ELECTION 2008 | The Pub | The Field Mess | The Staff College | Bookmark WAB



Go Back   World Affairs Board > General Forums > Political Discussions
Register FAQ WAB RSS Feed Forum GuidelinesMembers List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Greetings, and welcome to the World Affairs Board!

The World Affairs Board is one of the premier forums for the discussion of the pressing geopolitical issues of our time. Topics include foreign & defense policy, international security, military developments, weapons proliferation, terrorism, international strategic affairs, and politics. Our membership includes many from military, defense industry, and government backgrounds with expert knowledge on a wide range of topics. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so why not register a World Affairs Board account and join our community today?
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-28-2004, 22:42 PM   #16 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,051
Country:
Quote:
Originally posted by Confed999
I didn't forget them. That really didn't turn out well, we didn't end up controling them. No alliance with evil is worth the price, that's the lesson I take from it.
If the Soviets hadn't taken on the Nazis, the price we would have paid would have skyrocketted and in the end, we would be facing an untouched USSR in the East.
__________________
Chimo
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 00:11 AM   #17 (permalink)
Confed999
Staff Emeritus
 
Confed999's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-03
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,681
Country:
Send a message via AIM to Confed999
Quote:
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
If the Soviets hadn't taken on the Nazis, the price we would have paid would have skyrocketted and in the end, we would be facing an untouched USSR in the East.
The Nazis and Commies were going to fight. They would have spent themselves on each other as they did. The Allied cost would have been higher, but they would have liberated eastern Europe and saved a s**t load of people from decades of slavery. The total costs of the cold war have yet to be tallied, with many of it's repercussions yet to be felt.
__________________
No man is free until all men are free - John Hossack
I agree completely with this Administration’s goal of a regime change in Iraq-John Kerry
even if that enforcement is mostly at the hands of the United States, a right we retain even if the Security Council fails to act-John Kerry
He may even miscalculate and slide these weapons off to terrorist groups to invite them to be a surrogate to use them against the United States. It’s the miscalculation that poses the greatest threat-John Kerry
Confed999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 01:05 AM   #18 (permalink)
Blademaster
Military Enthusiast
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 08-15-03
Posts: 3,255
What if this , what if that. Confed, it is so easy to make sweeping generalizations or make judgements in hindsight.

Remember the conditions as it was back in that time and understand the environment and the factors that led to people making such decisions as it was.

For example, when I look at the history of my country, India, I would have made different choices. But the question is that how can I predict the alternate future that will turn out? You can't.

We just live with our past and apply the lessons we learned to the present and move on and embrace the future whatever it may bring us.
Blademaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 01:13 AM   #19 (permalink)
Confed999
Staff Emeritus
 
Confed999's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-03
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,681
Country:
Send a message via AIM to Confed999
Quote:
Originally posted by Blademaster
What if this , what if that. Confed, it is so easy to make sweeping generalizations or make judgements in hindsight.
Except that my point is, learn from the past and quit doing the same things over and over, it doesn't work. Use hindsight to temper foresight or what was it worth going through all that in the first place? You're either with the bad guys or against them. I am not with the bad guys, period. No matter how convenient it is at the time, because it allways turns out bad.
Confed999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 17:47 PM   #20 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,051
Country:
Quote:
Originally posted by Confed999
The Nazis and Commies were going to fight. They would have spent themselves on each other as they did. The Allied cost would have been higher, but they would have liberated eastern Europe and saved a s**t load of people from decades of slavery. The total costs of the cold war have yet to be tallied, with many of it's repercussions yet to be felt.
Your logic isn't there. Had we left the ETO to the Soviets and the Nazis, they still would have devastated Eastern Europe and for which we still would not have any relief effort there - unless you're counting on Patton and Montgomery to defeat Kesselring in Italy and then drive northward. Highly dubious.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 18:49 PM   #21 (permalink)
Confed999
Staff Emeritus
 
Confed999's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-03
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,681
Country:
Send a message via AIM to Confed999
Quote:
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
Your logic isn't there.
For me it's not about logic, it's about right and wrong. If you make a deal with the Devil, especially to fight the Devil, you're the only one who pays. We're still paying for those past deals.
Quote:
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
Had we left the ETO to the Soviets and the Nazis, they still would have devastated Eastern Europe and for which we still would not have any relief effort there - unless you're counting on Patton and Montgomery to defeat Kesselring in Italy and then drive northward. Highly dubious.
I still don't think for a second the Nazis and Commies weren't going to fight it out. I don't remeber there being much/any Commie help in western Europe, no change there.
Confed999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 19:09 PM   #22 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,051
Country:
Quote:
Originally posted by Confed999
I still don't think for a second the Nazis and Commies weren't going to fight it out. I don't remeber there being much/any Commie help in western Europe, no change there.
This is your original assertion.

Quote:
Originally posted by Confed999
The Nazis and Commies were going to fight. They would have spent themselves on each other as they did. The Allied cost would have been higher, but they would have liberated eastern Europe and saved a s**t load of people from decades of slavery. The total costs of the cold war have yet to be tallied, with many of it's repercussions yet to be felt.
I was merely pointing out to you that liberating eastern Europe and saving s**t load of people from decades of slavery was never in the cards with or without the Soviet alliance.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 19:50 PM   #23 (permalink)
Confed999
Staff Emeritus
 
Confed999's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-03
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,681
Country:
Send a message via AIM to Confed999
Quote:
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
I was merely pointing out to you that liberating eastern Europe and saving s**t load of people from decades of slavery was never in the cards with or without the Soviet alliance.
Allied support wouldn't have made a difference in Soviet strength at all? If they were just a little weaker, then the Allies may very well have taken the ground. Who would the Germans have surrendered to, the Allies or the Soviets? Heck, if it had just ended the Cold war sooner...
Confed999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 19:54 PM   #24 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,051
Country:
Would the Wehrmacht surrendered at all? Or would have they negotiated a peace, even a seperate peace? It would be either Nazi control of Eastern Europe or a Soviet control. It would not have been us.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 20:01 PM   #25 (permalink)
Confed999
Staff Emeritus
 
Confed999's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-03
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,681
Country:
Send a message via AIM to Confed999
Then I guess we have to go further back. How long have we been making deals? Either way I won't stand on that side, no tolerance for the bad guys from me.
Confed999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 20:10 PM   #26 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,051
Country:
Quote:
Originally posted by Confed999
Then I guess we have to go further back. How long have we been making deals? Either way I won't stand on that side, no tolerance for the bad guys from me.
For me, the quinesential moment was the Sudetenland. We could have stopped Hitler back then. Hell, we could have just told Hitler, go adhead and try and conquer it. The Czechs would still have lost but would have bled the Wehrmacht dry and beyond repair.

As it is, we expected the Poles to be able to last longer. Hell, we expected the BEF and the French Maginot Line to sweep the Wehrmacht from the face of the earth.

This being said, luck played a large role. Had the BEF committed the two Canadian divisions they held in reserves in Great Britain, the Wehrmacht would have been chased out of France, having ran out of gas and ammo. Hitler's ordered delay gave a very much needed replenishement to attack Dunkirk.

As for what happenned with the Czechs, you have to understand the context in which Chamberlain made his peace with Hitler. He wanted at all costs to avoid the head long rush into war that was the cause of WWI where even the Monarchs were unable to stop the war from starting despite some very desperate attempts.

In hindsight, it would have been better to rush off to war against Hitler but would you pay 11 million military dead just to kill 1 guy?
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-29-2004, 21:21 PM   #27 (permalink)
Confed999
Staff Emeritus
 
Confed999's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-03
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,681
Country:
Send a message via AIM to Confed999
Quote:
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers
In hindsight, it would have been better to rush off to war against Hitler but would you pay 11 million military dead just to kill 1 guy?
Me? I would get us all killed, trying to save all the good guys and stop all the bad guys.
Confed999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2004, 22:01 PM   #28 (permalink)
Blademaster
Military Enthusiast
Senior Contributor
 
Join Date: 08-15-03
Posts: 3,255
Then I would ask you, "Who the hell gave you that authority to make such a decision!?? You do not have the right to sacrifice my family for YOUR PERSONAL BELIEFS." I would stand in your way.

This is the kind of moralistic attitude that makes me cringe and want to hit someone.

If you want to act out on your moralistic beliefs, sacrifice your life or ur family but LEAVE MY FAMILY ALONE!!!!!!!!

If I decide or my family decide, then we will do it because IT'S OUR CHOICE.

That is why we vote and why leaders consider the voters. Because it is the voters' lives at stake and leaders have to listen to the will of the voters. That's the best thing and the worst flaw of democracy.

That's why we did not go into Iraq before 9/11. Also that's why we helped Saddam during the Iraq-Iran War because it was the only action we could do without risking voters' lives without their consent. Vietnam taught that painful lesson.
Blademaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 00:16 AM   #29 (permalink)
Officer of Engineers
Military Professional
Moderator
Scotch taster
 
Join Date: 08-06-03
Posts: 17,051
Country:
Except one thing.

No one voted for an Iraq War. That was not part of the election platform of either candidate.
Officer of Engineers is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 03:52 AM   #30 (permalink)
Confed999
Staff Emeritus
 
Confed999's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-10-03
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,681
Country:
Send a message via AIM to Confed999
Quote:
Originally posted by Blademaster
Then I would ask you, "Who the hell gave you that authority to make such a decision!??
Nobody gave me authority, nor do I ask for it.
Quote:
Originally posted by Blademaster
I would stand in your way.
That's fine, I wasn't going that way anyhow. :smoke
Quote:
Originally posted by Blademaster
This is the kind of moralistic attitude that makes me cringe and want to hit someone.
Life is mostly grey for some, it's black and white for others. I've never imposed my views on you, and won't unless I see you commit an evil act, so what do you care?
Quote:
Originally posted by Blademaster
That is why we vote and why leaders consider the voters. Because it is the voters' lives at stake and leaders have to listen to the will of the voters. That's the best thing and the worst flaw of democracy.

That's why we did not go into Iraq before 9/11. Also that's why we helped Saddam during the Iraq-Iran War because it was the only action we could do without risking voters' lives without their consent. Vietnam taught that painful lesson.
As I previously stated, and your example shows, the bad guys have to be fought either way. The lesson I caught from Vietnam is, if you are going to fight a war, fight it like it's a war. Vote however you wish, I'm going to vote for the ones who stand up to the bad guys.
Confed999 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 13:38 PM.


Rochen is the business hosting sponsor of World Affairs Board and a provider of reseller web hosting services.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC8