CDZ Unconditional Surender: Another FDR Blunder?

[jwoodie]

At Casablanca in January 1943, FDR announced that America's objective in WW2 was the "unconditional surrender" of the Axis Powers. This was seized upon by propagandists in Germany and Japan to bolster public support for the concept of a "total war" for survival that must be fought to the bitter end. In addition, it provided a pretext for the Soviet Union to completely destroy any democratic institutions in Eastern Europe and replace them with Communist dictatorships.

Was FDR foolishly naive enough to believe that people in Germany and Japan were somehow less resilient and patriotic than their counterparts in the USA, GB and USSR? Or was this simply the delusion of a dying old man?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yeah, the term was a blunder.

 

[Toronado3800]

At Casablanca in January 1943, FDR announced that America's objective in WW2 was the "unconditional surrender" of the Axis Powers. This was seized upon by propagandists in Germany and Japan to bolster public support for the concept of a "total war" for survival that must be fought to the bitter end. In addition, it provided a pretext for the Soviet Union to completely destroy any democratic institutions in Eastern Europe and replace them with Communist dictatorships.

Was FDR foolishly naive enough to believe that people in Germany and Japan were somehow less resilient and patriotic than their counterparts in the USA, GB and USSR? Or was this simply the delusion of a dying old man?

IMO given the history or Germany and the problems with recovery after the treaty of Versailles unconditional surrender was not a mistake. FDR's interments were, unconditional surrender was not.

After the atrocities Germany and Japan might have become our newest national parks or my atomic testing grounds for the entire Cold War if I were President Truman.

FDR's unconditional surrender and Marshall's rebuilding of Europe and Asia against Communism seem to have worked for the best though.

 

[jwoodie]

IMO given the history or Germany and the problems with recovery after the treaty of Versailles unconditional surrender was not a mistake. FDR's interments were, unconditional surrender was not.

So the unnecessary loss of American lives in Germany was a virtue, and the saving of American lives in Japan was a vice?

P.S. The peoples of Eastern Europe would disagree with your rosy assessment of FDR's capitulation to Stalin.

 

[martybegan]

At Casablanca in January 1943, FDR announced that America's objective in WW2 was the "unconditional surrender" of the Axis Powers. This was seized upon by propagandists in Germany and Japan to bolster public support for the concept of a "total war" for survival that must be fought to the bitter end. In addition, it provided a pretext for the Soviet Union to completely destroy any democratic institutions in Eastern Europe and replace them with Communist dictatorships.

Was FDR foolishly naive enough to believe that people in Germany and Japan were somehow less resilient and patriotic than their counterparts in the USA, GB and USSR? Or was this simply the delusion of a dying old man?

IMO given the history or Germany and the problems with recovery after the treaty of Versailles unconditional surrender was not a mistake. FDR's interments were, unconditional surrender was not.

After the atrocities Germany and Japan might have become our newest national parks or my atomic testing grounds for the entire Cold War if I were President Truman.

FDR's unconditional surrender and Marshall's rebuilding of Europe and Asia against Communism seem to have worked for the best though.

It led to a true Clauswitzian resolution of the issues of Japanese and German Militarism/Nationalism, which a negotiated settlement with a remaining power structure would not have resulted in. The Germans got their chance after WWI, and both the Allies and the Germans blew it. Japan just got swept up in the unconditional surrender motif, but it worked out for them.

 

[Toronado3800]

IMO given the history or Germany and the problems with recovery after the treaty of Versailles unconditional surrender was not a mistake. FDR's interments were, unconditional surrender was not.

So the unnecessary loss of American lives in Germany was a virtue, and the saving of American lives in Japan was a vice?

P.S. The peoples of Eastern Europe would disagree with your rosy assessment of FDR's capitulation to Stalin.

Don't confuse my honesty with a lack of comprehension. There are few black and white issues. Also I am not a team member or paid poster by a political party I must support. I'll debate. I'll say what I thought Clinton, Bush, Reagan, FDR, whoever did right or wrong IMO.

I can see both sides and am willing to acknowledge the points while still having my own opinion. The atomic bombs were cruel, effective, ended the war in Japan w/o an invasion, worried the Soviets. Ever read the story about the heroics of the Enola Gay's escort fighter wings?

Heck, I'll even tell you what I would have done which may or may not have been better in hindsight.

1. When would you have accepted German surrender? August of 1943, September 8 1943 (we accepted a fine surrender then), the day after Normandy, 1945?

2. When would you have accepted Japanese surrender? It has been a decade or so but did a paper on this, I believe the Japanese "messed up" by misunderstanding the relationship between the Soviets and the Western Allies.

 

[jwoodie]

1. When would you have accepted German surrender? August of 1943, September 8 1943 (we accepted a fine surrender then), the day after Normandy, 1945?

2. When would you have accepted Japanese surrender? It has been a decade or so but did a paper on this, I believe the Japanese "messed up" by misunderstanding the relationship between the Soviets and the Western Allies.

1. At any time, but that was unlikely with Hitler still in power (and see below).

2. At any time, but they would have had to give up their territorial acquisitions and pay reparations to the countries they attacked or invaded.

 

[Toronado3800]

1. When would you have accepted German surrender? August of 1943, September 8 1943 (we accepted a fine surrender then), the day after Normandy, 1945?

2. When would you have accepted Japanese surrender? It has been a decade or so but did a paper on this, I believe the Japanese "messed up" by misunderstanding the relationship between the Soviets and the Western Allies.

1. At any time, but that was unlikely with Hitler still in power (and see below).

2. At any time, but they would have had to give up their territorial acquisitions and pay reparations to the countries they attacked or invaded.

Interesting. We can debate if Germany or Japan would have surrendered after Kursk, Okinawa, the fall of Italy, whenever. Each is very much its own topic.

With Japan I believe it was very possible they would have surrendered sometime after the VE day before the atomic bombs were dropped. I also feel we may have encountered some guerilla style resistance during our occupation of Japan if we accepted it. The government was not very unified in the surrender attempts which were made.

For Germany, I dunno. The WWI experience with the separate Russian Peace / Civil War made it unpalatable to us. I think a coup in Germany and some strange "now we're your ally let's fight Stalin" moment would have been necessary to make it even a possibility.

In 1943 I would NOT have wanted a land war with the Soviets even if we had a German ally we would have ended up fighting against T-34's and I 2's in Poland and the Balkans. Good devastating war game battles indeed!

I believe the shock of American and Soviet tanks in the streets of the aggressor countries as occupiers did something to the national psyche of Germany, Italy and Japan.