Eisenhower's Times

[Camp]

http://files.nyu.edu/th15/public/salantqa.html


Successful Strategic Deception: A Case Study


This kind of stuff makes FDR extreme conspiracy theory proponents heads explode. Hiss a double agent or counter intel operative. And credible universities !!!

 

[gipper]

I suspect this whole thread to be an attempt to make FDR a communist dupe by making Eisenhower a communist dupe by making the Normandy invasion a communist plan. The non-communist route was through Italy not France and so few can see that.
If the Normandy invasion had failed, the argument might have a little more validity but alas the Normandy invasion seemed to work so it proved nothing, well maybe that FDR, and Marshall made a correct appointment with Ike.
The name-calling is always a free bonus.

Could it be the Normandy invasion and the liberation of western Europe was not a success...in FDR's small mind?

Had Stalin's BFF lived (thank God he did not), he likely would have given ALL of Europe to his buddy, rather than only half of it.

 

[regent]

I suspect this whole thread to be an attempt to make FDR a communist dupe by making Eisenhower a communist dupe by making the Normandy invasion a communist plan. The non-communist route was through Italy not France and so few can see that.
If the Normandy invasion had failed, the argument might have a little more validity but alas the Normandy invasion seemed to work so it proved nothing, well maybe that FDR, and Marshall made a correct appointment with Ike.
The name-calling is always a free bonus.

Could it be the Normandy invasion and the liberation of western Europe was not a success...in FDR's small mind?

Had Stalin's BFF lived (thank God he did not), he likely would have given ALL of Europe to his buddy, rather than only half of it.

Are you trying to say that after the defeat of Hitler the allies should have continued the war by attacking the USSR and forcing them to obey their agreements and giving up the land they had taken?

 

[rightwinger]

I suspect this whole thread to be an attempt to make FDR a communist dupe by making Eisenhower a communist dupe by making the Normandy invasion a communist plan. The non-communist route was through Italy not France and so few can see that.
If the Normandy invasion had failed, the argument might have a little more validity but alas the Normandy invasion seemed to work so it proved nothing, well maybe that FDR, and Marshall made a correct appointment with Ike.
The name-calling is always a free bonus.

Could it be the Normandy invasion and the liberation of western Europe was not a success...in FDR's small mind?

Had Stalin's BFF lived (thank God he did not), he likely would have given ALL of Europe to his buddy, rather than only half of it.

Are you trying to say that after the defeat of Hitler the allies should have continued the war by attacking the USSR and forcing them to obey their agreements and giving up the land they had taken?

Its a conservative wet dream

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Dems are very defensive regarding their ideological forefathers

 

[gipper]

I suspect this whole thread to be an attempt to make FDR a communist dupe by making Eisenhower a communist dupe by making the Normandy invasion a communist plan. The non-communist route was through Italy not France and so few can see that.
If the Normandy invasion had failed, the argument might have a little more validity but alas the Normandy invasion seemed to work so it proved nothing, well maybe that FDR, and Marshall made a correct appointment with Ike.
The name-calling is always a free bonus.

Could it be the Normandy invasion and the liberation of western Europe was not a success...in FDR's small mind?

Had Stalin's BFF lived (thank God he did not), he likely would have given ALL of Europe to his buddy, rather than only half of it.

Are you trying to say that after the defeat of Hitler the allies should have continued the war by attacking the USSR and forcing them to obey their agreements and giving up the land they had taken?

No.

Jumping to dumb conclusions, is well...for dummies.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I suspect this whole thread to be an attempt to make FDR a communist dupe by making Eisenhower a communist dupe by making the Normandy invasion a communist plan. The non-communist route was through Italy not France and so few can see that.
If the Normandy invasion had failed, the argument might have a little more validity but alas the Normandy invasion seemed to work so it proved nothing, well maybe that FDR, and Marshall made a correct appointment with Ike.
The name-calling is always a free bonus.

Could it be the Normandy invasion and the liberation of western Europe was not a success...in FDR's small mind?

Had Stalin's BFF lived (thank God he did not), he likely would have given ALL of Europe to his buddy, rather than only half of it.

Are you trying to say that after the defeat of Hitler the allies should have continued the war by attacking the USSR and forcing them to obey their agreements and giving up the land they had taken?

Yes. Instead of subjecting hundreds of millions of people to the crushing oppression of Soviet Communism, we would have had a free Eastern Europe.

Patton thought so. He said WWII was a huge strategic failure for the USA and GB because all it did was trade one form of oppression for another. Of course, Democrats get very sensitive whenever there's criticism of their Uncle Joe so they hop in and call Patton crazy and a "War monger"

That's where Stalin's control of US foreign policy came in so handy. He made his Democrat sock puppets in the White House say "It's OK, Uncle Joe, take Eastern Europe" and so it was!

 

[JakeStarkey]

PC's Opus Dei like criticism of FDR and his policies makes no difference when one realizes that she would have had FDR either stay neutral or support Hitler vs. Stalin. Neither were viable options for America's future.

That FDR and Eisenhower and others were willing dupes and lackeys of the commies is a loony tune recitation of the John Birch Society propaganda fifty and sixty years ago.

When you have Comrade Frank and others supporting her, you know that her argument has grown toxic.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

PC's Opus Dei like criticism of FDR and his policies makes no difference when one realizes that she would have had FDR either stay neutral or support Hitler vs. Stalin. Neither were viable options for America's future.

That FDR and Eisenhower and others were willing dupes and lackeys of the commies is a loony tune recitation of the John Birch Society propaganda fifty and sixty years ago.

When you have Comrade Frank and others supporting her, you know that her argument has grown toxic.

See what I mean about how defensive Dems get when you criticize Stalin and his Sock Puppet FDR?

 

[regent]

Why didn't the people of Eastern Europe do something themselves about their own plight?
If America had continued WWII by attacking the USSR, what nations would have aided us?
America sort is a democracy and would the American people have gone along for more years of warfare with the USSR?
America had begun dismantling her military even before Japan was defeated. I doubt if the American people would have supported more years of warfare with the USSR.
As for Patton, he was one of those that live for war, and would have attacked Mars if it meant keeping the war going.
Today, some posters are ready for a war with the Soviet Union, but the bottom line at that time, is were the American people of that period, ready to spend more years in a war with the Soviet Union, so that the people of Eastern Europe could be free and Stalin keep his agreements?
And in the end who won?

 

[JakeStarkey]

PC's Opus Dei like criticism of FDR and his policies makes no difference when one realizes that she would have had FDR either stay neutral or support Hitler vs. Stalin. Neither were viable options for America's future.

That FDR and Eisenhower and others were willing dupes and lackeys of the commies is a loony tune recitation of the John Birch Society propaganda fifty and sixty years ago.

When you have Comrade Frank and others supporting her, you know that her argument has grown toxic.

See what I mean about how defensive Dems get when you criticize Stalin and his Sock Puppet FDR?

Whatever you "mean" is confused, Frank. The great majority of our GOP opposes your and PC's nonsense about FDR. You are a reactionary and not a Republican. PC is further down the crazy spectrum then you.

Your attempt to revise American narrative, which is your right to do, will continue to fail as it has for sixty years.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why didn't the people of Eastern Europe do something themselves about their own plight?
If America had continued WWII by attacking the USSR, what nations would have aided us?
America sort is a democracy and would the American people have gone along for more years of warfare with the USSR?
America had begun dismantling her military even before Japan was defeated. I doubt if the American people would have supported more years of warfare with the USSR.
As for Patton, he was one of those that live for war, and would have attacked Mars if it meant keeping the war going.
Today, some posters are ready for a war with the Soviet Union, but the bottom line at that time, is were the American people of that period, ready to spend more years in a war with the Soviet Union, so that the people of Eastern Europe could be free and Stalin keep his agreements?
And in the end who won?

The people of Eastern Europe were unarmed and that's why you're never going to take away our Second Amendment rights.

We would have rearmed the Germans. All of Eastern Europe would have lined up with us to fight against the "Descendants of Genghis Khan"

Patton was NOT a War Monger, he was a clear thinker and, unlike Democrats, was totally against Communism. He knew how evil it was, that why he was for pushing Stalin back.

In the end, Reagan won

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why didn't the people of Eastern Europe do something themselves about their own plight?
If America had continued WWII by attacking the USSR, what nations would have aided us?
America sort is a democracy and would the American people have gone along for more years of warfare with the USSR?
America had begun dismantling her military even before Japan was defeated. I doubt if the American people would have supported more years of warfare with the USSR.
As for Patton, he was one of those that live for war, and would have attacked Mars if it meant keeping the war going.
Today, some posters are ready for a war with the Soviet Union, but the bottom line at that time, is were the American people of that period, ready to spend more years in a war with the Soviet Union, so that the people of Eastern Europe could be free and Stalin keep his agreements?
And in the end who won?

Frank can pontificate all he wants, and he is still wrong.

One, we could not have continued the war into the East of Europe and had hope for success, for several reasons.

Two, we still had the Japanese to finish off.

Three, we had no idea if the atomic bomb would work.

Fourth, all of our divisions were overseas, and we had no stateside training divisions or cadres or recruits for them.

Fifth, the American electorate would never had accepted attacking the Soviet Union after defeating the Nazis.

Sixth, neither the French, British, or the Poles would have accepted such a dangerous venture.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

PC's Opus Dei like criticism of FDR and his policies makes no difference when one realizes that she would have had FDR either stay neutral or support Hitler vs. Stalin. Neither were viable options for America's future.

That FDR and Eisenhower and others were willing dupes and lackeys of the commies is a loony tune recitation of the John Birch Society propaganda fifty and sixty years ago.

When you have Comrade Frank and others supporting her, you know that her argument has grown toxic.

See what I mean about how defensive Dems get when you criticize Stalin and his Sock Puppet FDR?

Whatever you "mean" is confused, Frank. The great majority of our GOP opposes your and PC's nonsense about FDR. You are a reactionary and not a Republican. PC is further down the crazy spectrum then you.

Your attempt to revise American narrative, which is your right to do, will continue to fail as it has for sixty years.

Jake, you sound EXACTLY like a Democrat! Look at your reflexive defense of FDR who has more people in his WH Reporting to Stalin than to him.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why didn't the people of Eastern Europe do something themselves about their own plight?
If America had continued WWII by attacking the USSR, what nations would have aided us?
America sort is a democracy and would the American people have gone along for more years of warfare with the USSR?
America had begun dismantling her military even before Japan was defeated. I doubt if the American people would have supported more years of warfare with the USSR.
As for Patton, he was one of those that live for war, and would have attacked Mars if it meant keeping the war going.
Today, some posters are ready for a war with the Soviet Union, but the bottom line at that time, is were the American people of that period, ready to spend more years in a war with the Soviet Union, so that the people of Eastern Europe could be free and Stalin keep his agreements?
And in the end who won?

Frank can pontificate all he wants, and he is still wrong.

One, we could not have continued the war into the East of Europe and had hope for success, for several reasons.

Two, we still had the Japanese to finish off.

Three, we had no idea if the atomic bomb would work.

Fourth, all of our divisions were overseas, and we had no stateside training divisions or cadres or recruits for them.

Fifth, the American electorate would never had accepted attacking the Soviet Union after defeating the Nazis.

Sixth, neither the French, British, or the Poles would have accepted such a dangerous venture.

Jake while you're defending the gains Stalin made, bear in mind that the USAF would have laid waste to entire Soviet armored divisions in little or no time.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Also, Eisenhower is responsible for Berlin being a divided city. Patton would have been there ahead of the USSR, but after consulting with USSR generals, Eisenhower redirected Patton to locate the non-existent German "National Redoubt". Patton tried to tell Ike he was being a dupe and a moron, but to no avail.

Sure enough, there was no German National Redoubt, the USSR gets half of Berlin and the rest is history

 

[Camp]

Why didn't the people of Eastern Europe do something themselves about their own plight?
If America had continued WWII by attacking the USSR, what nations would have aided us?
America sort is a democracy and would the American people have gone along for more years of warfare with the USSR?
America had begun dismantling her military even before Japan was defeated. I doubt if the American people would have supported more years of warfare with the USSR.
As for Patton, he was one of those that live for war, and would have attacked Mars if it meant keeping the war going.
Today, some posters are ready for a war with the Soviet Union, but the bottom line at that time, is were the American people of that period, ready to spend more years in a war with the Soviet Union, so that the people of Eastern Europe could be free and Stalin keep his agreements?
And in the end who won?

Frank can pontificate all he wants, and he is still wrong.

One, we could not have continued the war into the East of Europe and had hope for success, for several reasons.

Two, we still had the Japanese to finish off.

Three, we had no idea if the atomic bomb would work.

Fourth, all of our divisions were overseas, and we had no stateside training divisions or cadres or recruits for them.

Fifth, the American electorate would never had accepted attacking the Soviet Union after defeating the Nazis.

Sixth, neither the French, British, or the Poles would have accepted such a dangerous venture.

Jake while you're defending the gains Stalin made, bear in mind that the USAF would have laid waste to entire Soviet armored divisions in little or no time.

One of the lessons learned early in the war against the German divisions is that they could not be bombed into submission. It took ground troops even though we had total control of the skies. The enemy is able to use weather and hiding, stealth and maneuver to counter some of the advantages of air power.

 

[regent]

Why didn't the people of Eastern Europe do something themselves about their own plight?
If America had continued WWII by attacking the USSR, what nations would have aided us?
America sort is a democracy and would the American people have gone along for more years of warfare with the USSR?
America had begun dismantling her military even before Japan was defeated. I doubt if the American people would have supported more years of warfare with the USSR.
As for Patton, he was one of those that live for war, and would have attacked Mars if it meant keeping the war going.
Today, some posters are ready for a war with the Soviet Union, but the bottom line at that time, is were the American people of that period, ready to spend more years in a war with the Soviet Union, so that the people of Eastern Europe could be free and Stalin keep his agreements?
And in the end who won?

The people of Eastern Europe were unarmed and that's why you're never going to take away our Second Amendment rights.

We would have rearmed the Germans. All of Eastern Europe would have lined up with us to fight against the "Descendants of Genghis Khan"

Patton was NOT a War Monger, he was a clear thinker and, unlike Democrats, was totally against Communism. He knew how evil it was, that why he was for pushing Stalin back.


In the end, Reagan won

Yep, Gorby offered Reagan a deal and Reagan grabbed it. So in the end Reagan began making deals with USSR sort of like we did during WWII when we held Stalin's coat after promising him second fronts for a couple of years. And now with the Reagan-deal Russia keeps her word and we no longer have any problems with Russia. The Eastern Europeans are free and happy and peace reigns? Who needed Genghis Khan?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Why didn't the people of Eastern Europe do something themselves about their own plight?
If America had continued WWII by attacking the USSR, what nations would have aided us?
America sort is a democracy and would the American people have gone along for more years of warfare with the USSR?
America had begun dismantling her military even before Japan was defeated. I doubt if the American people would have supported more years of warfare with the USSR.
As for Patton, he was one of those that live for war, and would have attacked Mars if it meant keeping the war going.
Today, some posters are ready for a war with the Soviet Union, but the bottom line at that time, is were the American people of that period, ready to spend more years in a war with the Soviet Union, so that the people of Eastern Europe could be free and Stalin keep his agreements?
And in the end who won?

The people of Eastern Europe were unarmed and that's why you're never going to take away our Second Amendment rights.

We would have rearmed the Germans. All of Eastern Europe would have lined up with us to fight against the "Descendants of Genghis Khan"

Patton was NOT a War Monger, he was a clear thinker and, unlike Democrats, was totally against Communism. He knew how evil it was, that why he was for pushing Stalin back.


In the end, Reagan won

Yep, Gorby offered Reagan a deal and Reagan grabbed it. So in the end Reagan began making deals with USSR sort of like we did during WWII when we held Stalin's coat after promising him second fronts for a couple of years. And now with the Reagan-deal Russia keeps her word and we no longer have any problems with Russia. The Eastern Europeans are free and happy and peace reigns? Who needed Genghis Khan?

What deals is Putin offering Obama these days?

 

[Camp]

Also, Eisenhower is responsible for Berlin being a divided city. Patton would have been there ahead of the USSR, but after consulting with USSR generals, Eisenhower redirected Patton to locate the non-existent German "National Redoubt". Patton tried to tell Ike he was being a dupe and a moron, but to no avail.

Sure enough, there was no German National Redoubt, the USSR gets half of Berlin and the rest is history

Patton was our wild man and vicious dog that had to be controlled lest he bring about troubles beyond his vision and understanding. He was dependent on an endless supply of material and men and a "blood and guts" attitude. Without that attitude and that endless supply of material, meaning fuel, replacement tanks and manpower he would have been just another General. He was not a General that realistically recognized or understood the big picture.