Posted on 05/31/2012 11:40:44 PM PDT by Peter ODonnell
These losers re-elected O’Mally in a landslide after him raising THEIR taxes and close to admitting that he lied about keeping electric prices down to get elected. This state is more liberal than ever. Obama polls high here.
Like Northern VA voters here are on the gravy train, VA will be a challenge too for Romney for the same reason,
Credit goes to Professor Schweikart.
I have always thought we would have been better off not choosing sides between Hitler and Stalin but that we should have popped a LOT of popcorn, settled into comfy chairs and witnessed the result of "Let's let Hitler and Stalin fight." After their respective forces had annihilated one another and only one was left barely standing, send in Patton and finish off the surviving forces. No more Nazi Germany. No more Soviet Union. No Warsaw Pact. No European Axis. No Cold War (after WE have won). Spring training for our military would have been finishing off Imperial Japan while waiting for the preliminary result in Europe to determine whom we would be annihilating there.
There's an idea. I haven't looked at it that way. But might Hilter have kicked their butt without having to deal with us on the Western Front and then been in a stronger position? Imagine if he had stay allied with Soviets in the first place, ouch. (This is more interesting than the awful election.)
In other words, it was just as likely that we would have faced a vastly stronger Nazified Europe, with ALL the troops swung our way, armed with rockets, jets, and nukes. And STILL at war with Japan. Not a good scenario. No, you don't play "maybe" when your survival is at stake. You ally with the lesser of evils and worry about that one later.
I like your WWII analogy, except for the fact that Britain would have fallen to Hitler, had we not joined the fight when we did. I think the scenario you proposed would have played out just like that, had our forces stopped at the Rhine.
Simply securing France, Belgium, and the Low Countries would probably have been sufficient to secure ours and our real allies interests. The Reds could have then taken over the rest of the fight, and Hitler and Stalin would have beaten each other to smithereens.
It’s interesting to war game out what might have been. I’m kind of turning your analogy over in my mind right now to see what lessons I can draw from it.
“Either way I love stupid analogies, Obama is trying to burn down my house and has be to stopped, he’s standing there pouring gas on it. Glove Romney as the Republican nominee is the only guy with a hose and pair of handcuffs to get rid of him. But Romney is a pyro-maniac himself and maybe (or say probably instead of maybe, or even say certainly) he’s gonna start his own fire before long. That will be dealt with when it happens. Obama wins and my house is a pile of ash tomorrow.”
Very well-put. Romney sucks, but voting for him is the only way to stop Obama.
It would, of course, have been useful to have our forces nearby. If we put them in England, I don’t think the Germans would have invaded England to get at them snd they might have thought twice about the wisdom of running the risk of tangling with American forces in France, Belgium and the Low Countries. I am guessing that Hitler would have tangled with the soviets on the Eastern Front if it seemed that we would stay put in England or Western Europe. He was certainly a nutcase but why would he fight a two-front war if he thought it possible that he might fight only Stalin. We could have propagandized that our troops were in England only because of our old special relationship with the Brits. We could also have communicated that V-2s and buzz bombs were not welcome against our forces and might lead to quite lethal consequences for the nazi regime if indulged.
Hitler was not terribly rational, He made grave errors in his war against the soviets. At first, when he sent only the Sturm Abteilung (young blonde, blue-eyed Aryans) into Russia's Western precincts, they were welcomed by the long-suffering soviet citizenry. Within weeks, he sent in the SchutzStaffel to round up the Jews. Backfired BIG TIME. Stalin had been forced to allow his people to march behind ikons of the Blessed Virgin and invoking not the Comintern but "Mother Russia." OTOH, neither the nazi ideologues nor the soviet ideologues were likely to yield to one another once blood had been shed. It would have been an epic battle with monstrous casualties, and then we would have been in an excellent position to, ummm, pragmatically capitalize on the situation.
A dog would not do nearly the damage those two execrable leftist frauds have and will continue to inflict.
I have the feeling that things will take very unusual and unexpected directions soon after the party conventions, if not even before then. Without going into much detail, because I really don’t know any details, I figure that the current situation looks and feels suspiciously like the “end times” and that both of these major candidates could be tossed overboard by their parties in the middle of a developing global crisis, for various reasons. Some influential Democrats, for example Bill Clinton, seem increasingly convinced that Obama is a weak link. I am not even convinced that Obama will be nominated. Meanwhile, Romney may be just the right person to fit into this scenario for good or for mischief, depending on what those details are.
Could be entirely wrong and this may just turn out to be business as usual — but there’s a feeling of the other shoe being about to drop, in a world where not much would need to happen to launch a major crisis (some would say, isn’t this already a major crisis? ... but I mean something far more dramatic than this mess).
Au contraire. Your post is very well thought out and logical.
“Ron Paul is not going to run, that’s 100%. The reason, his son is a Republican Senator who he wants to have a future.”
I've thought this all along. And I'd rather have Rand Paul as VP than Jeb or Huckabee (although there are many other people I'd rather see as VP than Rand Paul).
“I’m not making a pitch for Romney I hate the guy but to make a much better analogy stolen from another freeper it’s like helping Stalin beat Hitler in WW2.”
Either Romney or Obama is going to get elected in November, it's as simple as that.
Stalin vs. Hitler...my mind wanders...
I've always thought of a scenario in which the defeat of both Germany and Japan carry out as they did. Then the Allies (minus the Soviets) unite and using the defeated Nazis as the spearhead, Russia is attacked from the West. Toss in a second front from the East (after Japan is dispatched) and the Soviets would have been in the same scenario the Nazis were in - a war on two fronts. With no one to supply them and the US having “the bomb”, Soviet Communism could have been defeated right then and there.
I know that Rommel that thought of the possibility of uniting with the Allies and militarily it could have worked quite well. IIRC, Patton also thought of uniting with the defeated European Axis powers was workable.
The 1980s movie Patton's Last Days was replayed on cable last week where he get’s slapped down for suggesting such a thing.
Politically it was not possible at the time. The US had spent much political capital for years both making out the USSR as heroes and Nazi Germany as demons. The Katyn Forest massacre by the USSR had been played down in the US and the US factories had been arming the USSR for years. The US government under Roosevelt was loaded with American communists sympathetic to the USSR.
Hollywood made a US movie The North Star 1943 that depicted USSR socialist small town peasants overrun by Nazi's as patriotic heroes fighting them as the resistance behind the lines. Later during the Cold War this movie became unpopular.(I found a free copy on the internet and watched it again the past year.)
So with all of the above the American voter would not understood that all their relatives in the military, many of them who sacrificed greatly, were suddenly going to attack those they were told were helping us all those years. They wanted the troops home in 1945, VE and VJ. The wake-up day was when the USSR announced that had the bomb, which they stole from us,
I've long suspected that Patton was killed for wanting to take on the USSR. Call me a tinfoil wearer, but it's what I believe.
“Politically it was not possible at the time.”
I completely agree. I think of a line from the Orson Welles film “The Stranger” where a Nazi is described as “still having the stench of burnt bodies” on his clothes; no way would those types be fighting along side (or in front of) the Stars and Stripes (at least not openly). Although, Nuremburg could have been effectively canceled if those ghouls were thrown back in against the Soviets - I highly doubt they would have survived a second time against them. "Herr Hess, you have two choices: take this Mauser and attack the East or you get hung in five minutes."
“They wanted the troops home in 1945, VE and VJ. The wake-up day was when the USSR announced that had the bomb, which they stole from us,”
Of course! And since we don't have the luxury of a crystal ball, I doubt most folks saw Korea and Vietman on the horizon, which cost us another 110,000+ American lives and countless more casualties.
In the end, Patton was right in a military sense - we should have fought them then why we had the troops there (and were the sole owners of “the bomb”). Politically, it couldn't happen.
I erred, the quote was: “still having the stench of burnt flesh”.
“In the end, Patton was right in a military sense - we should have fought them then why we had the troops there (and were the sole owners of “the bomb”). Politically, it couldn’t happen.”
should read
In the end, Patton was right in a military sense - we should have fought them when we had the troops there (and were the sole owners of “the bomb”). Politically, it couldn’t happen.
I'm worried about the spineless weasels who slam other FReepers who refuse to sellout and vote for a liberal.
That is just downright treasonous.
Indeed, voting for mitt or obama is treasonous.
As much as I dislike Romney, I would take any non Communist over Obumbo
And mitt is NOT a non-communist, but you're in luck - Virgil Goode is not only non-communist, he's Conservative.
I remember a scene in McArthur where he told the Soviet military leader that if the USSR tried any of that funny business in Japan that they did in Europe that he would arrest their whole USSR diplomatic staff. Eventually Truman fired him over Korea.
Patton and McArthur both wondered why we fought in WWII just to let communists pick up the spoils, but as Republicans learned the hard way (OK maybe just a few did), you need the voters’s support in wars to win.
“Patton and McArthur both wondered why we fought in WWII just to let communists pick up the spoils, but as Republicans learned the hard way (OK maybe just a few did), you need the voters’s support in wars to win.”
Yep.
Hitler was so arrogant and stupid. We are very fortunate, if he had avoided just a few of his worst blunders things could have gone a lot worse.
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.