Posted on 01/03/2015 4:24:06 AM PST by Homer_J_Simpson
Eisenhower correctly reasoned? Not in this case IMO. I think Patton was right. The cost of communist totalitarian slavery and oppression in East Germany was much higher than what would have been the cost to Americans to liberate all of Berlin.
Seems like Churchill and Patton were the clearest thinkers regarding the Communist menace.
he confided to De Gaulle in a low voice, I am having a lot of trouble with Montgomery.
The conference ended. I think youve done the wise and proper thing, Churchill told Eisenhower. Buttonholing De Gaulle in a corridor outside, the prime minister said, in his sibilant, fractured French, that Eisenhower was not always aware of the political consequences of his decisions, but was nonetheless an excellent supreme commander. De Gaulle said nothing
What a mess. It is amazing and a great tribute to Ike that he was able to keep this French/British mishmash together in some kind of cohesive effort. One can see reasons why without the Americans, the French and British were toast before the Nazi machine.
Oh, my, that's a big can of worms you've opened, FRiend.
Let's see, we're talking about Yalta & Potsdam here...
If I remember correctly, President Roosevelt had already agreed with Churchill & Stalin that Soviet Russia would control most of Eastern Europe, including East Germany.
Peering inside FDR's mind, we find one thought, and one thought only, and that was to teach the Germans a lesson they would never, ever forget, and that, in his mind, meant splitting defeated Germany up amongst the conquerors.
Would the Soviets be tough on Germans?
Well, surely Germany deserved it, and would learn some humility from it....
So, I think Eisenhower already had his instructions from on-high.
And, if FDR had a second thought, it was certainly this: win the d*mn*ble war with as few American lives lost as possible.
So, if the Ruskies wanted to lose hundreds of thousands more lives killing Hitler in Berlin, why is that not a no-brainer?
Point is, I don't think FDR ever had the notion of Stalin as his future enemy.
As far as Roosevelt was concerned, whatever bargain was necessary to insure Stalin's unrestricted support, so be it.
Fortunately, Harry Truman had a somewhat different perspective, and in that sense, FDR's untimely death came none too soon.
And we still had a war to fight against Japan. Based on the experiences of Saipan and Leyte, we had every reason believe there was still much American blood to be shed before victory was secured. We needed to wrap up the was in Europe ASAP, and that meant letting the Soviets take Berlin.
There was also a timing/operational apsect. The timing of the Allied and Soviet offensives, along with the limits on each offensive imposed by logistic considerations, meant that the Soviets would get the last lunge at Berlin.
Nobody has any idea about the Manhattan Project and all expect this war will drag well into 1946. How do I stay alive through all that?
Let lots of Russians die taking Hitler's bunker? Hell yeah.
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.