The Last Correctly Prosecuted War....

[Stratiotes]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
Yes, they were very deadly indeed. So, does this mean that you would have sided with the isolationists in the America First organization and stayed out of war at all cost? Do you agree with Lindberg's statements about the British, FDR and the Jews agitating an unessecary war? Had Hitler conquered all of Europe and the Soviet Union unimpeded by the Americans, he would have indeed been a lot more efficient than Stalin; not only that, but he would have also become more strong and more dangerous to America later down the road. Do you not think FDR did the right thing in confronting Hitler and his ever-spreading death machine? I do.

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.

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Roy:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
Roy,

Do you believe as Lindberg and the America First crowd that the Jews and FDR were agitating an unecessary war with Hitler?

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

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
What if Dec. 7, 1941 had never happened? Would you still have argued that it was an internal conflict and none of our business?

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.

How long would it have taken you to abandon your isolationist views long enough to realize that Hitler had designs on conquering the world? You are right about one thing: Hindsight is 20/20. Then again, I have to wonder where we would be today, and which Nazi dictator would be running our country today had it not been for an attack on our borders by Japan (not Germany) which suddenly made it acceptable to the America First crowd to care about what Hitler was doing to my ancestors in Poland. I wonder if I would even be here discussing it today. Who knows?

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

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Stratiotes:
I tend to agree with LadyEagle as well - but, at the same time, we should never forget the maxim that the victors write the official histories and that our opinions are shaped by the history to which we expose ourselves. It is best to always question both sides in any conflict to get a clear understanding of the causes and results. I'm afraid that we Americans are not generally good at doing that.

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

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Stratiotes:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
Yes, they were very deadly indeed. So, does this mean that you would have sided with the isolationists in the America First organization and stayed out of war at all cost? Do you agree with Lindberg's statements about the British, FDR and the Jews agitating an unessecary war? Had Hitler conquered all of Europe and the Soviet Union unimpeded by the Americans, he would have indeed been a lot more efficient than Stalin; not only that, but he would have also become more strong and more dangerous to America later down the road. Do you not think FDR did the right thing in confronting Hitler and his ever-spreading death machine? I do.

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

 

[Stratiotes]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Stratiotes:
I tend to agree with LadyEagle as well - but, at the same time, we should never forget the maxim that the victors write the official histories and that our opinions are shaped by the history to which we expose ourselves. It is best to always question both sides in any conflict to get a clear understanding of the causes and results. I'm afraid that we Americans are not generally good at doing that.

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.

 

[Stratiotes]

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

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

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

Joseph Botwinick

 

[Roy]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
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 [/QB]

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

 

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by Roy:
You need to stop trying to be a Jewish Jessie Jackson - wearing your ethnicity like a chip on your shoulder.

Roy

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

Joseph Botwinick

 

[just-want-peace]

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.

 

[Roy]

Originally posted by Joseph_Botwinick:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Roy:
You need to stop trying to be a Jewish Jessie Jackson - wearing your ethnicity like a chip on your shoulder.

Roy

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

 

[Roy]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
Roy, I agree there seems to be no reason to be in the Balkans. But the fact is, we are there and this is why:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/balkans.html

Also, we armed al-Qaeda in Kosovo and now we are fighting them.

Evil never makes sense.

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

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by just-want-peace:
You cannot get rid of cancer by ignoring it! Doesn't help to put band-aids on it either. You either excise it, kill it in place, or it kills you. not a big range of choices!

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).

 

[LadyEagle]

Roy, agree.

 

[carpro]

Originally posted by LadyEagle:
Ended 15 August 1945.

The US has not correctly prosecuted a war since then. Including the one going on now. Just my humble opinion.


Thoughts?

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.

 

[Stratiotes]

Originally posted by carpro:
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.