Posted on 05/30/2019 4:18:35 PM PDT by WWII_Historian
Even if we celebrate the 75th Anniversary of D-day, it is not a rhetorical question. On a surface, World War II ended a long time ago, in 1945. However, the more accurate statement would be that the shooting war in Europe and the Pacific had ended, while one of the main reasons for the War in Europe – the conflict between one particular strain of Socialism (National Socialism), on the one side, with other versions of Socialism, and Capitalism, on the other side – had not.
Seeds of (International) Socialism, supported by USSR, along with National Socialism, supported by the Third Reich, were spread in many countries before the War, during the War, and after the War. However, nowhere in the world do these seeds sprout to such political significance like in Latin America and the Middle East.
The pioneer Middle Eastern movement that married Arabs and Socialism was the Muslim Brotherhood, established in 1928 in Egypt (a so-called Socialistic Theocracy). Such marriage was a manifestation of remarkable ideological propinquity between 7th-century semi-religion (Islam) and 19th-century semi-religion (Socialism.) The amalgamation of Islam and Socialism was exactly the mixture Soviet leaders liked; such mixture became a perfect breeding ground for international terrorism (under the pretense of “national liberation movement” and the “war against Israeli occupation of Arab lands” later). One of the first leaders who formally accepted Islamo-Socialistic ideas was Yasir Arafat, leader of PLO. In 1967, right after the Six-day War, he was rewarded with a brand-new KGB invention known as the Arab Palestinian nation (prior to 1967 only Jews were called Palestinians.)
The unbelievable, improbable marriage between dedicated Muslims and atheists-by-definition Socialists is one of the most remarkable events in human history.
(Excerpt) Read more at newrightnetwork.com ...
You do not have to be an atheist to be a socialist.
After we agreed to the armistice in Korea in 1953, Red China turned over many of the captured US weapons to the Viet Minh; the French were furious that we’d made that deal that ended up costing them dearly (while they fought a war they hadn’t even wanted; we convinced them to fight it).
Hitler’s worst legacy is making “Nationalism” a dirty word.
Germany “Atoned” for The Holocaust by shipping in millions of Muslims, who hate Jews even more than the Nazis did.
We never should have allowed the French back into Indochina after WWII, would have saved us a lot of grief.
There’s no USSR now, so it would be like signing a treaty with the Holy Roman Empire. I see Russia & Japan are dancing around to come to some sort of a treaty. Probably to try and get the Kuril Islands back. Can’t see Russia doing that, lot of military investment has been made there.
Great if they did.
If you look into the history of it (not conspiracy theories, but solid documented history) they didn’t want to fight the war there; they didn’t have the means or political will. We coerced them with talk of “containing communism”, and armed them to the teeth - with weapons (including an aircraft carrier) and money. The French honestly believed US airpower would rescue them at Dien Bien Phu, because they were fighting the war at our behest. Before the battle, US advisors and political figures visited the fortress; this was not solely a French effort. If you see footage of French troops in Indochina, they are wearing US helmets, carrying US weapons, and using US radios.
After we abandoned them to their fate, they went their own way; they developed nuclear weapons and never left their defense in the hands of the US and Britain again.
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.