Russia was the real cause for victory not the US's.
On the contrary, in the long run the victory goes to the United States. Had the USSR gone unchecked in Europe, they would have turned Western Europe into a series of puppet governments like they did with the "democratic" Poland, East Germany, and the Baltic states. While Russia could easily have won World War II by themselves, that would not be an Allied victory or a good thing.
What are you saying, the Allies had free countries? they were as much dominated by the Allies as Soviets
Yeah, but I still think it was definitely unwise to split up his army like that. That was one of the Central Powers' biggest weaknesses in the First World War, fighting on two fronts. Hitler fought in WWI, so he should have known better.
Another big weakness was that most of the world was with the Allied Powers.
Which is why they had to split up, which made them even weaker.
On the contrary, in the long run the victory goes to the United States. Had the USSR gone unchecked in Europe, they would have turned Western Europe into a series of puppet governments like they did with the "democratic" Poland, East Germany, and the Baltic states. While Russia could easily have won World War II by themselves, that would not be an Allied victory or a good thing.
What are you saying, the Allies had free countries? they were as much dominated by the Allies as Soviets
Give an example. Because I think you might be confusing "Allies" with "NATO".
On the contrary, in the long run the victory goes to the United States. Had the USSR gone unchecked in Europe, they would have turned Western Europe into a series of puppet governments like they did with the "democratic" Poland, East Germany, and the Baltic states. While Russia could easily have won World War II by themselves, that would not be an Allied victory or a good thing.
What are you saying, the Allies had free countries? they were as much dominated by the Allies as Soviets
When the Soviet Union liberated Eastern Europe, they permanently absorbed most of those countries into the Soviet Union, and at the very least installed a communist regime that did whatever Moscow told them. When the Allies liberated Western Europe (France, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, West Germany), the original governments that existed before the Nazi regime were allowed to return and democratic elections were held again. There was no American annexation or domination of the West, nor was there a British annexation.
We did occupy West Germany for about ten years after the war as we worked with the German people to create a government with checks and balances to prevent another Nazi rise to power. We installed a democratic government that continues to function to this day independent of American policy. The USSR occupied East Germany for about ten years and propped up a communist government that, while legally autonomous, was an extension of Soviet power and severely infringed on the rights of its citizens.
The installation of NATO, through which the United States came to operate in many countries of Europe, was not an occupation or military domination -- it was an agreement voluntarily signed by the west out of fear that the Soviet Union may overrun Europe. We placed troops in those countries to protect them and collaborated closely with their governments while never interfering with their policy.
✠✙ What once was old doth fade away/But Former Glory stays the same ✙✠ •••Unity•••Duty•••DESTINY••• ***EST. 2006*** • 9/11/01 • BCC: 2010-2014 • EX-TER-MIN-ATE! –Dalek
What are you saying, the Allies had free countries? they were as much dominated by the Allies as Soviets
Give an example. Because I think you might be confusing "Allies" with "NATO".
Same thing, Everyone talks about Soviet aggression and how bad the Warsaw pact was but like NATO or America is better, They were more aggresive than Stalin, what about the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan?
What are you saying, the Allies had free countries? they were as much dominated by the Allies as Soviets
When the Soviet Union liberated Eastern Europe, they permanently absorbed most of those countries into the Soviet Union, and at the very least installed a communist regime that did whatever Moscow told them. When the Allies liberated Western Europe (France, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, West Germany), the original governments that existed before the Nazi regime were allowed to return and democratic elections were held again. There was no American annexation or domination of the West, nor was there a British annexation.
We did occupy West Germany for about ten years after the war as we worked with the German people to create a government with checks and balances to prevent another Nazi rise to power. We installed a democratic government that continues to function to this day independent of American policy. The USSR occupied East Germany for about ten years and propped up a communist government that, while legally autonomous, was an extension of Soviet power and severely infringed on the rights of its citizens.
The installation of NATO, through which the United States came to operate in many countries of Europe, was not an occupation or military domination -- it was an agreement voluntarily signed by the west out of fear that the Soviet Union may overrun Europe. We placed troops in those countries to protect them and collaborated closely with their governments while never interfering with their policy.
I don't see much difference, From Stalin's view The Soviet Union lost over 20 million soldiers, he did all the fighting and not until things looked like he was going to take all Europe The Allies did D-Day and tried to make as much land as possible, I also Note Churchill and Stalin made a agreement in which Churchill gave Eastern Europe to Stalin if they could keep the Western countries, after the War Uncle Joe was suddenly bad and we had to "Liberate" the free world from their Aggression, only problem was we were the ones being aggressive. Same Story today, Bad Putin being aggressive, BUT I don't see any Russian Nuclear Bombs in mexico or Canada, would that stand? No. So why is it okay to have a puppets on their border, Who's being aggressive, I also hope you note That NATO is US dominated and they basically run it.
When the Soviet Union liberated Eastern Europe, they permanently absorbed most of those countries into the Soviet Union, and at the very least installed a communist regime that did whatever Moscow told them. When the Allies liberated Western Europe (France, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, West Germany), the original governments that existed before the Nazi regime were allowed to return and democratic elections were held again. There was no American annexation or domination of the West, nor was there a British annexation.
We did occupy West Germany for about ten years after the war as we worked with the German people to create a government with checks and balances to prevent another Nazi rise to power. We installed a democratic government that continues to function to this day independent of American policy. The USSR occupied East Germany for about ten years and propped up a communist government that, while legally autonomous, was an extension of Soviet power and severely infringed on the rights of its citizens.
The installation of NATO, through which the United States came to operate in many countries of Europe, was not an occupation or military domination -- it was an agreement voluntarily signed by the west out of fear that the Soviet Union may overrun Europe. We placed troops in those countries to protect them and collaborated closely with their governments while never interfering with their policy.
I don't see much difference, From Stalin's view The Soviet Union lost over 20 million soldiers, he did all the fighting and not until things looked like he was going to take all Europe The Allies did D-Day and tried to make as much land as possible, I also Note Churchill and Stalin made a agreement in which Churchill gave Eastern Europe to Stalin if they could keep the Western countries, after the War Uncle Joe was suddenly bad and we had to "Liberate" the free world from their Aggression, only problem was we were the ones being aggressive. Same Story today, Bad Putin being aggressive, BUT I don't see any Russian Nuclear Bombs in mexico or Canada, would that stand? No. So why is it okay to have a puppets on their border, Who's being aggressive, I also hope you note That NATO is US dominated and they basically run it.
I believe you are referring to the Yalta conference, in which the Big Three accepted Soviet control over much of eastern Europe in order to gain their support against Japan. It was not an under the table deal between Churchill and Stalin, in fact Churchill hated the deal.
Also, are you aware Stalin had Zhukov draw up plans for a Soviet invasion of France and Italy in 1945? Stalin was disappointed he only went all the way to Berlin, where Alexander I had gone all the way to Paris. Stalin wanted to go further, he wanted to go all the way to Spain! This operation was only called off because he feared Nuclear retaliation.
When the Soviet Union liberated Eastern Europe, they permanently absorbed most of those countries into the Soviet Union, and at the very least installed a communist regime that did whatever Moscow told them. When the Allies liberated Western Europe (France, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands, Belgium, West Germany), the original governments that existed before the Nazi regime were allowed to return and democratic elections were held again. There was no American annexation or domination of the West, nor was there a British annexation.
We did occupy West Germany for about ten years after the war as we worked with the German people to create a government with checks and balances to prevent another Nazi rise to power. We installed a democratic government that continues to function to this day independent of American policy. The USSR occupied East Germany for about ten years and propped up a communist government that, while legally autonomous, was an extension of Soviet power and severely infringed on the rights of its citizens. The installation of NATO, through which the United States came to operate in many countries of Europe, was not an occupation or military domination -- it was an agreement voluntarily signed by the west out of fear that the Soviet Union may overrun Europe. We placed troops in those countries to protect them and collaborated closely with their governments while never interfering with their policy.
I don't see much difference, From Stalin's view The Soviet Union lost over 20 million soldiers, he did all the fighting and not until things looked like he was going to take all Europe The Allies did D-Day and tried to make as much land as possible, I also Note Churchill and Stalin made a agreement in which Churchill gave Eastern Europe to Stalin if they could keep the Western countries, after the War Uncle Joe was suddenly bad and we had to "Liberate" the free world from their Aggression, only problem was we were the ones being aggressive. Same Story today, Bad Putin being aggressive, BUT I don't see any Russian Nuclear Bombs in mexico or Canada, would that stand? No. So why is it okay to have a puppets on their border, Who's being aggressive, I also hope you note That NATO is US dominated and they basically run it.
Looking at my immediately previous post, you can't possibly hope to tell me the Soviet Union were the victims.
The Yalta agreement was a tragedy and one of the biggest Allied mistakes of the war. We carelessly abandoned our allies in Poland and Churchill was heavily criticized by the British Parliament for daring allow Stalin to annex half of Poland (the western half was ostensibly "free" but became a communist puppet). This is known to the Polish as "Western Betrayal," I strongly oppose it myself.
Stalin promised that the other eastern countries would be liberated (no mention of annexing the Baltic states was made in any of the Big Three conferences). These were blatant lies and freedom was nonexistent until after the Cold War ended.
As far as aggression -- the Soviet Union backed aggressive forces in North Vietnam, North Korea, South America, Cuba, and Grenada, in many cases violently overthrowing democratic governments and committing war crimes on national television to create fear. The Soviet Union also directly invaded Afghanistan in the late years of the Cold War. The United States and her allies worked with the defensive forces in many of these countries and sometimes ran covert operations of our own to prevent the spread of communism.
The "nuclear bombs" statement of yours is somewhat inaccurate -- that's part of our nuclear sharing program, in which Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, and Turkey participate. The weapons are guarded by US airmen in peacetime but officially belong to the host countries and are to be used by those countries in times are war. We did not force those countries to host our weapons; they signed onto this program for their own defense. We have never supplied nuclear weapons to Mexico.
Putin's aggression is also somewhat more serious than you seem to believe. You realize he militarily annexed a large section of a neighboring country that contained a strategic port, right?
As far as NATO being US-dominated: I'm sure you'll be happy to hear that President Donald J. Trump is considering leaving the US-dominated organization because many Americans are tired of being the only line of defense for 27 countries. The main reason that the United States "dominates" NATO is because the other member countries are unwilling or unable to defend themselves. Friends of mine who live in NATO states close to the border like Poland and Ukraine have voiced their concerns that Russia may invade them if the US stops providing their defense.
✠✙ What once was old doth fade away/But Former Glory stays the same ✙✠ •••Unity•••Duty•••DESTINY••• ***EST. 2006*** • 9/11/01 • BCC: 2010-2014 • EX-TER-MIN-ATE! –Dalek
Give an example. Because I think you might be confusing "Allies" with "NATO".
Same thing, Everyone talks about Soviet aggression and how bad the Warsaw pact was but like NATO or America is better, They were more aggresive than Stalin, what about the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan?
Truman is tied for one of my least favorite presidents of all time, so I can't exactly say I approve of what he did. The Truman Doctrine isn't aggressive, though -- it's supposed to aid in the defense of countries attacked by communist forces. Even if it was aggressive, it doesn't alone stack up against the many Soviet infringements.
"The Marshall Plan (officially the European Recovery Program, ERP) was an American initiative to aid Western Europe, in which the United States gave over $12 billion (approximately $120 billion in current dollar value as of June 2016) in economic support to help rebuild Western European economies after the end of World War II. The plan was in operation for four years beginning April 8, 1948. The goals of the United States were to rebuild war-devastated regions, remove trade barriers, modernize industry, make Europe prosperous once more, and prevent the spread of communism."
This isn't even a military plan or aggressive. It's an economic recovery plan. We offered the same plan to the Soviet Union and they refused. The Soviet Union created the "Molotov Plan" as a reactionary measure, but it was not effective and instead of working to economically rehabilitate countries, it actively tried to suppress the regrowth of former Axis nations.
Stalin invaded Poland in 1939 alongside Hitler. NATO was not more aggressive than that.
✠✙ What once was old doth fade away/But Former Glory stays the same ✙✠ •••Unity•••Duty•••DESTINY••• ***EST. 2006*** • 9/11/01 • BCC: 2010-2014 • EX-TER-MIN-ATE! –Dalek
Give an example. Because I think you might be confusing "Allies" with "NATO".
Same thing, Everyone talks about Soviet aggression and how bad the Warsaw pact was but like NATO or America is better, They were more aggresive than Stalin, what about the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan?
Aggressiveness isn't the only reason people hated the USSR. It's the fact that their government was authoritarian and single-party.
In the United States, you're allowed to believe whatever you want to believe. You can hate the government and still live in America. You can hate democracy and we won't arrest you. You can run in elections and vote for people in order to change government policy. The constitution of our country specifies that it is the right and duty of the people to stand up and revolt against tyranny.
In the Warsaw Pact nations, you were monitored. Your phone might be tapped or any of your friends or relatives might be an informant. In one case in East Germany, a wife and a husband were spying on each other for the government. Speaking out against the government, even in private, was a very dangerous affair and if the secret police heard about it you would never be seen again. The Soviet government controlled the economy and also dictated what citizens were allowed to believe. It's a horrible reality that only those who have lived under it can fully understand, and it's because we live in the free world that you currently don't comprehend just how bad the USSR was.
America's citizens do not just "do whatever the government tells them." With the exception of laws meant to protect society, we are free to do and believe whatever we want.
✠✙ What once was old doth fade away/But Former Glory stays the same ✙✠ •••Unity•••Duty•••DESTINY••• ***EST. 2006*** • 9/11/01 • BCC: 2010-2014 • EX-TER-MIN-ATE! –Dalek
And which war are you talking about at this point?