The Last Correctly Prosecuted War....

But Joseph...FDR did the right thing...are you really praising a "liberal" - oh my!

I think it is quite more likely that Hitler would have had a very difficult time destroying the Soviet Union. It is far more likely that they would have kept one another too busy to worry much about world conquest and would likely have exhausted one another beyond being a threat to anyone else had they been left alone. But, arguing that point is pure speculative history that we will never have agreement on.

 

No, and why would you care beans what Lucky Lindy had to say about anything? He was a has been at that time.

I think that what I would have advocated is to be prepared. Beef up the defenses and offer aid to those fighting the NAZIs. Hitler was a maniac anyway and I don't think it would have been long before he would have crossed the line, pulling the U.S. into the war.

You can call my nationalistic views isolationist if you want to. Isolationist is the term preferred by liberals and pseudo-conservatives. I don't apologize for caring more for my own country than for international issues that are of no importance to the U.S. The fact that someone in your ancestry saw fit to relocate the Botwinick klan to the U.S. should also tell you something. They left a land which, for one reason or the other, was seen as unfit to remain in and take a stand for.

What I'm getting from you is that we need to be ready to go to war to protect Jewish interests around the world. We have many other cultures in this country as well and if we accomodate you, then we must in all fairness accomodate the those of Haitian ancestry, Cuban ancestry, Mexican ancestry, Vietnamese ancestry, Chineses ancestry, Nigerian ancestry, and whatever else is out there. My point is that we can't do it.

You need to stop trying to be a Jewish Jessie Jackson - wearing your ethnicity like a chip on your shoulder.

Roy [/QB]</font>[/QUOTE]I must be one of those Jewish Neo Con agitators of war you CP isolationists America First crowd are always talking about. Thanks for revealing it so clear. BTW, this time I was agitating war for the liberation of Muslims, not Jews. Sorry if my ethnicity offends you so much. Although, it is interesting that you denounce Lindy in one breath and then talk just like him in the next.

Joseph Botwinick

 

You're right. I am sure the peaceful Hitler was just misrepresented by the Jewish agitators of an unecessary war, right? He was really a peaceful man, right? It seems to me that the same argument was attempted to be made by the some of the same anti-war isolationists about Saddam. What is it with these people that they tend to think higher of brutal genocidal dictators than they do of their victims and the ones who stand up against them?

Joseph Botwinick

 

But Joseph...FDR did the right thing...are you really praising a "liberal" - oh my!

I think it is quite more likely that Hitler would have had a very difficult time destroying the Soviet Union. It is far more likely that they would have kept one another too busy to worry much about world conquest and would likely have exhausted one another beyond being a threat to anyone else had they been left alone. But, arguing that point is pure speculative history that we will never have agreement on. </font>[/QUOTE]Yes.

FDR did do the right thing here. It wasn't a matter of liberal or conservative. It was a matter of right and wrong which is something that I would contend that the Isolationist America First crowd haven't understood for a long time.

Joseph Botwinick

 

You're right. I am sure the peaceful Hitler was just misrepresented by the Jewish agitators of an unecessary war, right? He was really a peaceful man, right? It seems to me that the same argument was attempted to be made by the some of the same anti-war isolationists about Saddam. What is it with these people that they tend to think higher of brutal genocidal dictators than they do of their victims and the ones who stand up against them?

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]Thanks Joseph. Once again you illustrate my point far more clearly than I could do on my own.

And the long glorious peace that followed WWII with a Europe and Asia we gave to our dear allies like Stalin, Tito, and Hoxha (to name just a few) was surely better than your worst case scenario with Hitler. And, I suppose an Iraq on the road to becoming a radical Shiite state in the mold of Iran is better than Sadam too...I just don't see how but I look forward to your simple yet provocative explanation for both views.

One thing I appreciate very much from you bro is your ability to liven a debate.

 

Related to my last post - some analysis on the numbers:
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstat1.htm

 

You understand that the only reason Hitler did not do more damage is because we stopped him, right?

Joseph Botwinick

 

I don't think that your ethnicity offends anyone on this discussion board, but you probably have some wonderful pity parties imagining that it does.

Roy

 

How should I do this, Roy? Stop being of Jewish ancestry or stop giving a rip about Israel and the Jews?

Joseph Botwinick

 

I have absolutely no doubt that Hitler would have bested Stalin had The US of A not been involved. How many Fock-Wolfs were downed by America that otherwise could have been used on the Russian front? How many divisions were between Berlin & the channel that could have been used in the East?

Don't know the figures, but my guestimate would be that Hitler would have needed only 1/4 or less manpower, & materiel to just fight England.

To judge that things were worse under Stalin than Hitler is a little too pompous. There's no more evidence that one would have been a better choice than the other.

One has to make decisions based on the knowledge at the time, not what's available some years later.

Monday morning quarterbacking is fine for the Sunday night game, but it gets a bit dangerous when that's the basis for political/foriegn policy decisions.

 

How should I do this, Roy? Stop being of Jewish ancestry or stop giving a rip about Israel and the Jews?

Joseph Botwinick </font>[/QUOTE]That's a kind offer, Mr. Botwinick, but I like you just fine as an American with Jewish bloodlines. I also like Israel and the Jewish people.

Roy

For anyone who's interested, I found an outline on the web, at the below link, of the Nazi invasion of Russia.

http://history.acusd.edu/gen/WW2Timeline/BARBAROS.HTML

 

Hey Lady Eagle, my apologies for not looking at this link earlier. I think also that oil is a prime motivator for the U.S. presence in Iraq. If we are able to maintain friendly relations with the powers in control there, it will give us access to Iraqi oil and thus leverage against the Saudis. I believe that Iraqi freedom is probably the least of our reasons for being there even though the government is touting it as the main reason.

Roy

 

No faith-healing for you, eh? No spontaneous remission either, I guess.

A lot of doctors would disagree with you about aggressively treating prostrate cancer in elderly men (I don't know what's best).

 

I believe we have successfully prosecuted every war since 1945...militarily.

It would be easy to blame the military for all the truces , unfinished wars and losses since 1945, but it is our political will and planning that is lacking.

Our military still knows how to win when given the proper mission.

 

I agree in a sense. I think its more political problems than the grunts in the field but I think its politics in higher ranks of the military as well. There comes a point in a military career where a soldier must choose between playing a political game to obtain higher promotion or doing what s/he knows is right even if it might be unpopular. Most will choose the road of assured promotion. Its the way our military is structured that is the problem.

See: Hackworth Column for example.