Churchill's turn

[rupol2000]

At first, Churchill supported the leftist and totalitarian regimes of Stalin and Roosevelt, but then suddenly sided with Truman. What is the reason for this?
At the same time, Truman himself was on the left, and supported Roosevelt's new course, this is also strange, why did he then turn against the USSR?

 

[DudleySmith]

Well, you're certainly confused all right. Been reading stuff over at FreeRepublic and Town Hall again?

 

[lg325]

Truman's and Roosevelts political philosophy was democratic, not leftist. The alliance with Stalin was because they had a mutual enemy in Naziism.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

Churchill was a big supporter of "the Empire".

 

[braalian]

At first, Churchill supported the leftist and totalitarian regimes of Stalin and Roosevelt, but then suddenly sided with Truman. What is the reason for this?
At the same time, Truman himself was on the left, and supported Roosevelt's new course, this is also strange, why did he then turn against the USSR?

Are you comparing the USA of FDR to the USSR of Stalin?

Anyways, Churchill long viewed the USA as Britain’s main hope as an ally. But even though Roosevelt approved of intervention, public sentiment was against him and the American people didn’t support entering the war until late in the game, after Pearl Harbor.

Churchill considered the USA and Britain natural allies due to shared democratic values, shared language and history, etc. Though he had a special relationship with FDR, of course he worked with Truman.

Churchill was deeply suspicious of the Soviet Union. But they were basically Britain’s only ally for years in the war after France surrendered and before America entered. It was an alliance of necessity.

Truman and Churchill naturally turned away from Russia after Germany was defeated. The two sides had little in common and their common enemy was gone.

 

[rupol2000]

Well, you're certainly confused all right. Been reading stuff over at FreeRepublic and Town Hall again?

Not

 

[rupol2000]

Truman's and Roosevelts political philosophy was democratic, not leftist.

Democrats are the left

 

[rupol2000]

Are you comparing the USA of FDR to the USSR of Stalin?

Anyways, Churchill long viewed the USA as Britain’s main hope as an ally. But even though Roosevelt approved of intervention, public sentiment was against him and the American people didn’t support entering the war until late in the game, after Pearl Harbor.

Churchill considered the USA and Britain natural allies due to shared democratic values, shared language and history, etc. Though he had a special relationship with FDR, of course he worked with Truman.

Churchill was deeply suspicious of the Soviet Union. But they were basically Britain’s only ally for years in the war after France surrendered and before America entered. It was an alliance of necessity.

Truman and Churchill naturally turned away from Russia after Germany was defeated. The two sides had little in common and their common enemy was gone.

This is unconvincing

 

[rupol2000]

The clue may lie in the fact that after Truman's departure, the United States increased its military budget, and then rapprochement with the USSR and aggravation with China began.
This was probably the beginning of anti-British policy, Britain collapsed.
At the time of Truman, there could not have been an anti-British policy, and Churchill could not have supported such a policy.

 

[braalian]

Democrats are the left

As a staunch conservative, I’m sure Churchill *did* disagree with much of FDR’s policies (New Deal, etc). At least in private.

But obviously The US and the UK were United as democracies against Fascism in Europe and Asia. And, yes, one was a republic and one was an empire, but both governments were based on democratic institutions. There’s nothing odd about America and Britain being allies. I don’t understand your confusion.

 

[braalian]

The clue may lie in the fact that after Truman's departure, the United States increased its military budget, and then rapprochement with the USSR and aggravation with China began.
This was probably the beginning of anti-British policy, Britain collapsed.
At the time of Truman, there could not have been an anti-British policy, and Churchillne could have supported such a policy.

You’re kind of exhausting. None of that makes sense. Word salad.

 

[rupol2000]

were based on democratic

These are empty words. Democrats and Republicans are formally all Democrats, but they pull in different directions. The communists also called themselves democrats, and the National Socialists did not even violate democratic electoral procedures.

What an idiot would say that he is against the people.

 

[rupol2000]

The US and the UK were United

Who destroyed Britain? USSR, without the participation of the United States?

 

[rupol2000]

And Churchill may have liked democracy in England, but he was in no hurry to establish it in the British colonies, just the opposite. So there is no need to tell tales about how he was a fan of democracy.

 

[braalian]

Who destroyed Britain? USSR, without the participation of the United States?

What? How did the USSR destroy Britain?

 

[rupol2000]

What? How did the USSR destroy Britain?

I did not say that the USSR alone destroyed Britain, I assume that they did it together with the United States. This was done by supporting independence movements in the colonies. The same scenario that formed the basis of the Reagan Doctrine

 

[rupol2000]

I am sure that this is exactly how it was, because before Kennedy, Khrushchev had exceptionally warm relations with America, and he was in confrontation with Stalinist-Maoist China. There is no doubt that Khrushchev personally took part in process of ruined Britain, he also spoke openly about it himself. The only question is when this cooperation began and the role of the United States in it. Most likely it began after Truman's departure.

But this logical mosaic does not fit the fact that Churchill declared war on the USSR while his friends were there: Kaganovich, Stalin and the pedophile Beria

That is the question.

 

[braalian]

I did not say that the USSR alone destroyed Britain, I assume that they did it together with the United States. This was done by supporting independence movements in the colonies. The same scenario that formed the basis of the Reagan Doctrine

Oh, I see. Well I think even Churchill knew the days were numbered for empire even before the war.

I don’t think anyone thought decolonization would happen as rapidly as it did. With notable exceptions (like the Suez Crisis), I don’t even think the US or the USSR even played that big of a role in the process. Britain and France were exhausted and there was simply no way they could have stopped independence for colonies even if the superpowers had looked the other way.

Deep down I’m sure Churchill realized allying with America and Russia and setting up the UN would eventually lead to independence for much of the British Empire and a decline of British influence. He just didn’t expect it to be so fast and so total.

I do think he thought that by being at the winning table he could preserve *some* of the empire, and I’m sure he felt bitterly disappointed and hurt when both the USA and the British people themselves showed little interest in preserving said Empire.

 

[rupol2000]

when both the USA and the British people themselves showed little interest in preserving said Empire.

I think that the US was interested in Death of Britain, if only because it interfered with their dominance. The left in the United States has always lobbied for British interest, but when the right came, they started a "deal".

But the question of why Churchill turned his back on the USSR even at a time when his friends were still there is still unclear.

 

[rupol2000]

I have now read more closely these passages of speech, which are described as anti-Soviet, and it turned out that this is a zombie-lie. There is no f*cking anti-Soviet, other than mentioning that the communists are trying to achieve complete control over their territory. It's a scam. In general, Churchill does not oppose the USSR there, but on the contrary calls for an invitation to the UN as a full partner. This was not the start of the Cold War.