"I fear we fought the wrong enemy and i fear we will regret it" --- General Patton

Would Jimmy Carter had support Solidarity? Would Jimmy Carter had sent Stinger missiles to the Mujaheen? Would Jimmy Carter have deployed cruise missiles?
Jimmy Carter ran a balanced budget
He also cut down post Vietnam forces as he would be expected to do

Carter actually volunteered to serve his country and didn’t claim to have bone spurs



Your repeated refusals to serious and honestly respond to my points, shows that you understand that they are valid.



And thus, my original point, ie that the Cold War could have gone much worse than it did, is true.


AND, thus, that Patton had a point. THe Soviet Union was in many ways, a more serious threat than Nazi Germany.
Patton was a political moron.
One reason it took him so long to get promoted

He was a tactical genius but had no concept of political realities

Committing US forces to fight the Soviets after 400,000 deaths for no reason is the rant of an idiot


All correct. Yet, his point about the Soviet Union was also completely right. THey were in many ways, more of a grave threat than Nazi Germany was.


Your inability to even discuss this honestly, is very odd.

Turns out, we did not attack the Soviets
History proved the decision to be correct
you are wrong, USA had 50 years gap to save our planet and USA has missed it , just think about our planet without commies ...
 
The only person who slaughtered tens of million of innocent Russians was your Hero Uncle Joe.
Doesn’t answer the question

How do you justify killing millions of civilians just because they are communist?
in 1945 koba did not have recurses och technologies to fight USA/UK . so it´d straight forward koba´s capitulation . do you need a link ?
No idea what the fuk you are saying
Joseph Stalin - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Joseph_Stalin

Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin was a Georgian revolutionary and Soviet politician who led the .... Another influential text was Alexander Kazbegi's The Patricide, with Stalin adopting the nickname "Koba" from that of the book's bandit protagonist.
I know who Stalin was
I just have no idea what you are rambling about
do you think that Ussr had technologies - resources to fight USA/UK/France/Germany in 1945?
 
Patton was a political moron.
One reason it took him so long to get promoted

He was a tactical genius but had no concept of political realities

Committing US forces to fight the Soviets after 400,000 deaths for no reason is the rant of an idiot


All correct. Yet, his point about the Soviet Union was also completely right. THey were in many ways, more of a grave threat than Nazi Germany was.


Your inability to even discuss this honestly, is very odd.

Turns out, we did not attack the Soviets
History proved the decision to be correct


We fought a conflict one way and managed to win. That does not address whether Patton was right on the scale of the threat or whether another way would have been superior.


Why is this so important to you to avoid? Do you even know?

The threat was contained through a Cold War up till the Soviet Union collapsed. Nobody killed


MIllions killed. And it could have been far worse. Failure was always an option. Full scale nuclear exchange was always an option.


Your pretense that the way it went, was the only way it could have gone, is to silly to be taken seriously.



Why are you so determined to avoid looking at this honestly? What is your investment here?


Do you fear FDR looking like less of a Great Leader?
I didn’t say it was the only way it could go, only the only practical way it could go

History proved it right
 
Doesn’t answer the question

How do you justify killing millions of civilians just because they are communist?
in 1945 koba did not have recurses och technologies to fight USA/UK . so it´d straight forward koba´s capitulation . do you need a link ?
No idea what the fuk you are saying
Joseph Stalin - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Joseph_Stalin

Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin was a Georgian revolutionary and Soviet politician who led the .... Another influential text was Alexander Kazbegi's The Patricide, with Stalin adopting the nickname "Koba" from that of the book's bandit protagonist.
I know who Stalin was
I just have no idea what you are rambling about
do you think that Ussr had technologies - resources to fight USA/UK/France/Germany in 1945?

They had one resource.......a willingness to die
That the Western Countries lacked

None were willing to suffer more carnage
 
in 1945 koba did not have recurses och technologies to fight USA/UK . so it´d straight forward koba´s capitulation . do you need a link ?
No idea what the fuk you are saying
Joseph Stalin - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Joseph_Stalin

Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin was a Georgian revolutionary and Soviet politician who led the .... Another influential text was Alexander Kazbegi's The Patricide, with Stalin adopting the nickname "Koba" from that of the book's bandit protagonist.
I know who Stalin was
I just have no idea what you are rambling about
do you think that Ussr had technologies - resources to fight USA/UK/France/Germany in 1945?

They had one resource.......a willingness to die
That the Western Countries lacked

None were willing to suffer more carnage

"They had one resource.......a willingness to die " much like Japanese worriers how it helped them after we dropped 2 bombs on them ?
 
or and

Operation Pike - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Operation_Pike

Operation Pike was the code-name for a strategic bombing plan, overseen by Air Commodore John Slessor, against the Soviet Union by the Anglo-French alliance. British military planning against the Soviet Union occurred during the first two years of the Second World War, when, despite Soviet neutrality, ... Serious preparation by the British began after the end of the
Superior technology, superior tactics, superior industrial capacity, command of the air and seas, veteran troops in place, German officers could have been used to fill in most of the intel blanks, red army seriously depleted after taking Berlin...Might well have taken Moscow before Hiroshima.

All correct. Yet, his point about the Soviet Union was also completely right. THey were in many ways, more of a grave threat than Nazi Germany was.


Your inability to even discuss this honestly, is very odd.

Turns out, we did not attack the Soviets
History proved the decision to be correct


We fought a conflict one way and managed to win. That does not address whether Patton was right on the scale of the threat or whether another way would have been superior.


Why is this so important to you to avoid? Do you even know?

The threat was contained through a Cold War up till the Soviet Union collapsed. Nobody killed


MIllions killed. And it could have been far worse. Failure was always an option. Full scale nuclear exchange was always an option.


Your pretense that the way it went, was the only way it could have gone, is to silly to be taken seriously.



Why are you so determined to avoid looking at this honestly? What is your investment here?


Do you fear FDR looking like less of a Great Leader?
I didn’t say it was the only way it could go, only the only practical way it could go

History proved it right

some numbers from Muscovite- Jewish leading historian M Solonin
"
18 thousand American and British warplanes are not. If we add to this the loss of two Siberian aircraft factories (see paragraph 1), then we do not have bomber aircraft of medium and long range. Pe-2 is used as a bomber, hastily cobbled together in a “sharak” of the NKVD from a high-altitude fighter with a maximum bomb load of 600 kg (the German single-engine fighter FW-190 took 500 kg of bombs, the American single-engine fighter Thunderbolt - 908 kg). And it is not clear what this Pe-2 should be made of - in the absence of Lend-Lease aluminum and chromansil (high-strength steel). The same question applies to the production of Yakovlev fighters. Lavochkin fighters are made of the so-called “delta-wood” (multilayer plywood, to put it more simply), we have our own wood, but phenolic resins for gluing veneers are imported. But even if there are some planes, then why refuel them?

In real history, the Soviet Air Force spent 3 million tons of gasoline during the war. One third is American gasoline. The second third is gasoline of its own production, brought to the right condition by mixing with American high-octane components. A third of the third million is made at four full-blown American plants brought across the ocean. And let's not forget about 6300 tons of tetraethyl lead (antiknock additive) that arithmetically completely covers the needs of Soviet-made aviation gasoline. Since there is none of this, and the planes are quietly on the ground, you can’t even forget about the absence of 12 thousand tons of Lend-Lease ethylene glycol (coolant, which could fill about 250 thousand aircraft engines).



And now - from the little things to the main thing. To what is happening on the other side of the front.



Point 6. In a real story, from the first to the last day of the war, a grand battle took place in the waters of the Atlantic, in the deep sea and sky-high heights above the ocean; grandiose not in the number of people directly involved in naval battles, but in the cost of material resources. In particular, from 39 to 45, Germany produced 1,113 submarines with a combined tonnage of 960 thousand tons. Even considering the most primitive way, by weight, these boats correspond to 40 thousand medium tanks of the Pz-III or Pz-IV type. Is this a lot? In fact, for the entire time of the war, the Germans produced “only” 28 thousand of these tanks (including self-propelled guns on their chassis). At the same time, we understand that a ton of hostility, and a submarine in terms of "filling density" with complex systems (hydroacoustics, autonomous navigation, long-distance radio communications, crew life support, optics, pneumatics, batteries, etc.) are much more expensive and more complicated than a tank.

In an alternative reality, after the Anglo-American allies left the war and curtailing the construction of submarines, the Germans were able to increase the production of tanks by 2-3 times. For those who doubt the possibility of such a conversion, I suggest google the words "Red Sormovo". And all these tanks go to a single Eastern Front. And now these tanks are diesel (in real history, Germany spent most of the diesel resource for war at sea, and the tanks conquered the whole war on fire-hazardous gasoline).

Submarines were for the Germans the main, but far from the only instrument of war at sea; aviation was actively working, and this again was a huge expenditure of material and intellectual resources: thousands of planes, hundreds of thousands of tons of gasoline, torpedoes, mines, locators, Fritz-X radio-controlled planning bombs, Hs-293 cruise missile anti-ship missiles (the last two types of weapons ahead of their time for a decade, more than 500 units were used in hostilities, but three times as many were produced). It was in naval aviation that the bulk of the “new types” bombers were transferred - the long-range twin-engine Do-217 and the giant 30-ton Ural-bomber He-177. And in an alternative reality, all this goes to the Eastern Front."

Google Translate
 
Germans drove the Soviet Black Sea Fleet into the Poti-Batumi region, where the ship stood until the end of the war by the forces of aviation and a dozen torpedo boats (not a single! Surface ship of a destroyer class or higher at the kriegsmarine in the Black Sea). There is no reason to doubt that the appearance of large forces of the German surface fleet in the Black Sea would have ended with the second flooding of the Black Sea Fleet for the second quarter of a century and the unimpeded landing of German troops on the Black Sea coast of Georgia. From Batumi to Baku, 700 km in a straight line, and at the most, in a month the Germans either seize oil fields or burn them to the ground with air strikes (doubters can google the words "Lufwaffe raids on Yaroslavl, Gorky, Saratov")

For the Soviet Union, the loss of Baku oil means a catastrophe of strategic magnitude. There was no West Siberian oil at all, and the so-called "second Baku" - the fields of Tataria and Bashkiria - accounted for no more than 5-7% of the production of "first Baku". The Red Army now fights on carts, in the Ural collective farms plow on women. What, where and when would the war end under such conditions?

I think the very same thing that would end the war on the Western Front, if in another alternative reality it would be the only one. That we are without Anglo-American allies, that without us they were doomed to inevitable defeat. And in real history, Hitlerite Germany was defeated by a coalition of world powers, and so it was called: "anti-Hitler coalition." The participation of our country in this coalition - despite the horror of the war and the tragedy of the deaths of millions of people - was the most worthy, brightest event in the thousand-year history of Russia. This must be remembered, one can be proud of it.
 
No idea what the fuk you are saying
Joseph Stalin - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Joseph_Stalin

Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin was a Georgian revolutionary and Soviet politician who led the .... Another influential text was Alexander Kazbegi's The Patricide, with Stalin adopting the nickname "Koba" from that of the book's bandit protagonist.
I know who Stalin was
I just have no idea what you are rambling about
do you think that Ussr had technologies - resources to fight USA/UK/France/Germany in 1945?

They had one resource.......a willingness to die
That the Western Countries lacked

None were willing to suffer more carnage

"They had one resource.......a willingness to die " much like Japanese worriers how it helped them after we dropped 2 bombs on them ?
In that case you have to rely on our willingness to slaughter millions of innocent civilians to defeat a former ally
 
All correct. Yet, his point about the Soviet Union was also completely right. THey were in many ways, more of a grave threat than Nazi Germany was.


Your inability to even discuss this honestly, is very odd.

Turns out, we did not attack the Soviets
History proved the decision to be correct


We fought a conflict one way and managed to win. That does not address whether Patton was right on the scale of the threat or whether another way would have been superior.


Why is this so important to you to avoid? Do you even know?

The threat was contained through a Cold War up till the Soviet Union collapsed. Nobody killed


MIllions killed. And it could have been far worse. Failure was always an option. Full scale nuclear exchange was always an option.


Your pretense that the way it went, was the only way it could have gone, is to silly to be taken seriously.



Why are you so determined to avoid looking at this honestly? What is your investment here?


Do you fear FDR looking like less of a Great Leader?
I didn’t say it was the only way it could go, only the only practical way it could go

History proved it right


You are purposefully ignoring my points, to answer things I did not say.


Why are you so determined to avoid looking at this honestly? What is your investment here?
 
Turns out, we did not attack the Soviets
History proved the decision to be correct


We fought a conflict one way and managed to win. That does not address whether Patton was right on the scale of the threat or whether another way would have been superior.


Why is this so important to you to avoid? Do you even know?

The threat was contained through a Cold War up till the Soviet Union collapsed. Nobody killed


MIllions killed. And it could have been far worse. Failure was always an option. Full scale nuclear exchange was always an option.


Your pretense that the way it went, was the only way it could have gone, is to silly to be taken seriously.



Why are you so determined to avoid looking at this honestly? What is your investment here?


Do you fear FDR looking like less of a Great Leader?
I didn’t say it was the only way it could go, only the only practical way it could go

History proved it right


You are purposefully ignoring my points, to answer things I did not say.


Why are you so determined to avoid looking at this honestly? What is your investment here?
You have no credible points
Your position is absurd
 
Joseph Stalin - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Joseph_Stalin

Joseph Vissarionovich Stalin was a Georgian revolutionary and Soviet politician who led the .... Another influential text was Alexander Kazbegi's The Patricide, with Stalin adopting the nickname "Koba" from that of the book's bandit protagonist.
I know who Stalin was
I just have no idea what you are rambling about
do you think that Ussr had technologies - resources to fight USA/UK/France/Germany in 1945?

They had one resource.......a willingness to die
That the Western Countries lacked

None were willing to suffer more carnage

"They had one resource.......a willingness to die " much like Japanese worriers how it helped them after we dropped 2 bombs on them ?
In that case you have to rely on our willingness to slaughter millions of innocent civilians to defeat a former ally
"In that case you have to rely on our willingness to slaughter millions of innocent civilians to defeat a former ally"
as i proved with the links, ussr did not have resources to fight the war with USA/UK/Germany /France . and you missed that millions of innocent civilians actually died in 1946-47 from the hunger under Stalinist Muscovite occupation . i hope you understand that for majority Belarusians, Poles, Latvians, Ukrainians , etc. Muscovite red Stalinist horde was an occupation force


"
In the post WW2 famine of 1946-47 there were approximately 400,000 - 500,000 children and teenagers that died, who made up a third of the victims. There were many recorded cases of cannibalism.
Soviet famine of 1946–47 - Wikipedia

https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Soviet_famine_of_1946–47

"
 
We fought a conflict one way and managed to win. That does not address whether Patton was right on the scale of the threat or whether another way would have been superior.


Why is this so important to you to avoid? Do you even know?

The threat was contained through a Cold War up till the Soviet Union collapsed. Nobody killed


MIllions killed. And it could have been far worse. Failure was always an option. Full scale nuclear exchange was always an option.


Your pretense that the way it went, was the only way it could have gone, is to silly to be taken seriously.



Why are you so determined to avoid looking at this honestly? What is your investment here?


Do you fear FDR looking like less of a Great Leader?
I didn’t say it was the only way it could go, only the only practical way it could go

History proved it right


You are purposefully ignoring my points, to answer things I did not say.


Why are you so determined to avoid looking at this honestly? What is your investment here?
You have no credible points
Your position is absurd


Seriously. THis is ancient history. What are you afraid of?


Here. Using perfect hindsight, as you are doing.


This is what should have happened.


Someone should have told FDR, that Germany and Japan could not defeat the US.


The Soviets should have been declared co belligerents, not allies, and we should have fought Japan, letting the Nazis and Soviets kill and weaken each other


Till 1945, when we would have nuked Berlin, and then negotiated a peace with Germany that led to US occupying all of Nazi occupied Europe.


The Cold War, would have still happened, but with the Iron Curtain running along the Eastern Border of Poland.


What part of this, if any, do you find upsetting?
 
General Patton was only partly right, both barbarian , totalitarian, cannibals ´d be hunted down, but west ´d take koba first (as the bigger and more dangerous butcher) . what do you think about Patton´s words?



"I fear we fought the wrong enemy and i fear we will regret it"

--- General Patton when asked about Germany
Patton knew the history of the Soviets/Bolsheviks how when they gained power they genocided tens of millions as well. Their first order of business was mass torture, mass murder of the Christian clergy in Russia.
 
General Patton was only partly right, both barbarian , totalitarian, cannibals ´d be hunted down, but west ´d take koba first (as the bigger and more dangerous butcher) . what do you think about Patton´s words?



"I fear we fought the wrong enemy and i fear we will regret it"

--- General Patton when asked about Germany
Patton knew the history of the Soviets/Bolsheviks how when they gained power they genocided tens of millions as well. Their first order of business was mass torture, mass murder of the Christian clergy in Russia.
the moscow´s satanists did it the same things to all religious institutes...
 

Forum List

Back
Top