Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This is the history forum. Not the "fantasy and conspiracy forum".
Have you ever heard of Lachlin Currie, a communist who wrote FDR's Banking Act of 1935 ?
Who funded the Flying Tigers, and locked down
all the Japanese money across the world before Pearl Harbor ?
What about the dozens of exposed communists exposed by Joseph McCarthy ?
This is history, not fiction. Conspiracies are PART of history, whether you acknowledge
that or choose to limit your understanding to some naive perception of human interaction
is your choice.
Have you ever heard of Lachlin Currie, a communist who wrote FDR's Banking Act of 1935 ?
Who funded the Flying Tigers, and locked down
all the Japanese money across the world before Pearl Harbor ?
What about the dozens of exposed communists exposed by Joseph McCarthy ?
This is history, not fiction. Conspiracies are PART of history, whether you acknowledge
that or choose to limit your understanding to some naive perception of human interaction
is your choice.
I wouldn't go that far by any stretch by suggesting Roosevelt was a communist. And McCartyism brings about it's own history of hysteria of seeing a commie under each rock. However - there is enough evidence to suggest that their were communist agents and sympathizers in Roosevelt's administrations, the impact and extent of which will probably never be known. The topic of Alger Hiss, for one (a negotiator at Yalta), is still debatabe on weather he was an agent working for Russia or not.
I wouldn't go that far by any stretch by suggesting Roosevelt was a communist. And McCartyism brings about it's own history of hysteria of seeing a commie under each rock. However - there is enough evidence to suggest that their were communist agents and sympathizers in Roosevelt's administrations, the impact and extent of which will probably never be known. The topic of Alger Hiss, for one (a negotiator at Yalta), is still debatabe on weather he was an agent working for Russia or not.
OK, Ngoat mentioned in the parallel discussion from the End OF WW2 thread, that historians think LL put the USSR 12 to 18 months ahead of schedule on the Eastern Front. Let's use a hypothetical situation to get a better picture of where you stand (if you wish) on these agreements FDR made with Stalin, especially the Tehran Conference.
For whatever reason, let's say the Soviets were not as far along as they had been, and not taken most of Eastern Europe, and Patton had taken Berlin. The Germans then surrender but want to surrender to the West. All the East European countries then want to align themselves with the West and remain free. Do you honor the Tehran agreement, withdraw from Eastern Europe and let Russia occupy them, in accordance with the agreement FDR made, or do you break the agreement and protect those countries, even though Stalin is demanding we honor the agreement and is furious.
Would you please provide us with what you think the relevancy of providing the above names is to whether or not any of them were communists?
Are we supposed to conclude that a Rosenvelt or a Roggenfelder is automatically a communist while a real Roosevelt or Rockefeller would not be?
By your above standards, may we conclude that Eisenhower was a Nazi?
1. No, you'll have to do your own reading, I posted some links, use them or do searches
on the names.
2. Those are their true family names, just like Rothschilds were Bauers.
3. Eisenhower hated the German people, not just Nazis.
1. No, you'll have to do your own reading, I posted some links, use them or do searches
on the names.
2. Those are their true family names, just like Rothschilds were Bauers.
3. Eisenhower hated the German people, not just Nazis.
"No?"
So you had no reason? Or you have a reason but fear the consequences of revealing it to us?
No dice, no homework assignments. You brought the issue before us so you can explain your reasoning and motivations, or be seen as someone with a specific, and all too familiar on this forum, private agenda, albeit one too cowardly to operate openly.
Yeah, and it probably would've been in the long term economic interests of The United States; Europe totally screwed up and us making everything they now make.
We didn't need Germans to develop most of our weapons and we certainly had the talent and resources to develop rockets on our own.
Maybe you did. But you did NOT. No matter how much pride or jingo patriotism you put into this, FACTS are very stubborn. GERMANS did rocket development. German exiles (as most of them were not Germans by blood) did Manhattan project. Germans did jet engines and jet planes, that gave so much advantage to the USA AF for several years to come. And so on and so on.
Which is really nothing new, considering that overall, Allies let the USSR bleed itself out beating Wehrmacht, ( or lose 1.5 million of their soldiers to do unprepared advance, saving American troops in Ardene massacre), and only then realized that they will lose entire Europe, as there was nothing to stop RA from reaching Gibraltar, and had no choice but to open 2nd front? That "sit in the shrubs watch big boys fight" attitude well enough showed itself in stealing anything intellectual from Germany possible, and claiming it as "we could". No you could not. Even such truth bender as History channel admits that German science and engineering jettisoned USA into 21st century. And now, without influx of new "borrowed" minds, USA is doing nothing but lagging behind same Europe, or Asia. Or Russia.
Is Roosevelt to blame for what happened? Is it a situation that really couldn't have been prevented without another war because Poland was occupied by the Red Army and under Stalin's control? Was Roosevelt's health to blame?
It was the best result we could get at the time, given our previous commitments to Stalin. The problem was the commitment itself. We should've stayed out of the war, whatever it took, and the reason we didn't is because we had a president who didn't want to.
Roosevelt was always very taken with Stalin; he didn't need the excuse of failing health.
We should've stayed out of the war, whatever it took, and the reason we didn't is because we had a president who didn't want to.
Seriously?!?
Quote:
Roosevelt was always very taken with Stalin; he didn't need the excuse of failing health.
Taken with Stalin in what way, please explain... if you can.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
