Thanks for sharing. It’s an irony to see the large red letters in the picture of the Chernobyl sports hall. They read “pobeda”, which means “victory”.
What if U.S. invaded Soviet Union?
-
@aequitas:
Now you raised another question CWO marc, of how got America the clue that the Nazi Regime was the greater Danger and tyranny?
What was Americas aspect of it?….I’m not sure I fully understand the question. Could you clarify or expand it a bit?
-
Just to follow up on my last post, I’ve drafted an answer to what I think the question means. If I misunderstood, I’ll try to provide a supplementary response later on.
I’d say the answer doesn’t depend so much on ideology as on the concept of a direct military threat. In the years leading up to America’s entry into WWII, the US was no ideological fan of the USSR. The US operated on the principles of representative government and free-market capitalism, and it valued freedom of worship; the USSR was a one-party state with a directed economy built on socialist / communist principles, and its government had a repressive attitude towards the churches. So there was no natural inclination in much of the US to leap to Russia’s aid when it was invaded in 1941. There wasn’t even much inclination to help Britain in the early years of the war, even though Britain was much closer to the US than Russia in its political and economic philosophies. The American public by and large felt that the US should stay out of the war unless the US came under direct attack – which in fact is what happened on December 7, 1941.
I don’t know what the public’s opinion would have been if a Gallup poll had asked Americans in mid-1941 whether they considered fascist Germany or communist Russia to be the more abhorent regime, or if they had been asked whether Hitler or Stalin was the worst tyrant. In terms of pure and direct military threats, however, as expressed by the size and number of territorial acquisitions conducted via the threat or use of armed force, Germany and Japan were way ahead of Russia. The period running from 1931 to mid-1941 saw Japan take over Manchuria, Jehol, and large parts of China, and Germany take over Austria, Czechoslovakia, Poland, Denmark, Norway, France, Yugoslavia and Greece, with a year-long Blitz and an eighteen-month-long U-boat campaign against Britain thrown in for good measure and a see-saw battle in North Africa as icing on the cake. In the same period, Russia took over Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, Bessarabia, eastern Poland and parts of Finland – utterly despicable, yes, but small change compared to what Germany and Japan had been up to. And this was before Germany launched its invasion of the USSR and before Japan overran large parts of Southeast Asia and the Southwest Pacific.
I haven’t calculated the square footage involved, but at a rough guess I’d estimate that the USSR’s territorial grabs prior to mid-1941 were a lot closer in size to those made by Italy in the same period (when it conquered Ethiopia and a few other places like British Somaliland) than to those of Germany and Japan. Germany’s war against Britain was particularly dangerous to the US because if the Royal Navy had been eliminated (and with the French already eliminated) the US Navy would have been left on its own in the Atlantic (on top of having to control the Pacific more or less on its own).
-
" Richard Overy devotes an entire chapter in his book “Why the Allies Won” to the moral aspects of the war, and his argument is that one the great sources of strength for the entire Allied war effort was that it was aimed at defeating the Nazi tyranny. "
First things first, Sorry for my lazy question.
This is my Question!…
How did America define that Nazi Germany was the Greater Evil?Posted almost at the same time like you, Â 8-)…
you answered my question! in one way… :-D
Thank you -
Ever heard Hitlers explanation as to why he declared war on America?
It might answer your question Aequitas…
-
I haven’t Garg. Was it the vegetarian diet?
Nice writing Marc. -
Take this with a grain of salt…
It’s a you tube translation, and even if it’s accurate, it’s Hitler speaking, so lol… That said though, the events discussed are accurate, like America offering to double foreign aid to France, if they continued to fight etc. Interference in Poland etc…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzgQXRdXr2Q
Basically, Germany was a threat to the economic/power-threshold of the status quo, and that construed a threat to the power class in America (who in all likelyhood WERE looking out for American interests)
The best part of the speech is when hitler quotes Roosevelt and mentions that his comments can only be said “With the arrogance of the millionaire class” lol…
-
Where do you find time to dredge up these videos? I love the idiots who comment and always end up name calling.
-
can´t watch it Garg, need ´n american PC :-D…thinking bout watching it in a other language. Will not be a very good idea since it might differ from yours hahahahaha :lol:
-
@CWO:
Not something that would have happened. When the Germans signed their first surrender under the supervision of the western Allies (they signed a second one a day later under Soviet supervision), Eisenhower didn’t even enter the room until the German officers had signed the document – and even then, it was only to ask in a cold tone of voice for confirmation that they had done so. Eisenhower had no sympathies for the Wehrmacht whatsoever (particularly after he had visited one of the liberated Nazi death camps), and he would have been appalled at the idea of teaming up with the army that had fought for Nazi Germany and launching a Germano-American campaign against the Allied country which had defeated Hitler on the Eastern Front. The idea that he would have participated in such a venture is as much of a fantasy as Himmler’s line in the movie “Downfall” in which has asks an aide, in complete seriousness, “When I meet Eisenhower, should I shake his hand or give the Nazi salute?” If Himmler had actually tried to see Eisenhower, Ike would have had him arrested on the spot by some MPs without letting him get within half a mile of his office.
Had Eisehower been informed that Stalin actually killed more people during World War 2 than Hitler, he might have had looked differently.
I like the point the other members have made, particularly about Japan.
USA had a lot of troops, equipment, airplanes and naval forces committed to Japan. U.S. could simply use the same strategy against Russia that they did against Japan. 1) capture key port cities using heavy bombardment from battleships 2) land large amount of diehard marines :) 3) use long range bombers to devastate enemy factories. This was the technique that worked against Japan, it worked against “fortress Europe” and it would have worked against Russian industry. Once a country is back in stone age, everything else is a matter of time.Another member complained about American public being not very sympathetic. Well, easy solution. Remember Vietnam? Draft everyone ages 18-56 and tell them you are going to free the world of communism. Or…. U.S. could repeat Pearl Harbor but this time with Russians as offenders and wait for 10 million volunteers to show up.
Also people forget to mention that the Chinese were friendly with USA during WWII. Those guys could have been used as well to hit the Russia from both sides.
-
USA had a lot of troops, equipment, airplanes and naval forces committed to Japan. U.S. could simply use the same strategy against Russia that they did against Japan. 1) capture key port cities using heavy bombardment from battleships 2) land large amount of diehard marines :) 3) use long range bombers to devastate enemy factories. This was the technique that worked against Japan, it worked against “fortress Europe” and it would have worked against Russian industry. […] U.S. could repeat Pearl Harbor but this time with Russians as offenders and wait for 10 million volunteers to show up. Also people forget to mention that the Chinese were friendly with USA during WWII. Those guys could have been used as well to hit the Russia from both sides.
A few comments:
On the part about the US using on Russia the same techniques it used on Japan, note that Japan is a tiny in size, and is an island nation that sits in the Pacific Ocean, a body of water which the US Navy was able to dominate during the last two or three years of the war. The Russia is the largest country in the world, and has a very small amount of ice-free coastlines compared to its enormous interior size. The overwhelming proportion of its industry is far inland, completely out of range of any coastal bombardment. Russia’s geography means it can’t be defeated by sea power, and its sheer size and harsh climate and large population make it a very difficult country to fight even with strong land forces and air power. As for the suggestion to “land large amount of diehard marines” – well, as much as I admire the USMC’s formidable fighting abilities, note that it took the Marines almost two months to secure Iwo Jima, an island with an area of only 8 square miles and which was defended by only 21,000 Japanese troops. The old USSR had an area of about 9 million square miles, and in 1941 it survived an invasion by millions of Axis troops.
On the part about “U.S. could repeat Pearl Harbor but this time with Russians as offenders”, this seems to imply that it was the US rather than Japan which arranged the attack on Pearl Harbor. I assume this is a reference to the old Roosevelt-wanted-the-Japanese-to-attack conspiracy theory which has been floating around for decades.
As for the part about enlisting the Chinese, I would simply point out that the Chinese spent most of the period from 1937 to 1945 on the losing end of a war with Japan…a country which, when it took on the Russians in the border incident wars of 1938 and 1939 achieved stalemates at best and got trounced at worst.
-
Well the soviet union never would have conquered America!
You are right though… Factories being beyond reach was a BIG problem for the Germans. Their aircraft simple didn’t have the range to make it out there, bomb what they could find, and make it back, with weather permitting.
Trade Embargo’s, and WORLD support, would have been the only way…
-
Well the soviet union never would have conquered America!
Negative. Alaska would fall first and then your precious British Columbia would have been taken next. Then they would have discovered the wonderful women of Alberta and settled for peace, giving back BC, probably to America.
-
…and California would now be called Calivostok and Vodka and Caviar would be sold to puplic on Zuhkov Beach :-D :-D :-D
-
But they would never have had England! Only knights led by a bastard using underhand tricks or ancient peoples in rowing boats made of wood could conquer this island.
-
But all of England’s actors would defect so they could star in all the blockbuster films coming out of the big Stalinwood movie studios.
-
The US already invaded Russia during the civil war 1918-1920, along with UK and failed.
Russia is too big and logistics would be a nightmare. Also, the Soviet manpower advantage would really be felt. Consider the total manpower delivered to France 1944-45 and compare that to the Soviet figures.
-
@Most:
But all of England’s actors would defect so they could star in all the blockbuster films coming out of the big Stalinwood movie studios.
As soon as the Russian 1st waves arrived at the Franco German border all actors would have been put against a wall to avoid such an eventuality. We did not have the luxury of right wing actors like you: Reagan or John Wayne to name two.
-
@Most:
But all of England’s actors would defect so they could star in all the blockbuster films coming out of the big Stalinwood movie studios.
“Hollyngrad” would be a good name too.
-
Oh Hollywood is a communist enough name itself. Believe me.
But…
Los Archangelsk
Seattleostok
Colovrado
Euguineorov
Portlandolesk
San Fransicovik
-
Maybe Stalinfrancisco is better… ?
Suggested Topics
