A must see! You can get it on iTunes....warning though, the ending is brutal.
Posted on 05/17/2012 1:56:58 AM PDT by se99tp
The American communists joined in the Soviet propaganda campaign. Corliss Lamont, a millionaire communist propagandist, wrote “Soviet Russia’s severance of relations with the Polish Government-in-Exile, over the Nazi-inspired charge that the Russians murdered 10,000 Polish army officers, shows clearly the danger to the United Nations of the splitting tactics engineered by Hitler and definitely helped along by the general campaign of anti-Soviet propaganda carried on during recent months in Britain and America. According to the London Bureau of the New York Herald Tribune, ‘It is a safe assumption that the Poles would not have taken so tough an attitude toward the Soviet Government if it had not been for the widespread support Americans have been giving them in the cases of Henry Ehrlich and Victor Alter.’”
(Excerpt) Read more at christianconceptsdaily.com ...
What I've come to believe (especially after 9/11), is that the reason there was no real anti-war movement in WW II, was because Hitler invaded the Leftists' hero-nation The Soviet Union, and everything and anything had to be done to save them. This explains why people like George McGovern became war heroes.
Otherwise known as "speaking the truth".
One of the worst crimes of WWII was the surrendering of Eastern Europe to Stalin; the war that started when Britain & France went to war to defend Poland (oddly enough, only declaring war against Germany, invading from the west, while ignoring the Soviet invasion from the east that actually resulted in the Katyn massacre) resulted in Poland (and many other countries) being given to Soviet masters instead of Nazi masters.
Churchill realized this at the time and was furious; the Western allies fought for (and got) nothing.
Yep, never has such an abject failure to accomplish a war’s original aims been so falsely yet successfully described as a ‘victory’.
Britain would have been better off staying out of the war and give the French time to complete the Maginot line across the Belgian border...
You know the saying: Stalin was better than Hitler so he is our friend.
Meanwhile US communists were infesting the US government under Roosevelt at the same time, but heck, at least they were not Nazis.
US Communists fought to keep the US out of the war until the USSR was invaded. They flipped over night and many of their members, drawn to the anti-war fervor of the Communists, left the movement.
Later we discovered the US Communist Party was under the pay of the USSR.
True, but what else could the West have done? Stalin never would have left Eastern Europe just because you asked him to do so.
It would have probably taken the threat of the atomic bomb to push Stalin back. Patton's tanks alone could not have done it. The Red Army in 1945 was a formidable, battle-hardened force.
Would the American or British people have supported the use of atomic weapons against the Soviets, just to liberate Eastern Europe? No way.
RE: Search “Corliss Lamont” and see how deep the rot of Communism has burrowed into the elites on WS and Academia.
RE: Search “Corliss Lamont” and see how deep the rot of Communism has burrowed into the elites on WS and Academia.
I am with you 1000% on that.
I thought Joe McCarthy laid it out perfectly in his book “America’s Retreat From Victory” where he outlined how we screwed them at Yalta.
I firmly believe Alger Hiss had a hand in it.
It was shameful.
“You know the saying: Stalin was better than Hitler so he is our friend.
Meanwhile US communists were infesting the US government under Roosevelt at the same time, but heck, at least they were not Nazis. “
You know your history.
Not long after, Hollywood communists became pervasive..primarily writers.
Herbert J. Biberman
Lester Cole
Edward Dmytryk
Ring Lardner Jr.
John Howard Lawson
Albert Maltz
Samuel Ornitz
Adrian Scott
Dalton Trumbo
Alvah Bessie
As to the impulse to ignore the Soviets ideology and atrocities during the war while they were ostensibly our allies - Churchill said something along the lines of...
“If Hitler invaded Hell - I would find a few kind words to say about the Devil.”
There was an ENORMOUS anti-war movement at the beginning of WW II in the US. Groups like American Peace Mobilization held a 1,029-hour non-stop peace demonstration in front of the White House.
The demonstration stopped at the exact time that Hitler invaded the USSR, and the group immediately started calling for the US to enter the war.
Even the ones chained into their aircraft and in the punishment, death battalions charging the Germans. Their mass murdering dictator had ways of pushing his enslaved people forward and having them endure the cost.
Didn't FDR have his security clearance yanked for a while because he was careless with classified documents?
Yep. Even the ones who were given a few rounds of ammo and told to pick up their weapons from the dead guys.
But isn’t it nice that the Commies did all that dying, rather than us running up even more casualties? Dead Nazis, dead Commies - both are good things!
Not aware of it, but I wouldn’t be surprised.
A must see! You can get it on iTunes....warning though, the ending is brutal.
Interesting insight, and I’ve got to agree with you. Explains all the deception it took to get us involved in it as well.
I am with you 1000% on that.
I thought Joe McCarthy laid it out perfectly in his book “America’s Retreat From Victory” where he outlined how we screwed them at Yalta.
I firmly believe Alger Hiss had a hand in it.
It was shameful.
If France & Britain had done nothing the Nazis would have probably just gone to war with the Soviet Union; that way everybody wins!
“Stalin never would have left Eastern Europe just because you asked him to do so.”
Stalin halted his armies after the Soviet territory had been cleared, then asked the Western Allies what incentive he had to continue a war that had already cost so many Russian lives. In order to keep the pressure up on the Eastern Front while the allies came in from the west, they gave him Eastern Europe.
The Soviet Union was spent by that time, anyway; most of the ethnic Russians for that generation were killed, and replaced by Far Eastern minorities; they even had women in combat roles (the effect of that loss of life can be seen even today). The move into Eastern Europe was behind a rolling artillery barrage, as they had more shells than men.
Americans didn’t go to war to liberate Eastern Europe/Poland; we probably had the least reason of any combatants to fight in Europe.
In my neck of the woods there are many Eastern Europeans, and you quickly realize they have a very different take on “The Great Crusade” than Americans learn in school.
They lived through the consequences.
“Arguably, the Soviets did do most of the heavy lifting on the land campaigns against the Third Reich.”
It isn’t even arguable; they did. How that translates into keeping territories of other countries that had been victimized by the Nazis is beyond me; by what right would they keep Poland?
Our collusion with the USSR guaranteed that we would fight wars in Korea and Vietnam because we rescued Stalin while selling out Europe.
Churchill was the one leader who understood at the time that his country had wasted all those lives for nothing, and in the end all they had to show for it was the breakup of their empire.
While American Marines were dying in the Pacific, and Americans at home dealt with rationing so that we could supply the Soviet Union with food and weapons, the USSR and Japan observed a cease-fire until the last months of the war.
One of my ex-wife’s childhood friends was of Polish descent, never knowing her grandfather who a Polish officer killed at Katyn.
You said: "...they have a very different take on “The Great Crusade” than Americans learn in school..."
Can you elaborate on that for me? Are you speaking of the sentiment: "...“the war served a generation of Britons and Americans as a myth which enshrined their essential purity, a parable of good and evil...”?
Poland had not existed since the 18th century. After WWI it was reconstituted out land taken from Germany and Russia. As far as the Russians were concerned, they were getting some of their own back. I’m not saying it was right, just that they saw it that way (sorta like the Chinese believing that every land that ever paid them tribute is actually a stray part of “Greater China” or something like that...).
If we wanted to fight Germany, we had to collude with the Soviets. There was an example of the Russians signing a separate peace with Germany in WWI. If the Russians had signed a separate peace in WWII, the Germans would have been able to double the forces facing us. If didn’t want to fight Germany, well, we were not offered that choice.
Hitler and Stalin both signed the Non-Aggression Pact assuming certain things would happen, that didn’t turn out for them.
Stalin expected a long protacted war in the West, which would deplete the armies of Britain, France and Germany, allowing the Soviets to swoop in and conquer all of Europe.....but what he didn’t count on was France falling in just six weeks.
Hitler thought the Non-Aggression Pact would get Britain and France to call off the dogs, and give him free rein in Eastern Europe, which also didn’t happen.
Hitler was obsessed with eliminating every single Jew on the planet....certainly conquering the US and eliminating her Jews was going to be something Hitler would do, if he was in position to do so.
I don’t think so. There weren’t enough GERMANS to conquer the entire world. I think he was looking for room in Russia - that other miscalculation - where he thought France and UK would back off - indicates his real intentions.
But, even he did, we had a bit of time before he’d be able to stage an invasion of the US... Something about not having much of a navy outside the Ubootwaffe.
True, but remember, Hitler had Ukrainians, Romanians, etc. fighting for him. And he had Vlasov's Army potentially at his disposal had he defeated Russia. Some speculate, out of admiration for Stalin, he would have offered Stalin a chance to keep command of a puppet state, though I certainly doubt he would have accepted it. Over time as Nazi Europe became more consolidate, certainly there would also be French troops fighting for the Nazis.
Suggest you two (RinaseaofDs;MuttTheHoople) read the link given by Papabear and do even more research, as you both, imho, have not enough of an idea of what was going on at the time.
The Left was at first very ANTI-war BECAUSE Stalin was aligned WITH Hitler, and only after Germany attacked Stalin did they then go along with the our war effort.
“This explains why people like George McGovern became war heroes. “
????
While McGovern’s WW2 exploits as a pilot were written about much later after his failed presidential campaign, virtually no one considered him a war hero, and he did not run as such in his campaign.
“Explains all the deception it took to get us involved in it as well.”
While we made a tremendous error as Germany was being defeated in not turning around and blocking/crushing the USSR, if you are even remotely considering that staying out of WW2 and tolerating a Europe under Nazi rule would have been at all acceptable, you are, imho, out of your mind.
I was just saying that the only reason we didn't have the same anti-war protests like we did during Vietnam was because the Left desperately needed to save their hero-nation.
“As far as the Russians were concerned, they were getting some of their own back.”
Germany (and Austria) used the same logic; Poland was re-created from territory of all three after WWI. That same defense could be used by the USSR for keeping the Baltic states (and trying for Finland); all four were created from Tsarist Russian territory.
“If we wanted to fight Germany, we had to collude with the Soviets.”
As with WWI, we had little reason to fight Germany. In any case, Germany achieved its goal (domination of Europe) and the views held by the Nazis (post-Christian paganism) also dominate.
It goes beyond that; the fact is that 2 evil forces were fighting for domination of Europe, and the Western Democracies stood to gain little by involving themselves in such a war (and in fact did gain little). Many of the new coutries forged after WWI lost the independence which had been used as an excuse to fight in that war, and they remained enslaved for almost 50 years.
The end result of the war (Soviet domination of Eastern Europe, and influence in Asia that would lead to the fall of China and wars in Korea & Vietnam) demonstrated what an exercise in futility it had been.
btt
Ummm, there was this little issue of Germany declaring war on us... I know our anti-sub patrols were, perhaps, a bit provocative, but they didn’t declare war on us until the Japs attacked us at Pearl Harbor.
Once they did that, it was on.
Have to agree with you on the last part. The EU ended up mostly “Juden-rein” and is largely dominated by Germany. Dunno that Reich would have tolerated the Muzzies, though.
That still wouldn’t be enough. He regard Slavs as “untermenschen” so I don’t know if he would made use of his biggest source of manpower.
And the navies of Germany, its allies and its conquests, still would not have had parity with the USN. You needed the Japanese and their naval aviation - and they were half the world away!
We were in the war by arming England against Germany and China against Japan.
In WWI England blockaded Germany against trade with the US (prior to our involvement), and we did nothing. I live within s few miles of 2 sites that were bombed by saboteurs in WWI (in Lyndhurst & Jersey City, NJ); this was a reaction of German sympathizers here who realized that the weapons made here were killing Germans in a war in which we were officially neutral.
WWII was no different; as a “neutral” we were shipping the weapons to kill Germans to England while officially remaining neutral.
That's an interesting take on the situation. From what I'd read, Stalin wanted Eastern Europe as a buffer region between him and the West. Stalin didn't want any more surprise attacks into Soviet territory like what had happened in 1941. If that were the case, Stalin would have grabbed the region regardless.
Well, I’m sure we would have gladly sold weapons to the Germans if there had been any way to deliver them (*snicker*). After all, Standard Oil managed to get a few tankers of petrol to Germany through Spain.
But that’s what happens when you surrender control of the sea...
I don’t know where you read in my response, anywhere, that I said anything whatsoever about whether we should or should not have been involved in WWII.
I do know at the time that sentiment ran AGAINST going to war in Europe 2 to 1 against. I know that FDR and Churchill allowed the Brits to help us set up the OSS, and I know that FDR knew Pearl Harbor was going to be bombed. I also know Churchill was desperate to get us into it on their side.
WWI was still an open wound, and Lindbergh, who was a US superstar was telling people we could live with Hitler at the time.
Now, these are facts.
That WWII was a just war doesn’t forgive our government from the manipulation that occurred in order to get us into it.
We know NOW about the holocaust. At the time, and in 1938, there wasn’t. All we knew was ‘Germany was at it again’. Spain was at war in 1930, even with WWI having happened 11 years earlier.
The RPP (Reasonably Prudent Person) might have come to the idea “I’m glad Dad left when he did. I want no part of what’s going on over there.”
There was no American Legion in WWI - men were allowed to keep their uniforms and they got a train ticket back to their home town. You lost a limb - those are the breaks.
Nobody, and I mean nobody, in the US was spoiling for a fight until December 7, 1941. Justification has nothing to do with it.
Even Patton was in the dark about it until he rolled into one of the camps, took all the civilians prisoner, made them file through, and filmed everything. I believe that was 1944, and summer.
Only when it was convenient....Slovaks were Slavs, just like Poles and Russians, but the difference was, Tiso and the Slovaks cooperated with Nazi Germany, so they were left alone.
I believe the agreement to give him Eastern Europe was made at Yalta; late in the war he couldn’t have done anything without the approval of the US & UK. They were feeding his people, and his army was on its last legs. It was one thing to chase a starving, beaten army back to Berlin; quite another to fight 2 countries that in comparison to the USSR and Germany has suffered rather light casualties (the Axis armies that were lost in Stalingrad alone were almost on par with US casualties for the whole war).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.