Yeah... Operation Barbarossa. After Hitler signed non aggression pact with the USSR the Liberals all screamed for FDR to back down. But once they attacked Russia all the libs began screaming for America to attack Germany.
I don't understand one thing though. Nazi Germany and the USSR under Stalin were both leftists. They both believed the same things that the Demonrat liberals believe in, (they just keep some of it to themselves though.) What difference would it make for liberals if Stalin did lose?
Stalin was a Marxist. Hitler was merely a Socialist. Both on the Left, and if they were allied it seemed like a good thing to anyone who loved the Left. But when the fighting started, American Leftists had to choose sides — and they preferred the Marxist — the glory of the Bolshevik Revolution was central to the self-image of the Left (”I have seen the future — and it works”).
It would have made a huge difference. Stalin was the 'intellectual heir' of Marxism-Leninism which is the lodestone of liberals everywhere. The NYT was one of the principal cheerleaders for that murderous thug, btw.
Since the USSR was the 'birthplace' of socialism, it had to be defended from 'fascism', even though there isn't a dimes bit of difference between them.
L