What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Honoring The Sacrifices Of The Soviet Union in WWII….Really?

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
82,292
Reaction score
20,588
Points
2,220
hey--hey --there is no way the Allies were going to get to the Polish border before the Russians........as I stated, it was hard enough to get where we did


Let the german generals know that if Hitler fell down a flight of stairs, that a negotiated peace where they don't all get hung, is a possibility and who knows what might happen.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
82,292
Reaction score
20,588
Points
2,220
Lend Lease worked
It allowed the Soviets to fight the Germans while we wouldn’t
If the Soviets did not occupy Eastern Europe, the Nazis would have

Choose your poison


Sure. IF all you are thinking of, is the immediate situation. A good leader thinks ahead.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
82,292
Reaction score
20,588
Points
2,220

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
82,292
Reaction score
20,588
Points
2,220
What makes you think Eastern Europe would be free?

If the Soviets did not occupy it, the Nazis would have


Oh? You think the Nazis would have won WWII without US giving lend lease to the soviets?

Interesting. Most lefties insist that the soviets would have won regardless.
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
233,005
Reaction score
57,615
Points
2,190
Sure. IF all you are thinking of, is the immediate situation. A good leader thinks ahead.
FDR did think ahead
Nazi Germany and Japan were defeated
The world was better off

How far was FDR thinking ahead when he approved the Manhattan Project? A major investment in resources and Scientific Personnel with no guarantee of success
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
233,005
Reaction score
57,615
Points
2,190
Oh? You think the Nazis would have won WWII without US giving lend lease to the soviets?

Interesting. Most lefties insist that the soviets would have won regardless.

Yes
The Soviets did the bulk of the fighting and dying against the Nazis. The American public would not have approved of the same sacrifice
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
82,292
Reaction score
20,588
Points
2,220
FDR did think ahead
Nazi Germany and Japan were defeated
The world was better off

How far was FDR thinking ahead when he approved the Manhattan Project? A major investment in resources and Scientific Personnel with no guarantee of success


All of that was dealing with immediate situation with no thought to the long term.
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
82,292
Reaction score
20,588
Points
2,220
Yes
The Soviets did the bulk of the fighting and dying against the Nazis. The American public would not have approved of the same sacrifice


What do you imagine? THe nazis take Moscow and the Russians surrender and start working to support the nazi war machine?
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
233,005
Reaction score
57,615
Points
2,190
All of that was dealing with immediate situation with no thought to the long term.
FDR did look long term

An elimination of Nazi Germany and Japan
To do that, he needed the help of the Soviets

Keep in mind it was not FDRs war
He needed consensus of the Brits and Soviets who also had a dog in the fight
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
233,005
Reaction score
57,615
Points
2,190
What do you imagine? THe nazis take Moscow and the Russians surrender and start working to support the nazi war machine?

Since we are engaging in revisionist history…
Two possible alternate outcomes

Germany defeats the Soviets and occupies USSR
They fight to a stalemate and Germany occupies Eastern Europe

Either outcome is not preferable to the Soviets defeating the Nazis
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
82,292
Reaction score
20,588
Points
2,220
FDR did look long term

An elimination of Nazi Germany and Japan
To do that, he needed the help of the Soviets

Keep in mind it was not FDRs war
He needed consensus of the Brits and Soviets who also had a dog in the fight


YOu are in a war. Thinking of hte war, is short term. Thinking of the post war situation is long term.


I understand that Churchill and Stalin had...power too, and had to be taken seriously.
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
233,005
Reaction score
57,615
Points
2,190
YOu are in a war. Thinking of hte war, is short term. Thinking of the post war situation is long term.


I understand that Churchill and Stalin had...power too, and had to be taken seriously.
It does look at the postwar situation

A situation where we preferred the Soviets to the Nazis
A good decision on out part
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
82,292
Reaction score
20,588
Points
2,220
It does look at the postwar situation

A situation where we preferred the Soviets to the Nazis
A good decision on out part


Short term thinking.
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
233,005
Reaction score
57,615
Points
2,190
Short term thinking.
Under what scenario do you have us fighting on the Western Front and the Soviets fighting on the Eastern Front and us ending up with all the territory on the Eastern Front?
 

Correll

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 16, 2015
Messages
82,292
Reaction score
20,588
Points
2,220
Under what scenario do you have us fighting on the Western Front and the Soviets fighting on the Eastern Front and us ending up with all the territory on the Eastern Front?


One where we get a surrender that includes nazi war crime trials and US taking over all occupied lands from the Germans.
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
233,005
Reaction score
57,615
Points
2,190
One where we get a surrender that includes nazi war crime trials and US taking over all occupied lands from the Germans.
Why would the Nazis surrender when their entire Army is still active on the Eastern Front?
 

AZrailwhale

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
3,076
Reaction score
2,516
Points
1,938
Location
Arizona
Exa
Stalin BEGGED FDR to open a second front starting in 1942. Instead, FDR held off invasion till June 1944. In that time, Stalin killed millions of German troops and sacrificed tens of millions of his own people.

Good deal for FDR, bad deal for Stalin.

What “next big conflict” are you talking about?


Exactly how was the US supposed to open a second front in 1942? Unlike Stalin, FDR couldn’t send his troops walking to fight the Germans. Plus we did open a second front in Africa,it was called Operation Torch and was far larger than any amphibious operation Stalin even planned.
 

AZrailwhale

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
3,076
Reaction score
2,516
Points
1,938
Location
Arizona
Good example

Could Patton and Montgomery have defeated Rommel if Rommel was fully supplied? Germany diverted his support to Russia and Yugoslavia.
Rommel didn’t lose, he ran out of gas.

Germany was overextended and had to make military trade offs
North Africa and Italy were part of that.
Yes they could have. Rommel faced the same problem the Allies faced in Torch. His supplies had to come by water. No matter how many millions of tons of supplies Hitler sent for North Africa, the Italians And Germans were limited to the Few tens of thousands of tons they could transport across the Med.
Rommel not only ran out of gas, he ran out of tanks and trucks as well because he depended on Italian merchant ships for resupply and Italy didn’t have all that many ships. Rommel was only able to attack as well as he did because he see captured British trucks, tanks, artillery, food and fuel to support his forces. The 8th Army and Afrika Korps fought a see saw war sued upon supply availability. There is a point where trucks need more fuel than they can carry and that’s as far as the Brits and Germans were able to go. The US changed that, it funneled endless amounts of weapons, fuel and food to the Brits, then invaded in Rommel’s rear forcing him to retreat from North Africa entirely.
 

AZrailwhale

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
3,076
Reaction score
2,516
Points
1,938
Location
Arizona
1. they didn't need the industrial might of the US--Russia was too big to conquer
2. most of the fighting was done on the Ost Front--without it, the Western Front would've had a lot more dead--a lot more time getting the Germany
If the Germans had even half a brain, they could have easily defeated Stalin and the communists. All they had to do was support the various separatist movments in the republics. Everybody hated Stalin and the communists, the Ukrainian people welcomed the Germans as liberators until the SS got there and started murdering civilians.
 

AZrailwhale

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2020
Messages
3,076
Reaction score
2,516
Points
1,938
Location
Arizona
you are out of your mind if you think we could beat Russia
..the Germans had airpower also
...AND Germany was fighting on TWO fronts--against the 2 largest countries
..the US is not going to beat Russia
..please give us a scenario of the US taking over Russia
..there are very, very few instances of a country totally taking over another in war--especially post WW1
The Luftwaffe was a joke compared to the USAAF. We defeated them over their own airfields in their own radar coverage. The Luftwaffe did the same to the Red Airforce. The Soviets were unable to gain even air parity over Eastern Front battlefields until the USAAF gutted the Luftwaffe’s fighter strength. If the US had gone to war with the USSR, it wouldn’t only have more fighters and bombers by a huge margin, but far better ones as well. The Soviets would have been further handicapped by having to use low octane gas for aviation fuel as their entire supply of the octane boosters came from the US as well as a large percentage of their aviation fuel as well. The Soviets would have had a short window of relative equality in mobility until the lend lease supplies ran out and the poorly maintained American Studebaker trucks the Red Army depended on began to breakdown in large numbers. Remember, the instant combat with Soviet forces starts, all lend lease stops and the Soviets are only left with the small amounts they have stockpiled. In 1945, the Soviets couldn’t even feed their own army, let along their civilians. Starvation and disease would quickly wreck the Soviet Union allowing the Western Allies to walk in and pick up the pieces just as they did in Germany.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$295.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top