Of Romanovs, Bolsheviks, and 'Just Rewards'

[PoliticalChic]

Who should decide what label to put on a nation's government and economic system? Should it be the nation itself, that decides, or others, if others who? For example who has the authority to say America is a capitalist nation and not a communist nation?

What are you....a moron????

If you are unable to answer the post why not just ignore it instead of calling the poster names? So I'll ask something that you might be able to answer: if the USSR did not practice Marx what economic systems did the USSR practice?

I don't know which I like less....your stupid 'rush out and tell the historians' posts...

... or the really imbecilic one where you claim that you can't tell the difference between communism and capitalism.


As far as you imagining that you can determine how I post.....
…I am immovable, like General Jackson’s Virginians at First Manassas: a veritable stone wall. If you only had an acquaintance with history…you’d understand that.

 

[guno]

1. One of the finest Generals in United States history was George Patton. Patton had an 'interesting' view of America's erstwhile ally, the Soviet Union....

"It is a conflict that Patton believes will be fought soon.The Russians are moving to forcibly spread communism throughout the world, and Patton knows it."They are a scurvy race and simply savages," he writes of the Russians in his journal. "We could beat the hell out of them."
"Patton," By Martin Blumenson, Kevin M. Hymel, p. 84



2. When any speak of 'the Russians,' let's remember that the reference is to post 1917 Russian governance, ....the Bolsheviks, the communists.

"October 1917: The October Bolshevik Revolution
Encouraged by revolutionary leader Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, who had returned to Russia from exile in Germany, in October 1917, the radical Bolshevik workers' committees of Petrograd voted to stage an insurrection led by industrial workers against the forces of the Provisional Government. The Provisional Government surrendered without a fight, leaving the Bolshevik party of the workers and peasants in power. In the weeks that followed, Bolsheviks gradually forced non-Bolsheviks out of government. The United States and the Allies watched with concern as radical socialists seized control in Russia and threatened to pull Russian troops from the battlefield.

1917-1933: Interruption of Official U.S.-Russian Relations
Following the Bolshevik Revolution, President Woodrow Wilson instructed U.S. diplomats to withhold official and unofficial recognition of the new Bolshevik Government. U.S. Ambassador David Francis remained in Russia until November 1918, but was never replaced. On September 14, 1919, the U.S. Embassy in Russia closed its doors, though the U.S. Consulate in Vladivostok remained open until May 1922. The United States did not re‑establish diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union until 1933." United States Relations with Russia Establishment of Relations to World War Two



"....The United States and the Allies watched with concern as radical socialists seized control...."

Why 'concern'? Because they recognized Bolsheviks were savages of the most inhuman kind.

3. 'Woodrow Wilson's policy of withholding recognition on moral grounds was displaced by a return to traditional international practice of extending de jure recognition to de facto governments. ' "US Presidents and Foreign Policy"
edited by Carl Cavanagh Hodge, Cathal J. Nolan, p. 243


It remains a fact, though, that not Wilson, nor Harding, Coolidge, nor Hoover would advance recognition to the Bolshevik government.



But morality meant nothing to the 32nd President....

4. On November 16, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov. Recognition of the Soviet Union 1933 - 1921 1936 - Milestones - Office of the Historian



What was the message that Roosevelt was sending to the American people?
Giving the Bolsheviks their 'just reward'????

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Totally ignorant of both American and Soviet/ Russian history

 

[guno]

It is ironic that some aspects of Marxism are more evident today in the USA, than in the former USSR.

that is because we have so many Ashkenazi's in our government, ACLU, ADA, Supreme Court and in think tanks and have since the 1900's. Ashkenazis started socialism and communism.

Stalin wasn't Jewish, but he did the right thing to the catholic churches

 

[PoliticalChic]

10. The Romanov executions has been the subject of great interest, then, and now.
It is the iconic description of Bolshevik....communist....governance.
There are many descriptions of the event....

"Tuesday, July 16 began uneventfully for the Romanovs,.....
And while there is no indication that the children were aware of their impending fate, two of the guards got cold feet and said they would not shoot the girls. They were sent away.

After evening prayers, they went to bed. In the early hours of the following day, they were wakened and told that the White Army was approaching and might launch an artillery attack on the house.

They were to go downstairs for their own safety. The Tsar got up immediately, the women put on their camisoles sewn full of jewels and pearls, as they had rehearsed for a rescue attempt or sudden flight.


At 2.15am on July 17, they were led down to the basement.
Anastasia carried her sister Tatiana's little Pekinese, Jemmy, down the stairs. They were ushered into a storeroom, lit by a single naked bulb.

Next, the family and their servants were lined up as for a last, sinister official photograph.
Then they were left alone for half an hour, as their assassins downed shots of vodka.
Re-entering the room, a guard read out a statement sentencing the family to death.

The faces before him registered blank incomprehension. The family crossed themselves, and a man walked towards the Tsar and shot him at point-blank range in the chest.

Other guards fired, as his body crumpled to the floor. Half drunk, the guards shot clumsily, hitting the Tsaritsa in the left side of her skull.

Next to her, poor lame Alexey, too crippled to move, sat transfixed with terror, his ashen face splattered with his father's blood.
The moans and whimpers from the floor testified to a botched job. But it was the children who suffered most.
None of the Romanov girls died a quick or painless death. Maria was felled by a bullet in the thigh, and lay bleeding until repeated stabbing in the torso snuffed out her life.

Her sisters were eventually finished off with an 8in bayonet, Olga having been shot in the jaw, and Tatiana in the back of the head as she tried to escape.

... turned into an orgy of killing, with only the thick clouds of gunpowder smoke obscuring the full horror of it.

Last of the women to die was Anastasia. A drunken guard lunged at her like an animal, attempting to pierce her chest with his bayonet.
Eventually, the head of the hit squad, Yakov Yurovsky, took his gun to her head.


Alexey alone was still alive, the young heir to the throne. He was wearing an undergarment sewn with jewels, which acted as a flak jacket. Yurovsky fired his Colt into the boy's head, and he slumped against his father.

It had taken a frenzied 20 minutes to kill the Romanovs and their servants. In the panicked moments that followed, Yurovsky's men staggered from the room, choking and coughing."
Massacre of the Russian royals Horrific last hours of a dynasty Daily Mail Online



The sub-title of the article is 'Bayonetted and shot by drunken assassins, the slaughter of the Russian royal family shook the world."


Didn't shake Franklin Roosevelt.
He had decided that there were people with whom he could partner.

 

[Moonglow]

1. One of the finest Generals in United States history was George Patton. Patton had an 'interesting' view of America's erstwhile ally, the Soviet Union....

"It is a conflict that Patton believes will be fought soon.The Russians are moving to forcibly spread communism throughout the world, and Patton knows it."They are a scurvy race and simply savages," he writes of the Russians in his journal. "We could beat the hell out of them."
"Patton," By Martin Blumenson, Kevin M. Hymel, p. 84



2. When any speak of 'the Russians,' let's remember that the reference is to post 1917 Russian governance, ....the Bolsheviks, the communists.

"October 1917: The October Bolshevik Revolution
Encouraged by revolutionary leader Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, who had returned to Russia from exile in Germany, in October 1917, the radical Bolshevik workers' committees of Petrograd voted to stage an insurrection led by industrial workers against the forces of the Provisional Government. The Provisional Government surrendered without a fight, leaving the Bolshevik party of the workers and peasants in power. In the weeks that followed, Bolsheviks gradually forced non-Bolsheviks out of government. The United States and the Allies watched with concern as radical socialists seized control in Russia and threatened to pull Russian troops from the battlefield.

1917-1933: Interruption of Official U.S.-Russian Relations
Following the Bolshevik Revolution, President Woodrow Wilson instructed U.S. diplomats to withhold official and unofficial recognition of the new Bolshevik Government. U.S. Ambassador David Francis remained in Russia until November 1918, but was never replaced. On September 14, 1919, the U.S. Embassy in Russia closed its doors, though the U.S. Consulate in Vladivostok remained open until May 1922. The United States did not re‑establish diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union until 1933." United States Relations with Russia Establishment of Relations to World War Two



"....The United States and the Allies watched with concern as radical socialists seized control...."

Why 'concern'? Because they recognized Bolsheviks were savages of the most inhuman kind.

3. 'Woodrow Wilson's policy of withholding recognition on moral grounds was displaced by a return to traditional international practice of extending de jure recognition to de facto governments. ' "US Presidents and Foreign Policy"
edited by Carl Cavanagh Hodge, Cathal J. Nolan, p. 243


It remains a fact, though, that not Wilson, nor Harding, Coolidge, nor Hoover would advance recognition to the Bolshevik government.



But morality meant nothing to the 32nd President....

4. On November 16, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov. Recognition of the Soviet Union 1933 - 1921 1936 - Milestones - Office of the Historian



What was the message that Roosevelt was sending to the American people?
Giving the Bolsheviks their 'just reward'????

He was doing what American businessmen wanted...Trade with Russia...

I was waiting for some dope to use that ridiculous excuse.


He despised businessmen.


His road to the presidency was over their corpses.

He didn't alter his attacks on businessmen until the reality of the coming war impinged on his class warfare.


From the Prologue of “FDR Goes To War: How Expanded Executive Power, Spiraling National Debt, And Restricted Civil Liberties Shaped Wartime America” by Burton W. Folsom Jr. and Anita Folsom…

1. “Earlier, during national elections, the president could use class warfare and federal subsidies to win votes. …But when wars came, they must be won. Few remembered the Panic of 1873- or even who was president then- but everyone remembered the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War, and, of course, the Civil War. U.S. presidents could fail when they worked to end depressions, as FDR had shown, and still survive politically- if they had a viable scapegoat….Lincoln was great because Lincoln was a successful war president. His high taxes and abuse of civil liberties were largely forgotten. If the forthcoming war were lost, FDR could, of course, attack business again for not making enough weapons. But historians would still hold Roosevelt accountable for losing any war on his watch!”

2. Careful students of the Roosevelt presidency knew that war must be near because FDR had decided to change the tone of the political debate in Washington. For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting. The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”

3. On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”


4. On May 26, 1940 his Fireside Chat signaled a new relationship with business: he would insure their profits, and assuage their fears that he would nationalize their factories.

a. “…we are calling upon the resources, the efficiency and the ingenuity of the American manufacturers of war material of all kinds -- airplanes and tanks and guns and ships, and all the hundreds of products that go into this material. The Government of the United States itself manufactures few of the implements of war. Private industry will continue to be the source of most of this material, and private industry will have to be speeded up to produce it at the rate and efficiency called for by the needs of the times….Private industry will have the responsibility of providing the best, speediest and most efficient mass production of which it is capable.” On National Defense - May 26 1940



What's your next excuse to save Roosevelt from the contumely he...and you....so richly deserve?

Try again...and I'll shred it again.

Bull shit, the Koch's led the whey to normalized relations...FDR did not make his presidency by running over business, who do you think supported his campaigns? Not him, he had no money, his mother controlled the family wealth....

 

[Moonglow]

10. The Romanov executions has been the subject of great interest, then, and now.
It is the iconic description of Bolshevik....communist....governance.
There are many descriptions of the event....

"Tuesday, July 16 began uneventfully for the Romanovs,.....
And while there is no indication that the children were aware of their impending fate, two of the guards got cold feet and said they would not shoot the girls. They were sent away.

After evening prayers, they went to bed. In the early hours of the following day, they were wakened and told that the White Army was approaching and might launch an artillery attack on the house.

They were to go downstairs for their own safety. The Tsar got up immediately, the women put on their camisoles sewn full of jewels and pearls, as they had rehearsed for a rescue attempt or sudden flight.


At 2.15am on July 17, they were led down to the basement.
Anastasia carried her sister Tatiana's little Pekinese, Jemmy, down the stairs. They were ushered into a storeroom, lit by a single naked bulb.

Next, the family and their servants were lined up as for a last, sinister official photograph.
Then they were left alone for half an hour, as their assassins downed shots of vodka.
Re-entering the room, a guard read out a statement sentencing the family to death.

The faces before him registered blank incomprehension. The family crossed themselves, and a man walked towards the Tsar and shot him at point-blank range in the chest.

Other guards fired, as his body crumpled to the floor. Half drunk, the guards shot clumsily, hitting the Tsaritsa in the left side of her skull.

Next to her, poor lame Alexey, too crippled to move, sat transfixed with terror, his ashen face splattered with his father's blood.
The moans and whimpers from the floor testified to a botched job. But it was the children who suffered most.
None of the Romanov girls died a quick or painless death. Maria was felled by a bullet in the thigh, and lay bleeding until repeated stabbing in the torso snuffed out her life.

Her sisters were eventually finished off with an 8in bayonet, Olga having been shot in the jaw, and Tatiana in the back of the head as she tried to escape.

... turned into an orgy of killing, with only the thick clouds of gunpowder smoke obscuring the full horror of it.

Last of the women to die was Anastasia. A drunken guard lunged at her like an animal, attempting to pierce her chest with his bayonet.
Eventually, the head of the hit squad, Yakov Yurovsky, took his gun to her head.


Alexey alone was still alive, the young heir to the throne. He was wearing an undergarment sewn with jewels, which acted as a flak jacket. Yurovsky fired his Colt into the boy's head, and he slumped against his father.

It had taken a frenzied 20 minutes to kill the Romanovs and their servants. In the panicked moments that followed, Yurovsky's men staggered from the room, choking and coughing."
Massacre of the Russian royals Horrific last hours of a dynasty Daily Mail Online



The sub-title of the article is 'Bayonetted and shot by drunken assassins, the slaughter of the Russian royal family shook the world."


Didn't shake Franklin Roosevelt.
He had decided that there were people with whom he could partner.

So you love how the Romanov dynasty treated the peasants and the Jews? You have no idea the brutality meted out by the dynasty...

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. One of the finest Generals in United States history was George Patton. Patton had an 'interesting' view of America's erstwhile ally, the Soviet Union....

"It is a conflict that Patton believes will be fought soon.The Russians are moving to forcibly spread communism throughout the world, and Patton knows it."They are a scurvy race and simply savages," he writes of the Russians in his journal. "We could beat the hell out of them."
"Patton," By Martin Blumenson, Kevin M. Hymel, p. 84



2. When any speak of 'the Russians,' let's remember that the reference is to post 1917 Russian governance, ....the Bolsheviks, the communists.

"October 1917: The October Bolshevik Revolution
Encouraged by revolutionary leader Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, who had returned to Russia from exile in Germany, in October 1917, the radical Bolshevik workers' committees of Petrograd voted to stage an insurrection led by industrial workers against the forces of the Provisional Government. The Provisional Government surrendered without a fight, leaving the Bolshevik party of the workers and peasants in power. In the weeks that followed, Bolsheviks gradually forced non-Bolsheviks out of government. The United States and the Allies watched with concern as radical socialists seized control in Russia and threatened to pull Russian troops from the battlefield.

1917-1933: Interruption of Official U.S.-Russian Relations
Following the Bolshevik Revolution, President Woodrow Wilson instructed U.S. diplomats to withhold official and unofficial recognition of the new Bolshevik Government. U.S. Ambassador David Francis remained in Russia until November 1918, but was never replaced. On September 14, 1919, the U.S. Embassy in Russia closed its doors, though the U.S. Consulate in Vladivostok remained open until May 1922. The United States did not re‑establish diplomatic relations with the Soviet Union until 1933." United States Relations with Russia Establishment of Relations to World War Two



"....The United States and the Allies watched with concern as radical socialists seized control...."

Why 'concern'? Because they recognized Bolsheviks were savages of the most inhuman kind.

3. 'Woodrow Wilson's policy of withholding recognition on moral grounds was displaced by a return to traditional international practice of extending de jure recognition to de facto governments. ' "US Presidents and Foreign Policy"
edited by Carl Cavanagh Hodge, Cathal J. Nolan, p. 243


It remains a fact, though, that not Wilson, nor Harding, Coolidge, nor Hoover would advance recognition to the Bolshevik government.



But morality meant nothing to the 32nd President....

4. On November 16, 1933, President Franklin Roosevelt ended almost 16 years of American non-recognition of the Soviet Union following a series of negotiations in Washington, D.C. with the Soviet Commissar for Foreign Affairs, Maxim Litvinov. Recognition of the Soviet Union 1933 - 1921 1936 - Milestones - Office of the Historian



What was the message that Roosevelt was sending to the American people?
Giving the Bolsheviks their 'just reward'????

He was doing what American businessmen wanted...Trade with Russia...

I was waiting for some dope to use that ridiculous excuse.


He despised businessmen.


His road to the presidency was over their corpses.

He didn't alter his attacks on businessmen until the reality of the coming war impinged on his class warfare.


From the Prologue of “FDR Goes To War: How Expanded Executive Power, Spiraling National Debt, And Restricted Civil Liberties Shaped Wartime America” by Burton W. Folsom Jr. and Anita Folsom…

1. “Earlier, during national elections, the president could use class warfare and federal subsidies to win votes. …But when wars came, they must be won. Few remembered the Panic of 1873- or even who was president then- but everyone remembered the Mexican War, the Spanish-American War, and, of course, the Civil War. U.S. presidents could fail when they worked to end depressions, as FDR had shown, and still survive politically- if they had a viable scapegoat….Lincoln was great because Lincoln was a successful war president. His high taxes and abuse of civil liberties were largely forgotten. If the forthcoming war were lost, FDR could, of course, attack business again for not making enough weapons. But historians would still hold Roosevelt accountable for losing any war on his watch!”

2. Careful students of the Roosevelt presidency knew that war must be near because FDR had decided to change the tone of the political debate in Washington. For almost eight years, Wall Street bankers and corporate leaders had been his favorite scapegoats for explaining why the Great Depression was persisting. The premise of his New Deal, after all was that businessmen had failed and that government should regulate, plan and direct much of the American economy to break the hold of the Great Depression.”

3. On May 16, 1940, Roosevelt had addressed Congress and asked for more than a billion dollars for defense, with a commitment for fifty thousand military aircraft. He knew, also, that he needed the good will of business to win the war: no longer would he call them “privileged princes…thirsting for power.”


4. On May 26, 1940 his Fireside Chat signaled a new relationship with business: he would insure their profits, and assuage their fears that he would nationalize their factories.

a. “…we are calling upon the resources, the efficiency and the ingenuity of the American manufacturers of war material of all kinds -- airplanes and tanks and guns and ships, and all the hundreds of products that go into this material. The Government of the United States itself manufactures few of the implements of war. Private industry will continue to be the source of most of this material, and private industry will have to be speeded up to produce it at the rate and efficiency called for by the needs of the times….Private industry will have the responsibility of providing the best, speediest and most efficient mass production of which it is capable.” On National Defense - May 26 1940



What's your next excuse to save Roosevelt from the contumely he...and you....so richly deserve?

Try again...and I'll shred it again.

Bull shit, the Koch's led the whey to normalized relations...FDR did not make his presidency by running over business, who do you think supported his campaigns? Not him, he had no money, his mother controlled the family wealth....

Liar.

 

[Penelope]

It is ironic that some aspects of Marxism are more evident today in the USA, than in the former USSR.

that is because we have so many Ashkenazi's in our government, ACLU, ADA, Supreme Court and in think tanks and have since the 1900's. Ashkenazis started socialism and communism.

Stalin wasn't Jewish, but he did the right thing to the catholic churches

Jews got rid of the RC's before stalin and destroyed Christian churches and Stalin didn't need to be jew his, right hand men were: and one more thing the Jews started global communism.


Stalin's Jews

We mustn't forget that some of greatest murderers of modern times were Jewish

And us, the Jews? An Israeli student finishes high school without ever hearing the name "Genrikh Yagoda," the greatest Jewish murderer of the 20th Century, the GPU's deputy commander and the founder and commander of the NKVD. Yagoda diligently implemented Stalin's collectivization orders and is responsible for the deaths of at least 10 million people. His Jewish deputies established and managed the Gulag system. After Stalin no longer viewed him favorably, Yagoda was demoted and executed, and was replaced as chief hangman in 1936 by Yezhov, the "bloodthirsty dwarf."


Yezhov was not Jewish but was blessed with an active Jewish wife. In his Book "Stalin: Court of the Red Star", Jewish historian Sebag Montefiore writes that during the darkest period of terror, when the Communist killing machine worked in full force, Stalin was surrounded by beautiful, young Jewish women.

Stalin s Jews - Israel Opinion Ynetnews

 

[PoliticalChic]

10. The Romanov executions has been the subject of great interest, then, and now.
It is the iconic description of Bolshevik....communist....governance.
There are many descriptions of the event....

"Tuesday, July 16 began uneventfully for the Romanovs,.....
And while there is no indication that the children were aware of their impending fate, two of the guards got cold feet and said they would not shoot the girls. They were sent away.

After evening prayers, they went to bed. In the early hours of the following day, they were wakened and told that the White Army was approaching and might launch an artillery attack on the house.

They were to go downstairs for their own safety. The Tsar got up immediately, the women put on their camisoles sewn full of jewels and pearls, as they had rehearsed for a rescue attempt or sudden flight.


At 2.15am on July 17, they were led down to the basement.
Anastasia carried her sister Tatiana's little Pekinese, Jemmy, down the stairs. They were ushered into a storeroom, lit by a single naked bulb.

Next, the family and their servants were lined up as for a last, sinister official photograph.
Then they were left alone for half an hour, as their assassins downed shots of vodka.
Re-entering the room, a guard read out a statement sentencing the family to death.

The faces before him registered blank incomprehension. The family crossed themselves, and a man walked towards the Tsar and shot him at point-blank range in the chest.

Other guards fired, as his body crumpled to the floor. Half drunk, the guards shot clumsily, hitting the Tsaritsa in the left side of her skull.

Next to her, poor lame Alexey, too crippled to move, sat transfixed with terror, his ashen face splattered with his father's blood.
The moans and whimpers from the floor testified to a botched job. But it was the children who suffered most.
None of the Romanov girls died a quick or painless death. Maria was felled by a bullet in the thigh, and lay bleeding until repeated stabbing in the torso snuffed out her life.

Her sisters were eventually finished off with an 8in bayonet, Olga having been shot in the jaw, and Tatiana in the back of the head as she tried to escape.

... turned into an orgy of killing, with only the thick clouds of gunpowder smoke obscuring the full horror of it.

Last of the women to die was Anastasia. A drunken guard lunged at her like an animal, attempting to pierce her chest with his bayonet.
Eventually, the head of the hit squad, Yakov Yurovsky, took his gun to her head.


Alexey alone was still alive, the young heir to the throne. He was wearing an undergarment sewn with jewels, which acted as a flak jacket. Yurovsky fired his Colt into the boy's head, and he slumped against his father.

It had taken a frenzied 20 minutes to kill the Romanovs and their servants. In the panicked moments that followed, Yurovsky's men staggered from the room, choking and coughing."
Massacre of the Russian royals Horrific last hours of a dynasty Daily Mail Online



The sub-title of the article is 'Bayonetted and shot by drunken assassins, the slaughter of the Russian royal family shook the world."


Didn't shake Franklin Roosevelt.
He had decided that there were people with whom he could partner.

So you love how the Romanov dynasty treated the peasants and the Jews? You have no idea the brutality meted out by the dynasty...

And post #17 proves you to be a liar.....again.

 

[regent]

Who should decide what label to put on a nation's government and economic system? Should it be the nation itself, that decides, or others, if others who? For example who has the authority to say America is a capitalist nation and not a communist nation?

What are you....a moron????

If you are unable to answer the post why not just ignore it instead of calling the poster names? So I'll ask something that you might be able to answer: if the USSR did not practice Marx what economic systems did the USSR practice?

I don't know which I like less....your stupid 'rush out and tell the historians' posts...

... or the really imbecilic one where you claim that you can't tell the difference between communism and capitalism.


As far as you imagining that you can determine how I post.....
…I am immovable, like General Jackson’s Virginians at First Manassas: a veritable stone wall. If you only had an acquaintance with history…you’d understand that.

Poor Jackson, shot by his own men. Anyway I take it you have not informed the historians of your findings and evidence that communism has been since an influence in our government, today and in the past. All that evidence and nothing. At least you might tell us what the historians responses were when you sent them your evidence, I bet they have already started the process of revision?
As for the difference between capitalism and communism I was just asking who best decides, posters seem to have different definitions. Who decides?

 

[regent]

The disciples of marx have been infiltrating governments and their agencies since well before the bolsheviks finally conquered a state for them. They were responsible for the "anachist" movement in the US which created riots and actual wars in the steel and coal industries, as well as having assasinated President McKinnley. They had so fully infused theselves into the democrook party that FDR went right along and gave Stalin everything he asked for.

They've infected out schools, our entertainment, our industry and our politics. They must be defeated in the arena of ideas, and they can be considering how many millions of people they've had to slaughter to gain control of countries and maintain it.

FDR didn't give Stalin the thing he hoped for most, a second front in 1942, nor in 1943 and finally the front was established in 1944. Wonder if Stalin had any comments about that delay.

 

[gipper]

The disciples of marx have been infiltrating governments and their agencies since well before the bolsheviks finally conquered a state for them. They were responsible for the "anachist" movement in the US which created riots and actual wars in the steel and coal industries, as well as having assasinated President McKinnley. They had so fully infused theselves into the democrook party that FDR went right along and gave Stalin everything he asked for.

They've infected out schools, our entertainment, our industry and our politics. They must be defeated in the arena of ideas, and they can be considering how many millions of people they've had to slaughter to gain control of countries and maintain it.

FDR didn't give Stalin the thing he hoped for most, a second front in 1942, nor in 1943 and finally the front was established in 1944. Wonder if Stalin had any comments about that delay.

You should research your government jesters (the historians you reference ad nauseam). No doubt they will tell you everything you need to know about Stalin's and FDR's love affair...and no more.

 

[Pete7469]

FDR didn't give Stalin the thing he hoped for most, a second front in 1942, nor in 1943 and finally the front was established in 1944. Wonder if Stalin had any comments about that delay.

It takes quite a while to train, equip and mobilize millions of soldiers. However a second front was the Africa Campaign and we put men and material in there almost immediately. The invasion of western europe was not something any sane person would flippantly endeavor to do, so I don't care what a mass murdering savage despot like stalin would have to say about it any more than I care what a bed wetting liberal has to say about anything.

 

[gipper]

FDR didn't give Stalin the thing he hoped for most, a second front in 1942, nor in 1943 and finally the front was established in 1944. Wonder if Stalin had any comments about that delay.

It takes quite a while to train, equip and mobilize millions of soldiers. However a second front was the Africa Campaign and we put men and material in there almost immediately. The invasion of western europe was not something any sane person would flippantly endeavor to do, so I don't care what a mass murdering savage despot like stalin would have to say about it any more than I care what a bed wetting liberal has to say about anything.

And what about the failure at Dieppe in August 1942?

A successful amphibious landing is difficult. The allies learned this lesson at Dieppe.

 

[regent]

FDR didn't give Stalin the thing he hoped for most, a second front in 1942, nor in 1943 and finally the front was established in 1944. Wonder if Stalin had any comments about that delay.

It takes quite a while to train, equip and mobilize millions of soldiers. However a second front was the Africa Campaign and we put men and material in there almost immediately. The invasion of western europe was not something any sane person would flippantly endeavor to do, so I don't care what a mass murdering savage despot like stalin would have to say about it any more than I care what a bed wetting liberal has to say about anything.

And what about the failure at Dieppe in August 1942?

A successful amphibious landing is difficult. The allies learned this lesson at Dieppe.

You are correct, but are you now thinking along the same lines as FDR and the
American military: don't invade until the nation is ready, no matter what Stalin wants. In the interim we will hold Stalin's coat and save many American lives.
In the meantime, Stalin, waiting for the second front, will stay in the war and not surrender as Russia did in WWI. Chalk up another for America and FDR.

 

[gipper]

FDR didn't give Stalin the thing he hoped for most, a second front in 1942, nor in 1943 and finally the front was established in 1944. Wonder if Stalin had any comments about that delay.

It takes quite a while to train, equip and mobilize millions of soldiers. However a second front was the Africa Campaign and we put men and material in there almost immediately. The invasion of western europe was not something any sane person would flippantly endeavor to do, so I don't care what a mass murdering savage despot like stalin would have to say about it any more than I care what a bed wetting liberal has to say about anything.

And what about the failure at Dieppe in August 1942?

A successful amphibious landing is difficult. The allies learned this lesson at Dieppe.

You are correct, but are you now thinking along the same lines as FDR and the
American military: don't invade until the nation is ready, no matter what Stalin wants. In the interim we will hold Stalin's coat and save many American lives.
In the meantime, Stalin, waiting for the second front, will stay in the war and not surrender as Russia did in WWI. Chalk up another for America and FDR.

No. I was addressing your comment about Uncle Joe's crying for a second front. Ignoring what Americans were doing in Africa, Asia, and Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. It seems some forget that America was fighting a two front war too. Many seem to think the Russians did all the fighting, apparently you are one of them.

However the brutal, murderous, and treacherous Uncle Joe (FDR's Hero), held no concern for his troops or civilians and sacrificed them readily, apparently unnoticed by his delusional unwell friend in the WH and you.

How do your court jester historians reconcile Uncle Joe's vast police state murdering and starving millions prior to WWII, alignment with Hitler in '39, invading and conquering the Baltic states and half of Poland and don't forget Finland, murdering Polish officers at Katyn (which FDR ignored and even claimed Germans did it), Stalin's plan to invade Poland and take all of Europe, but Hitler beat him to the punch, resulting in massive numbers of Russian prisoners who got caught planning an offensive, but couldn't fight defensively...then Stalin disowned his own soldiers held by the Germans, refusing to provide food resulting in an enormous death toll??????????

Or it is news to you?

 

[regent]

Seems like Stalin got outmaneuvered by FDR. In the end it was the US that survived, not Germany, not Japan and not the USSR. Now some posters in their zeal to downgrade FDR are trying to find some way to change history. We won and FDR was our leader. Might try the birthing thing or as some did the FDR was Jewish thing, or historians are communists or FDR.... Have at it, it was all done before and done better than today's Republicans.

 

[Pete7469]

Seems like Stalin got outmaneuvered by FDR. In the end it was the US that survived, not Germany, not Japan and not the USSR. Now some posters in their zeal to downgrade FDR are trying to find some way to change history. We won and FDR was our leader. Might try the birthing thing or as some did the FDR was Jewish thing, or historians are communists or FDR.... Have at it, it was all done before and done better than today's Republicans.

Are you reading history from an alternate universe? Stalin got half of europe, china, north korea and some japanese islands.

The russians did next to nothing in the pacific theater yet managed to influence a far greater majority of the land involved. There wouldn't be a communist China, North Korea or Vietnam war, let alone an Iron Curtain across eastern europe if FDR "out maneuvered" stalin. I'd ask what you've been smoking, but I'm starting to suspect you're huffing aerosols.

If things went as they should have, Patton would have revamped the German army, turned it around and shook hands with MacArthur on the plains of Mongolia in the spring of 1947.

 

[Picaro]

FDR didn't give Stalin the thing he hoped for most, a second front in 1942, nor in 1943 and finally the front was established in 1944. Wonder if Stalin had any comments about that delay.

It takes quite a while to train, equip and mobilize millions of soldiers. However a second front was the Africa Campaign and we put men and material in there almost immediately. The invasion of western europe was not something any sane person would flippantly endeavor to do, so I don't care what a mass murdering savage despot like stalin would have to say about it any more than I care what a bed wetting liberal has to say about anything.

And what about the failure at Dieppe in August 1942?

A successful amphibious landing is difficult. The allies learned this lesson at Dieppe.

Yes, but a hell of a lot was learned from that failure, along with the aggressive raids Churchhill had the Brit commandos conducting almost constantly on various shorelines. These raids forced the spreading out of German military and massive spending on fortifications along the entire coastlines, which became known as the Atlantic Wall.

 

[Picaro]

Seems like Stalin got outmaneuvered by FDR. In the end it was the US that survived, not Germany, not Japan and not the USSR. Now some posters in their zeal to downgrade FDR are trying to find some way to change history. We won and FDR was our leader. Might try the birthing thing or as some did the FDR was Jewish thing, or historians are communists or FDR.... Have at it, it was all done before and done better than today's Republicans.

Yes, we could have done a lot worse than FDR, but with his health failing and the crush of responsibilities over decades as President was taking its toll by Yalta; there is a lot to recommend the notion that he should have turned most of the negotiations over to Keenan by then instead of handling it himself.