The West allying with Russia to fight the Nazis has left this lingering geopolitical fiasco to this day. Not that there was a better solution, of course, but Russia’s atrocities was created by stopping Nazi atrocities. They solved one problem and created another.
Bruh. Russia had a long record of atrocities prior to WW2. Frankly, so did America. Not that I wish to compare the two, I am 100% behind the Western order. Fuck russia now, fuck russia forever.
I think a direct war with the Soviet Union after meeting in Germany would have been possible but at that point probably too costly. All out war with Britain, France and USA versus the Soviet Union could potentially have defeated the Red Army but at a staggering loss of human life. As well, the ground they had to cover to push back to Moscow at that point would have been outlandishly difficult.
Instead, the American support of Russia was a bit too successful and should only have supported a stalemate in the Eastern front until attrition made both very weak. Then, after D-Day, the Allies could have liberated Poland, Hungary, Romania, Estonia, etc. And then Russia would have been in 1945 where they are today instead of having 50+ years of occupation.
This comment feels so reactionary and so off the mark based on the op comment that I’m not certain this isn’t a bait post… Which I’ve just been hooked by… I should stop talking now.
The West allying with Russia to fight the Nazis has left this lingering geopolitical fiasco to this day. Not that there was a better solution, of course, but Russia’s atrocities was created by stopping Nazi atrocities. They solved one problem and created another.
Bruh. Russia had a long record of atrocities prior to WW2. Frankly, so did America. Not that I wish to compare the two, I am 100% behind the Western order. Fuck russia now, fuck russia forever.
Sometimes I do think Patton wasn’t an egotistical nutter after all.
1917 the US and other Allies tried to intervene in the Russian Civil War on the side of the White Army.
Churchill argued at length that Russia had to be next after Germany fell. He probably was onto something there.
I think a direct war with the Soviet Union after meeting in Germany would have been possible but at that point probably too costly. All out war with Britain, France and USA versus the Soviet Union could potentially have defeated the Red Army but at a staggering loss of human life. As well, the ground they had to cover to push back to Moscow at that point would have been outlandishly difficult.
Instead, the American support of Russia was a bit too successful and should only have supported a stalemate in the Eastern front until attrition made both very weak. Then, after D-Day, the Allies could have liberated Poland, Hungary, Romania, Estonia, etc. And then Russia would have been in 1945 where they are today instead of having 50+ years of occupation.
Also, the popularity of the Communist Parties in Europe at the time would probably have made such a confrontation quite awkward.
And here’s the defense of Nazis
Can we seriously defed from lemmy.world now, because this is seriously disgusting
I do not see any defense of Nazis in GP’s post. I don’t understand what you are talking about.
Life isn’t so binary and simplistic.
Get used to differing views to your own. You might learn something.
Post about how allying with one evil to destroy another evil when you’re also a bit evil, leaves some evil.
*shocked pikachu* *points finger* yOu’rE sUPpoRtINg eViL
How the fuck is that a defence of Nazis, you redundant muffin?
Redundant muffin is a great insult, thanks for adding it to my vocabulary.
This comment feels so reactionary and so off the mark based on the op comment that I’m not certain this isn’t a bait post… Which I’ve just been hooked by… I should stop talking now.
read again, the comment dunks on the west, Russia and the nazis…