Tender Mercies: A Roosevelt Love Story

[Camp]

We would have cut the fuel supply to the Soviet Air Force and all those big lumbering Russian tanks and artillery would have been nothing more than target practice for the Army AirForce.

How, I thought at the end of the war the USSR occupied the Romanian oil fields?

Not only did they control the Romanian oil fields, Russia was the 2nd largest oil producer in the world, 2nd only to the US. And they still hadn't developed their western oil fields.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1.If Franklin Roosevelt had had a teenager’s crush on Joseph Stalin, that might explain his actions vis-a-vis that homicidal megalomaniac, as when he ceded Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe."
….it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'



2. A telling insight comes from close friend, and, equally a Sovietophile, William Christian Bullitt, Jr..
Bullitt was also an extreme Liberal, and a radical who had worked for Woodrow Wilson, and, of course, was a fervent believer in internationalism.
"Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Christian_Bullitt,_Jr.

Bullitt did try to stop FDR. In 1935, he had written to FDR about the Comintern Congress, and he followed that with a cable to Secretary of State Hull, that included that there had been "...no decrease in the determination of the Soviet Government to produce a world revolution...If this basic postulate of the Soviet Government is understood, there is nothing in nothing in Soviet domestic or foreign policy that is not clear.' He went on to explain that Stalin yearned for a US-Japan war, after Japan had been thoroughly defeated....to acquire Manchuria and Sovietize China."
Dunn, "Caught Between Roosevelt and Stalin," p. 52.


Even so....FDR refused the advice of Bullitt.




3. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, Ambassador William Bullitt warned Roosevelt about what would happen if he continued pursuing the policies of appeasement toward Stalin that formed the foundation of the American war strategy. He pleaded with FDR not to 'permit our war to prevent Nazi domination of Europe to be turned into a war to establish Soviet domination of Europe.' He predicted the Soviet annexation of half of Europe; George Kennan identified that letter as the earliest warning of what would be the result of FDR's policies. "
For the President Personal & Secret: Correspondence Between Franklin D. Roosevelt and William C. Bullitt," Orville H. Bullitt, p. 575-590

a. FDR replied: "Bill, I don't dispute your facts, they are accurate, I don't dispute the logic of your reasoning. I have just had a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. Harry says he's not and that he doesn't want anything in the world but security for his country, and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace."
William C. Bullitt, "How We Won The War and Lost The Peace," Life Magazine, August 30, 1948, p. 94

Brilliant analysis by Roosevelt, huh?




How to explain this? Well, the CIA has an interesting take:

4.Perhaps it was something else, entirely:

"In recent years, the statesmanship of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in particular his handling of Soviet affairs, has come under attack in historical studies. The situation has reached such a pass that even a psychiatrist who examined FDR’s medical records has opined that toward the end of World War II the US President ceded the better part of Eastern Europe to Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin because he was “gripped by clinical depression." How “Uncle Joe” Bugged FDR — Central Intelligence Agency


Mentally ill??????
How could that be true of the great god of the Democrats?????

At the end of WWII the Soviets had the most powerful army on the planet yet we never went to war with them and they and most of their proxies no longer exist. All in all not a bad outcome, thanks FDR.

"At the end of WWII the Soviets had the most powerful army on the planet..."

Au contraire.

Patton saw the inevitability of a conflict with the Russians. Of course, he was totally correct.
More important, Stalin knew he was correct....and so did Franklin Roosevelt, whose raison d'être was to make certain that Soviet communism survived and ended up ruling Europe after the war.



"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

"They are a scurvy race and simply savages"

Patton sounds a lot like Hitler there. His sentiment was likely echoed by both Hitler and Napoleon.

Folks like the OP use Patton like a crutch to support their distorted interpretation and revision of history. Patton's success on the battlefield was dependent on a long list of attributes he had no control of. He commanded an Army dependent on supplies to keep his Armored division able to fight. That included massive amounts of fuel, ammunition, replacements of both men and tanks lost on the battlefield, air support and other commands to cover his flanks and rear.
Patton was like a prima donna who demanded everything focused on him and his mission at the expense of other missions and concerns.

"... interpretation and revision of history."

I provide facts.

I notice you were unable to find a single error in my posts.....and there will be more.


Now...wipe that polish from Roosevelt's boots off your tongue....it's gross.






"He commanded an Army dependent on supplies to keep his Armored division able to fight. That included massive amounts of fuel, ammunition, replacements...."

Guess where Stalin got his?

I challenge FDR apologists to explain government largesse to Soviet Russia, even superseding Allied, or even American military needs. Or American civilian needs: 217,660,666 pounds of butter shipped to the USSR during a time of strict state-side rationing. John R. Deane, "The Strange Alliance: The Story of Our Efforts at Wartime Cooperation With Russia," p.94-95.

Further, supplies didn't just "flow" to the Soviet Union, they flooded it, including non-military supplies: a tire plant, an oil refinery, pipe-fabricating works, over a million miles of copper wire, switchboard-panels, lathes and power tools, textile machinery, woodworking, typesetting, cranes hoists, derricks, air compressors, $152 million in women's 'dress goods,' 18.4 million pounds of writing paper, cigarette cases, jeweled watches, lipstick, liquor, bathtubs, and pianos.

a. " A year and a half after WWII began in Europe, Roosevelt’s Lend-Lease supplied a prodigious amount of war materiel to Russia, without which the embattled Red Army, the only challenge to Hitler’s forces, would have been defeated. The temporary congruence of interests was called an alliance, albeit a strange one. For example, when the Americans tried to find a way that long-range American bombers could land in Russia to re-fuel, so as to bomb deep into Germany, the Russians were found to be suspicious, ungrateful, secretive, xenophobic, unfriendly, in short….a great deal of take and very little give." “The Anti-Communist Manifestos,” by John V. Fleming, chapter six




Notice that I am always 100% correct?

 

[del]

We would have cut the fuel supply to the Soviet Air Force and all those big lumbering Russian tanks and artillery would have been nothing more than target practice for the Army AirForce.

FDR was a Stalin sock puppet who condemned half of Europe to 70 years of Hell

we didn't supply fuel to the soviets

 

[PoliticalChic]

Revisionist like the OP like to make predictions of how FDR would have handled Stalin and the entire ending of WWII, but of course, they in fact offer nothing more than speculative predictions and guess's. That is because FDR died before the war ended. That makes it seem easy for the revisionist. Especially when they pretend to have special powers that enable them to present their speculations as facts. They can cite a letter or report, a quote from a book or opinion article and say "look, here is the proof."
The OP's nonsense has been debunked for over 75 years by generations of historians.

Let's see you find any errors in any of my posts, you dunce.

 

[Camp]

We would have cut the fuel supply to the Soviet Air Force and all those big lumbering Russian tanks and artillery would have been nothing more than target practice for the Army AirForce.

How, I thought at the end of the war the USSR occupied the Romanian oil fields?

Just like with the atomic bomb, they had the raw materials but needed one of their spies to steal the secrets of conversion into aviation fuel.

Something else the Russians had, large numbers of German scientist who had been working on development of the A-bomb for years.

 

[alang1216]

Of course we fought them, you moron.

What do you imagine (I almost said 'think') Korea, and Vietnam, were?

Complicated, limited, proxy wars with a combination of local and global causes. US and Russians rarely fought each other. They were certainly not WWIII

 

[Unkotare]

1.If Franklin Roosevelt had had a teenager’s crush on Joseph Stalin, that might explain his actions vis-a-vis that homicidal megalomaniac, as when he ceded Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe."
….it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'



2. A telling insight comes from close friend, and, equally a Sovietophile, William Christian Bullitt, Jr..
Bullitt was also an extreme Liberal, and a radical who had worked for Woodrow Wilson, and, of course, was a fervent believer in internationalism.
"Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Christian_Bullitt,_Jr.

Bullitt did try to stop FDR. In 1935, he had written to FDR about the Comintern Congress, and he followed that with a cable to Secretary of State Hull, that included that there had been "...no decrease in the determination of the Soviet Government to produce a world revolution...If this basic postulate of the Soviet Government is understood, there is nothing in nothing in Soviet domestic or foreign policy that is not clear.' He went on to explain that Stalin yearned for a US-Japan war, after Japan had been thoroughly defeated....to acquire Manchuria and Sovietize China."
Dunn, "Caught Between Roosevelt and Stalin," p. 52.


Even so....FDR refused the advice of Bullitt.




3. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, Ambassador William Bullitt warned Roosevelt about what would happen if he continued pursuing the policies of appeasement toward Stalin that formed the foundation of the American war strategy. He pleaded with FDR not to 'permit our war to prevent Nazi domination of Europe to be turned into a war to establish Soviet domination of Europe.' He predicted the Soviet annexation of half of Europe; George Kennan identified that letter as the earliest warning of what would be the result of FDR's policies. "
For the President Personal & Secret: Correspondence Between Franklin D. Roosevelt and William C. Bullitt," Orville H. Bullitt, p. 575-590

a. FDR replied: "Bill, I don't dispute your facts, they are accurate, I don't dispute the logic of your reasoning. I have just had a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. Harry says he's not and that he doesn't want anything in the world but security for his country, and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace."
William C. Bullitt, "How We Won The War and Lost The Peace," Life Magazine, August 30, 1948, p. 94

Brilliant analysis by Roosevelt, huh?




How to explain this? Well, the CIA has an interesting take:

4.Perhaps it was something else, entirely:

"In recent years, the statesmanship of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in particular his handling of Soviet affairs, has come under attack in historical studies. The situation has reached such a pass that even a psychiatrist who examined FDR’s medical records has opined that toward the end of World War II the US President ceded the better part of Eastern Europe to Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin because he was “gripped by clinical depression." How “Uncle Joe” Bugged FDR — Central Intelligence Agency


Mentally ill??????
How could that be true of the great god of the Democrats?????

At the end of WWII the Soviets had the most powerful army on the planet ...

Huh????

Who told you that?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Of course we fought them, you moron.

What do you imagine (I almost said 'think') Korea, and Vietnam, were?

Complicated, limited, proxy wars with a combination of local and global causes. US and Russians rarely fought each other. They were certainly not WWIII

You remind me of nothing so much as Confederate General Wise, chased by Union General Cox, referring to his retreat a 'retrograde movement' of his troops.

Nice retrograde movement, there.

 

[Camp]

1.If Franklin Roosevelt had had a teenager’s crush on Joseph Stalin, that might explain his actions vis-a-vis that homicidal megalomaniac, as when he ceded Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe."

First sentence of the OP's post is BS. The US did not cede military strategy to Russia and Stalin at any time during WWII. American military commanders designed and executed strategies that minimized US casualties and obtained maximum assistance from allies, particularly the USSR. By the time the US hit the beaches of Normandy and began it's land war Russia was decimating German forces on the eastern front. That was the American strategy the OP complains about. The US with FDR at the helm used millions of Russian soldiers who died in action against Germany to weaken the forces Americans faced when they put boots on the ground western Europe.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1.If Franklin Roosevelt had had a teenager’s crush on Joseph Stalin, that might explain his actions vis-a-vis that homicidal megalomaniac, as when he ceded Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe."
….it must have relied on a belief in Stalin's 'tender mercies.'



2. A telling insight comes from close friend, and, equally a Sovietophile, William Christian Bullitt, Jr..
Bullitt was also an extreme Liberal, and a radical who had worked for Woodrow Wilson, and, of course, was a fervent believer in internationalism.
"Franklin D. Roosevelt appointed Bullitt the first US ambassador to the Soviet Union, a post that he filled from 1933 to 1936." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Christian_Bullitt,_Jr.

Bullitt did try to stop FDR. In 1935, he had written to FDR about the Comintern Congress, and he followed that with a cable to Secretary of State Hull, that included that there had been "...no decrease in the determination of the Soviet Government to produce a world revolution...If this basic postulate of the Soviet Government is understood, there is nothing in nothing in Soviet domestic or foreign policy that is not clear.' He went on to explain that Stalin yearned for a US-Japan war, after Japan had been thoroughly defeated....to acquire Manchuria and Sovietize China."
Dunn, "Caught Between Roosevelt and Stalin," p. 52.


Even so....FDR refused the advice of Bullitt.




3. In a letter to FDR, dated January 29, 1943, Ambassador William Bullitt warned Roosevelt about what would happen if he continued pursuing the policies of appeasement toward Stalin that formed the foundation of the American war strategy. He pleaded with FDR not to 'permit our war to prevent Nazi domination of Europe to be turned into a war to establish Soviet domination of Europe.' He predicted the Soviet annexation of half of Europe; George Kennan identified that letter as the earliest warning of what would be the result of FDR's policies. "
For the President Personal & Secret: Correspondence Between Franklin D. Roosevelt and William C. Bullitt," Orville H. Bullitt, p. 575-590

a. FDR replied: "Bill, I don't dispute your facts, they are accurate, I don't dispute the logic of your reasoning. I have just had a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man. Harry says he's not and that he doesn't want anything in the world but security for his country, and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace."
William C. Bullitt, "How We Won The War and Lost The Peace," Life Magazine, August 30, 1948, p. 94

Brilliant analysis by Roosevelt, huh?




How to explain this? Well, the CIA has an interesting take:

4.Perhaps it was something else, entirely:

"In recent years, the statesmanship of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in particular his handling of Soviet affairs, has come under attack in historical studies. The situation has reached such a pass that even a psychiatrist who examined FDR’s medical records has opined that toward the end of World War II the US President ceded the better part of Eastern Europe to Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin because he was “gripped by clinical depression." How “Uncle Joe” Bugged FDR — Central Intelligence Agency


Mentally ill??????
How could that be true of the great god of the Democrats?????

At the end of WWII the Soviets had the most powerful army on the planet ...

Huh????

Who told you that?

Let's remember, the liar is a government school grad.


Bet he didn't know this:

a. More than a million Soviet citizens joined the Nazis. Why was it that the USSR, of all the Allies, had provided the enemy with thousands of recruits? Nearly one million Russian and other anti-Soviet men joined the enemy of their Soviet Army. "The Secret Betrayal"byNikolai Tolstoy, p. 19-20.

b. The 850,000 strong army of Gen. Andrei Andreyevich Vlasov, having gone to the other side, Germany, "to save their country from Stalin" and having later surrendered to US forces, "formed the core of those forcibly repatriated between 1944 and 1947." "Operation Keelhaul; The Story of Forced Repatriation from 1944 to the Present," by Julius Epstein p.27, 53.



There's an army Stalin could count on, huh?

 

[PoliticalChic]

1.If Franklin Roosevelt had had a teenager’s crush on Joseph Stalin, that might explain his actions vis-a-vis that homicidal megalomaniac, as when he ceded Allied military strategy, and control over half of Europe to "Uncle Joe."

First sentence of the OP's post is BS. The US did not cede military strategy to Russia and Stalin at any time during WWII. American military commanders designed and executed strategies that minimized US casualties and obtained maximum assistance from allies, particularly the USSR. By the time the US hit the beaches of Normandy and began it's land war Russia was decimating German forces on the eastern front. That was the American strategy the OP complains about. The US with FDR at the helm used millions of Russian soldiers who died in action against Germany to weaken the forces Americans faced when they put boots on the ground western Europe.

"The US did not cede military strategy to Russia and Stalin at any time during WWII."

Absolutely did.

Stalin insisted on a 'second front,' the assumption being that Hitler's attack on the Soviet homeland, June 21, 1941, was the 'first front.'

Further, Stalin insisted....demanded .....that the second front be as far west in Europe as possible....so that at war's end, the Red Army could occupy and control all of Eastern Europe.

This meant that, although the Allies had control of Italy and could advance north into Germany, the Adriatic second front was not acceptable to Stalin....only Normandy, France, was.




Soviet Spy Hopkins and 'Yes,sir, yes sir' George Marshall were fully behind handing all of Eastern Europe over to Stalin's tender mercies.

 

[Camp]

Revisionist like the OP like to make predictions of how FDR would have handled Stalin and the entire ending of WWII, but of course, they in fact offer nothing more than speculative predictions and guess's. That is because FDR died before the war ended. That makes it seem easy for the revisionist. Especially when they pretend to have special powers that enable them to present their speculations as facts. They can cite a letter or report, a quote from a book or opinion article and say "look, here is the proof."
The OP's nonsense has been debunked for over 75 years by generations of historians.

Let's see you find any errors in any of my posts, you dunce.

Done, post #29. First sentence of you OP.

 

[alang1216]

Further, Stalin insisted....demanded .....that the second front be as far west in Europe as possible....so that at war's end, the Red Army could occupy and control all of Eastern Europe.

This meant that, although the Allies had control of Italy and could advance north into Germany, the Adriatic second front was not acceptable to Stalin....only Normandy, France, was.

Whatever Stalin wanted, the invasion of Italy was a nightmare for the Allies. The terrain was too easy for the Germans to defend. To defeat the Germans we needed to get our tanks onto the flat terrain of Northern Europe.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Revisionist like the OP like to make predictions of how FDR would have handled Stalin and the entire ending of WWII, but of course, they in fact offer nothing more than speculative predictions and guess's. That is because FDR died before the war ended. That makes it seem easy for the revisionist. Especially when they pretend to have special powers that enable them to present their speculations as facts. They can cite a letter or report, a quote from a book or opinion article and say "look, here is the proof."
The OP's nonsense has been debunked for over 75 years by generations of historians.

Let's see you find any errors in any of my posts, you dunce.

Done, post #29. First sentence of you OP.

Not only did I reveal your lie.....but guess who else knew it was a lie?

"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO. In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....

But Stalin said nooooooooooo....

He demanded that mid-Europe be left for the Red Army to occupy.....and Roosevelt bent over and grabbed his ankles....said 'da!!!!'


In your face, booooyyyyyeeeeeeeee!!!!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Further, Stalin insisted....demanded .....that the second front be as far west in Europe as possible....so that at war's end, the Red Army could occupy and control all of Eastern Europe.

This meant that, although the Allies had control of Italy and could advance north into Germany, the Adriatic second front was not acceptable to Stalin....only Normandy, France, was.

Whatever Stalin wanted, the invasion of Italy was a nightmare for the Allies. The terrain was too easy for the Germans to defend. To defeat the Germans we needed to get our tanks onto the flat terrain of Northern Europe.

Not only did I reveal your lie.....but guess who else knew it was a lie?

"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO. In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....

But Stalin said nooooooooooo....

He demanded that mid-Europe be left for the Red Army to occupy.....and Roosevelt bent over and grabbed his ankles....said 'da!!!!'


In your face, booooyyyyyeeeeeeeee!!!!

 

[Camp]

"The US did not cede military strategy to Russia and Stalin at any time during WWII."

Absolutely did.

Stalin insisted on a 'second front,' the assumption being that Hitler's attack on the Soviet homeland, June 21, 1941, was the 'first front.'

Further, Stalin insisted....demanded .....that the second front be as far west in Europe as possible....so that at war's end, the Red Army could occupy and control all of Eastern Europe.

This meant that, although the Allies had control of Italy and could advance north into Germany, the Adriatic second front was not acceptable to Stalin....only Normandy, France, was.




Soviet Spy Hopkins and 'Yes,sir, yes sir' George Marshall were fully behind handing all of Eastern Europe over to Stalin's tender mercies.

Normandy was the logical and western France was the obvious place to begin the western front. Claiming the USA was guided by and influenced by Stalin to pick Normandy as the starting point is beyond silly. Normandy was the perfect pick for resupply and transportation and Great Britain had the airbases that could and would supply air support for the invasion and continued actions.

 

[PoliticalChic]

"The US did not cede military strategy to Russia and Stalin at any time during WWII."

Absolutely did.

Stalin insisted on a 'second front,' the assumption being that Hitler's attack on the Soviet homeland, June 21, 1941, was the 'first front.'

Further, Stalin insisted....demanded .....that the second front be as far west in Europe as possible....so that at war's end, the Red Army could occupy and control all of Eastern Europe.

This meant that, although the Allies had control of Italy and could advance north into Germany, the Adriatic second front was not acceptable to Stalin....only Normandy, France, was.




Soviet Spy Hopkins and 'Yes,sir, yes sir' George Marshall were fully behind handing all of Eastern Europe over to Stalin's tender mercies.

Normandy was the logical and western France was the obvious place to begin the western front. Claiming the USA was guided by and influenced by Stalin to pick Normandy as the starting point is beyond silly. Normandy was the perfect pick for reshoupply and transportation and Great Britain had the airbases that could and would supply air support for the invasion and continued actions.

Eisenhower said one thing, and you, to hide the truth about Roosevelt, say the opposite.

Who to believe.


Was Churchill on your side?

Nah.

"Churchill strongly opposed the cross channel invasion both on military and political grounds. He was thinking about the future of Europe and the world, with Germany destroyed and triumphant communism dominating the Eurasian heartland. This prompted a difficulty for American "Russia First" strategists." A major factor in all American thinking of that time," writes General Eisenhower, "was a lively suspicion that the British contemplated the agreed-upon cross-channel concept with distaste and with considerable mental reservations. . . ."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution"


Smashed another custard pie in your ugly kisser, huh?

 

[Camp]

Revisionist like the OP like to make predictions of how FDR would have handled Stalin and the entire ending of WWII, but of course, they in fact offer nothing more than speculative predictions and guess's. That is because FDR died before the war ended. That makes it seem easy for the revisionist. Especially when they pretend to have special powers that enable them to present their speculations as facts. They can cite a letter or report, a quote from a book or opinion article and say "look, here is the proof."
The OP's nonsense has been debunked for over 75 years by generations of historians.

Let's see you find any errors in any of my posts, you dunce.

Done, post #29. First sentence of you OP.

Not only did I reveal your lie.....but guess who else knew it was a lie?

"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO. In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....

But Stalin said nooooooooooo....

He demanded that mid-Europe be left for the Red Army to occupy.....and Roosevelt bent over and grabbed his ankles....said 'da!!!!'


In your face, booooyyyyyeeeeeeeee!!!!

You did a thread about this years ago and got slapped and exposed for not knowing what you were talking about. You did not know how to equate geography of the battlefield, ignored the fact that allies were having great difficulty fight in and through that geography, and you ignored the fact that a mountain range called the Alp's created a difficulty, particularly in retrieving and rescuing downed airmen.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Revisionist like the OP like to make predictions of how FDR would have handled Stalin and the entire ending of WWII, but of course, they in fact offer nothing more than speculative predictions and guess's. That is because FDR died before the war ended. That makes it seem easy for the revisionist. Especially when they pretend to have special powers that enable them to present their speculations as facts. They can cite a letter or report, a quote from a book or opinion article and say "look, here is the proof."
The OP's nonsense has been debunked for over 75 years by generations of historians.

Let's see you find any errors in any of my posts, you dunce.

Done, post #29. First sentence of you OP.

Not only did I reveal your lie.....but guess who else knew it was a lie?

"Italy was the correct place in which to deploy our main forces and the objective should be the Valle of the PO. In no other area could we so well threaten the whole German structure including France, the Balkans and the Reich itself. Here also our air would be closer to vital objectives in Germany."
FRUS: The conferences at Cairo and Tehran, 1943, p.359-361
That report was published in "Foreign Relations of the United States" in 1961

Eisenhower's statement was to an audience in November 26, 1943....

But Stalin said nooooooooooo....

He demanded that mid-Europe be left for the Red Army to occupy.....and Roosevelt bent over and grabbed his ankles....said 'da!!!!'


In your face, booooyyyyyeeeeeeeee!!!!

You did a thread about this years ago and got slapped and exposed for not knowing what you were talking about. You did not know how to equate geography of the battlefield, ignored the fact that allies were having great difficulty fight in and through that geography, and you ignored the fact that a mountain range called the Alp's created a difficulty, particularly in retrieving and rescuing downed airmen.

Everything.....every single thing....I post is 100% true, accurate and correct.

You prove it by being unable to refute any of my posts.





Another stake through your heart?

Stalin demanded that Roosevelt continue the war until 'unconditional surrender.'

See, many anti-Nazi Germans were ready to fight Hitler, but Stalin couldn't allow any German post-war resistance to Communism...

So Roosevelt agreed.
He could have ended the war with a victory before Normandy.


Know what that means?

To get an idea of the cost of the extended war...."....over one hundred thirty-five thousand American GIs died –a startling figure today – between D day[june 6, 1944] and V-E day,[May 8, 1945]...."
So did the Red Army really singlehandedly defeat the Third Reich Stuff I Done Wrote - The Michael A. Charles Online Presence

Get that?

135,000 brave American boys whose lives were offered up as a gift to Stalin....to make certain that communism survived.


Based on the ratio of deaths to wounded, that would suggest almost an additional 200,000 wounded, just between Normandy and Germany's surrender.

Totally attributed to Roosevelt's refusal to allow a treaty to end the war.



United States suffered 292,000 combat deaths. Fully a third to a half during the last few years......could have been avoided.
World War II casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


100,000 American boys.....
They were sacrificed, Roosevelt's love-token, to Stalin by this love-sick, puerile United States President.
What other explanation is there?

 

[Camp]

"The US did not cede military strategy to Russia and Stalin at any time during WWII."

Absolutely did.

Stalin insisted on a 'second front,' the assumption being that Hitler's attack on the Soviet homeland, June 21, 1941, was the 'first front.'

Further, Stalin insisted....demanded .....that the second front be as far west in Europe as possible....so that at war's end, the Red Army could occupy and control all of Eastern Europe.

This meant that, although the Allies had control of Italy and could advance north into Germany, the Adriatic second front was not acceptable to Stalin....only Normandy, France, was.




Soviet Spy Hopkins and 'Yes,sir, yes sir' George Marshall were fully behind handing all of Eastern Europe over to Stalin's tender mercies.

Normandy was the logical and western France was the obvious place to begin the western front. Claiming the USA was guided by and influenced by Stalin to pick Normandy as the starting point is beyond silly. Normandy was the perfect pick for reshoupply and transportation and Great Britain had the airbases that could and would supply air support for the invasion and continued actions.

Eisenhower said one thing, and you, to hide the truth about Roosevelt, say the opposite.

Who to believe.


Was Churchill on your side?

Nah.

"Churchill strongly opposed the cross channel invasion both on military and political grounds. He was thinking about the future of Europe and the world, with Germany destroyed and triumphant communism dominating the Eurasian heartland. This prompted a difficulty for American "Russia First" strategists." A major factor in all American thinking of that time," writes General Eisenhower, "was a lively suspicion that the British contemplated the agreed-upon cross-channel concept with distaste and with considerable mental reservations. . . ."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution"


Smashed another custard pie in your ugly kisser, huh?

Holy crap, you are reverting to the non-existent fake propagandist Manly and the propaganda book published by the anti FDR lobby under that made up name. Same traitors that leaked US war preparations and contingencies a week before Pearl Harbor and was used by Hitler in his Declaration of War against the US.
Post a link for a bio on Manly. Tell folks about how a "writer" named Manly was given credit for leaking Rainbow Five to the Tribune.