Skip to comments.Author: Soviet agents subverted US in 1930s
Posted on 05/26/2013 9:20:34 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
click here to read article
Uh...I’m confused. What does a family at the breakfast table have to do with communist subversion? Is Mom quizzing the kids about their homework studying the works of Marx?
“OK, Johnny, the rise of industrial capitalism was followed by what additional development?”
“Gee, Mom, it was,..it was,....it was the development of the industrial bourgeoisie!”
“Hence FDR maintained his machine in the South”
Senators Byrd and Glass of Virginia, Bailey of NC, and VP Landon of Texas were members of the bipartisan conservative coalition that opposed FDR and his policies. The conservative coalition in Congress forced FDR to abandon a lot of his proposals, especially when WWII began.
The CCC, the WPA and other programs existed all over the country, they were an attempt to relieve the massive unemployment that existed during the Depression.
Not sure what drove his socialism
What drove FDR was an ambitious man with overwhelming hunger for power and control.
Our American system of government, with it’s checks and balances that intentionally limit the degree of power and control any single person or group can acquire was a limit on his ambition.
Socialism requires centralization of power and control, hence it suited FDR’s ambitions
Long term US policy was to defeat the Nazi regime. Modern critics have the luxury of knowing when the war would end, something not available to the war planners of that time.
The military assets available to the war planners were being used to defeat the German military as quickly as possible. The camps had no strategic value, most of them were located far to the east of the front lines, and had the rail lines to them been bombed the Germans would simply have rebuilt them.
It’s not clear to me what critics think would have been accomplished by bombing the rail lines. If the camps were cut off the inmates would have just died sooner of starvation. New inmates would have been diverted to new sites, father east, and it would have drawn 88s to the camps since the Germans would be expecting more raids.
And while the death camps are known factor today at that time it would have been impossible to separate rumor from fact. WWI had been filled with stories of the Germans bayoneting Belgian babies. Propaganda and war run together, you don’t have to be cynical to question atrocity stories. The soldiers liberating the camps were shocked to discover what had gone on. If the death camps had been common knowledge they would have been revolted by what they saw but they would not have been surprised.
Bkmk. Thanks for posting.
A question for any is, how does this relate to our policy towards China and its plans?
Note also that Communism comes from the devil, the originator of the the “root of bitterness” and and occupy movement and the welfare entitlement mentality (see Gn. 3) and “share the wealth” ideology.
“British troops did not save Poland; they did save Britain from the same fate.”
Britain (along with France) declared war on Germany to defend Poland; Germany had no resources to fight Britain (as borne out by the final result). Axis resources had to be dedicated to the East (war with the USSR was inevitable); subjugation/occupation of Britain was impossible.
http://www.amazon.com/Magic-Intelligence-Evacuation-Japanese-Residents/dp/0960273611/ref=sr_1_9?ie=UTF8&qid=1369679011&sr=8-9&keywords=magic+intercepts ~ you might read the reviews someday. It cannot be emphasized enough that NOTHING in the Magic intercepts was ever used by any of the principals in the JA evacuation as a justification. Much of the push came from folks interested in buying up property owned by Japanese Americans at tax sales ~ one family I know of owned most of Wilshire Boulevard for much of its length from the shore to miles inland. A tempting target and sold to investors within days of their being interned.
That was an incredibly long and dangerous supply line ~ BTW, we won!
It was far more important for the US to provide stuff to the Russians than to put soldiers on the ground who'd have to be fed and supplied locally by a nation that didn't have anything to supply them with.
It wasn't just FDR. Eisenhower was as guilty
Excellent thread, btw. It's obvious to me there are any number of Freepers who are as interested in Soviet espionage and its consequences as am I.
Someone mentioned the excellent work, Witness, a book that should be read by all even over 60 years later.
Someone else gave credit to uncovering the Soviet threat to Chambers and Bentley but failed to mention Gouzenko. Though not an American he was the first to reveal Soviet penetration of a Western government.
>>Uh...Im confused. What does a family at the breakfast table have to do with communist subversion? Is Mom quizzing the kids about their homework studying the works of Marx?<<
LOL. Have you seen ‘The Americans’ on FX?:-)
>>The US was in the background providing food, ammunition, vehicles, bombs and every other thing needed to fight a war ~ DIRECTLY from Detroit, Chicago, Fort Wayne, South Bend, Indianapolis and Louisville to the Russians in the Battle of Stalingrad.
Spot on. The material list of what we supplied the Soviets is breathtaking. Convoys to Archangel and Murmansk, plus much moved through Iran to the southern Soviet Union. For one example, the Soviets built essentially NO trucks during the war. They built their own tanks and some of the railroad stock, but any motor transport they had came from Detroit via those routes.
Lend Lease to Russia
From Major Jordan’ Diaries
(NY: Harcourt, Brace, 1952)
It was 1948, and it wasn't the Communist party itself but the "Progressive" party (a Communist front).
Wallace was a real odd bird.
It must be remembered that Stalin signed a non-aggression pact with Hitler on August 23, 1939, and he's not the one who broke it. If Hitler had kept up his end of the bargain, Ol' Smilin' Joe would have been happy to stay his pal.
I mention this because there are people out there who seem to believe that Stalin scripted the entire thing (somehow including Hitler's invasion) just so the Commies could be allies with the West.
It was Hitler who made the Commies and the West into allies.
I think you mean John Nance Garner. Landon was FDR's (liberal) Republican opponent in 1936.
The most useful sort of "useful idiot".
The Kingan meat packing plant in Indianapolis sent half the pork in America for 2 years straight to the Red Army fighting the Germans. Then there were the truck and tank engines made there ~ some of my aunts and great aunts worked assembling artillery shells and rockets for transport to the Russian troops ~ we worked hand in glove with those people.
After the war it took another 50 years before anyone here felt free to praise the Russians for their efforts on the front ~ where they died and we didn't.
I really don't know what more I can say about it ~ oh, yeah, one more thing, when I was not quite 6 months old my mother used to take me outdoors in the late afternoon up on Portland street in DC to wait on my dad to fly into Bolling. She'd be there and tell me "There's your daddy's plane. He'll be home soon" ~ and next thing you know he'd be home. That's way back BEFORE D-Day. Tens of thousands of planes, pilots and crew members were being rotated through Fairfax County and Alexandria for a final briefing with Roosevelt or the Secretary of War or a top General ~ before embarking for the European theatre.
I was born on holy ground as much a piece of the front against the Nazis as those bombed out hulks of steel and concrete in Russian cities ~ sometimes i'll recall the day and night roar of the planes taking off to be ferried across the Atlantic.
A friend of mine grew up over there, and he never met anyone who ever lived in WWII St Petersburg or Stalingrad ~ seriously. He was a professor at Moscow U. Such people did not make it to the future.
“Have you seen The Americans on FX?:-)”
No. I’m still confused, and old. F/X is something I was forced to learn in differential calculus, IIRC.
Is this the `Stepford Family’? Or is it the updated version of “Red Nightmare” where Mom & Dad suddenly feel the house beginning to shake as Soviet tanks rumble down the streets of Middletown U.S.A.?
The family characters look too perfect, that’s for sure. FWIW, I lived through the Sixties and learned there was a huge difference between kids who rejected their parents’ ideals & went radical, and those who were Red Diaper babies raised on Marx & Engels.
Read Eugene Lyons’ “The Red Decade” (1940), about communist subversion in Hollywood during the 1930’s.
We survived Soviet aggression; I don’t know if we can resist Islamic caliphate tyranny. I don’t plan to be around for a negative outcome as I am already visiting friends in nursing homes & that’s no way to check out, either.
I will never forgive FDR for so many things, but Yalta and winning WWII for the Communists are just two of them.
Here it is:
>>there was a huge difference between kids who rejected their parents ideals & went radical, and those who were Red Diaper babies raised on Marx & Engels.<<
In this case it is just opposite.
After Munich, Britain had made the decision to declare war if Hitler made *any* more territorial grabs, in Poland or elsewhere. Letting Germany take Poland unanswered would have been tantamount to letting them take the rest of Europe, which would have had the effect of excluding Britain from any influence on the Continent and allowing the Axis powers to strangle Britain’s naval routes, placing Britain entirely at Germany’s mercy once they had finished with Russia and developed the atomic bomb. In 1939 there was no guarantee that Germany would attack Russia first. Hitler had been debating who to attack first for years, and did not definitively decide to attack Russia first until the end of 1940, after he had reached a tipping point in his concern that Soviet advances in the Baltic might preclude a future German attack on Russia and that Soviet control of Romania might cut off Germany’s oil supply. Hitler and his generals debated the issue of attacking Russia until Hitler finally convinced Goering (during a November 13, 1940 discussion following a Molotov visit to Berlin) on the grounds that Russian conquests would supply the food and oil needed to defeat Britain. As this indicates, attacking Britain was by this point a given for the German planners, it was just a matter of when. They had been subverting Britain from within since before the war in the hopes of installing a German-friendly regime. Hitler’s hope was to keep the United States out of the war long enough to take Britain before the U.S. could intervene. Without U.S. aid, and if Germany had held off on the Russian front longer than it did, and especially if Germany’s atomic bomb program had reached completion, subjugation of Britain was a real risk.
That said, I will grant that a strategic case could have been made to let Germany and Russia slug it out while Britain built its military strength elsewhere around the German Empire’s periphery, instead of committing to Stalin’s Second Front demands. Once the Allies had committed to a Second Front, Britain’s main goal was to stall the Allied invasion of Europe long enough to build up sufficient forces for victory, for fear that the U.S. was pushing too hard for an immediate invasion of Europe from Britain in 1942 before there was a sufficient build-up. Marshall was pushing for FDR to attack Europe from Britain immediately, arguing that if the Allies did not attack in 1942-1943 Germany would knock Russia out of the war. Britain feared an attack this early would have to be too small to achieve significant success, and ran the risk of letting Germany and Japan achieve enough naval dominance in the East to cut off Allied oil supplies from the Persian Gulf. So the British and Americans went back and forth on this, and meanwhile the Soviets of course pushed in favor of the Second Front and worked on influencing the Americans who leaned towards that option, especially Harry Hopkins and Marshall. The invasion that ultimately unfolded was the result of this tug-of-war over the direction of the Allied strategy.
>>>I will never forgive FDR for so many things, but Yalta and winning WWII for the Communists are just two of them.<<<
Too many questions and a few reasonable answers how could it turn if not for a Yalta.
Things were looking too much differently back to the 1940s.
Sounds good. Prior administrations of FDR, in the run up to WWII was full of the same kind of “shovel ready” make work jobs (like the CCC and WPA) that the dems continue to use in their non-stop playbook. Today it’s called “infrastructure” or “green” or “minority set-asides”— in short, anything to dole out the manna to your party apparatus, and your banker pals.
FDR won his elections in the South through klan democrats who controlled the federal “nice work if you can get it” employment. And the poor whites and blacks who got those few labor jobs voted appropriately and sang the praises of the progressive socialist FDR. But business never came back because the New Deal was a joke, and was never meant to work by the power grabbing federal govt.
Locked in a generational battle with these federal apparatchik liberal bosses throughout the New Deal were Richard Russell, John Garner, Josiah Bailey and Harry Byrd— who fought for state’s rights, ending the union thuggery, and trying to let enterprise of business have a chance. Also, to stop FDR packing the Supreme Court (sound familiar to obamaomau?). The pressure was such that FDR got rid of Wallace as VP (seeing as how he really was a communist).
None of the liberal playbook worked, just like none of it is working now, or ever will in the Keynesian economic knee jerk nightmare, except making crony venture socialists and beltway bandits in the military industries- the entertainment industry and lawyers wealthy. Everything that Eisenhower warned us about, and the RINOs are helping. Waiting for the crash to hit and another world war, or perpetual one to feed the machine.
My original point, was that the camps did not feature in why we went to war with Germany, and neither did the plight of the Jews, period. I don’t doubt for one minute FDR got us into that war, with UK pulling his strings because it sure got us fully employed, removed a lot of opposition in the citizenry and got us into greater sovereign debt, needing more govt control and power. As for losing it to Stalin the psychopath— this lady writer is correct, because the Comintern was actively working against the Allies— working for Stalin worldwide.
Most today, unless they’ve studied it, know nothing about the Ribbentrop-Molotov pact, because the Stalinists whitewashed the whole thing once they became our “allies” in the “Good War” and the commies at home in the US changed their tune and were no longer anti-war. FDR, through Harry Dexter White, Alger Hiss, and a host of other red agents in his admin— was played like a violin by Stalin at Tehran and Yalta, and also by Churchill (similarly stage managed by Stalin— recall the Cambridge 5 Philby et. al). Right through to Potsdam with that little out of place haberdasher Truman fully compromised first in his limited intellect and secondly by long serving red agents in place-he never had a clue.
In keeping with the only thing that matters to democrats— maintaining control... well they certainly did and the country be damned. Just like today.
Thanks for the correction. I can't remember everything. ;)
There's a short recap here.
I understand your points; the fact is that Britain already had world domination (the sun never set on the British empire) while Germany could only hope for European dominance (they had no real surface fleet, no long-range bombers beyond prototypes, and a limited population - while Britain could, and did, supplement its troops with Australians, Indians, South Africans, Canadians, etc.). The second front became nnecessary when Stalin made it clear that without it he would stop fighting once Germans were off Soviet soil; he was also given Eastern Europe as incentive to keep up the pressure. As one of the guarantors of the independence of the newly-created Poland after WWI, Britain failed in that aspect (and both Britain & France lost much of their empires soon after the war as a result of it).
Hitler had hoped to keep peace with Britain; he knew he couldn’t fight on both fronts, and without Japanese pressure on British interests in the Far East the war would have been much shorter.
“I think you mean John Nance Garner. “
“FDR, through Harry Dexter White, Alger Hiss, and a host of other red agents in his admin was played like a violin by Stalin at Tehran and Yalta, and also by Churchill”
We had few options in dealing with Stalin. He wanted us to be more aggressive in attacking Germany from the west to take pressure off of Russia. We wanted Stalin to keep fighting on the east to tie down German divisions.
But once Russia overran eastern Europe we had no way to force Stalin to set up free governments there. Russia had a huge military and internal lines of supply. The best that we could do was to insure that western Europe remained free.
As for Churchill, it’s my understanding that FDR largely ignored Churchill in his dealings with Stalin.
Hitler’s Britain strategy was prone to tip either way over a strategic dilemma. On the one hand, as you point out, he hoped to keep peace with Britain to avoid fighting on two fronts. His overall calculation as recorded by Field Marshal von Leeb was that it was preferable not to smash Britain “because the beneficiaries will not be Germany but Japan in the east, Russia in India, Italy in the Mediterranean and America in world trade.” On the other hand, von Leeb also recorded, he did not hold out high hope that Britain would make peace for two reasons: she hoped for U.S. aid; she hoped to play Russia against Germany. Given this evaluation, while holding out hope that a fight with Britain could be avoided, Hitler expected it would come anyway, and planned and moved accordingly.
With respect to the postwar break-up of the British and French empires, this was indeed one of the big outcomes of the war, and one that FDR pursued deliberately.
“With respect to the postwar break-up of the British and French empires, this was indeed one of the big outcomes of the war, and one that FDR pursued deliberately.”
Destroying their empires while awarding the Soviets one; it is no wonder people are so cynical when it comes to FDR.
FDR and Churchill were in the orchestra, conducted by Stalin’s agents in place in both governments. It is quite
startling to realize this, and the tragic human waste and lost peace that a psychopath like Stalin caused.
And all because Stalin was an agent, and a Georgian (not a Great Russian) for the Tsar’s Ohkrana secret police and did not want to be found out by his commie thug pals— he killed everyone in paranoia and delusion. He was ideal as a partner to another lunatic of differenct descent- Hitler. Personally, this was possible because Satan is real.
-— books,letters and revelations in files from the Venona archive and the Mitrokhin archives that became available after the dissolution of the Soviet Union..... ——
New stuff. Could be interesting.
Nice to see an old name on FR, how have you been?
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.