My grandfather was there a couple months after and said you'd never be able to tell anything happened. I believe he thought it was due to white people's ability to keep moving forward but I have other theories. He died in 2008 before I knew a lot of what I know now. Bummer b/c I have so many questions.
To recap: England declared war on Germany (they say), to protect Poland. (Part of Poland had been stripped from Germany and given to the Poles after WW1 and the poles were treating them horrifically which caused Germany to respond) That was the first declaration of war in WW2 which started it. 17 days after Germany invaded Poland, the USSR did the same and the Germans and the USSR split the country in two. Not a word was spoken of by the English about that. Nor when the USSR took 14 more countries, nor after the war when the USSR occupied Poland after killing any polish nationalists or military folks they could find (Katyn massacre of @14,000 polish officers they tied up and executed was a fact known at the time by the west as USSR atrocities and not a fucking word was spoken to correct the lie that the Germans had done it)
D day as a second front was opposed by most all US and british miltary planners as a damned stupid thing to do. Running an operation right up the Slavics was the best shot as we already had control of the med and had troops in Italy/Sicily heading north, but Stalin opposed that.
Stalin won. So did the jews. Great work to read: Victor Suvorovs "The Chief Culprit". Suvorov, a sydoname for a jewish NKVD agent who fled to the west, wrote it. Worthy read.
Some of the better American fighting there. Let's face it though: D-Day was done to keep Russia from conquering EVERYTHING.
I suppose in connection with the battle achievements of the Western Allies though we can cite Patton. He is known to have conquered more territory faster than anyone else in the history of warfare. Or something like that.
Going to disagree with you there. If d-day was about stopping Soviet incursions of any kind, it would have been much simpler to stop supplying the soviets in the first place.
We're talking less than a year from the end of the war. By that time the Soviet Union outnumbered the Germans 4-1 on the battlefield and the Nazis had been on the defensive essentially since Stalingrad 18 months before. The damage was done.
There is also an American misconception that we simply powered the Soviet military. Even Stalin said we helped a lot. But it can be overstated.
You could even argue the Soviets could have eventually won the war by themselves.
There is also an American misconception that we simply powered the Soviet military. Even Stalin said we helped a lot. But it can be overstated.
That's not even close to being a misconception. They had petroleum and maybe steel but that's about it. They would have all starved to death. The soviets burned their own food supply so the Germans couldn't get to it. They killed all their scientists and engineers off during the red revolution
You could even argue the Soviets could have eventually won the war by themselves.
Not even close. The war was lost due to fighting on too many fronts. The west, the east, the sea, north Africa etc. Had they just had simply the east to contend with, nobody disputes they would have won.
D-Day was done to keep Russia from conquering EVERYTHING.
We had nukes and the Soviets didn't. We had superior manpower and resources and the Soviets were deathly dry on both. We had men willing and wanting to fight across the entirety of Europe, while the Soviet moral was borderline broken.
There was nothing stopping us from wiping the Soviet Union from the face of the planet, and yet we didn't as the jews that control the US and the Soviet Union were and most probably still are allied against us.
The point is that the presence of US and Allied troops forestalled a Soviet advance to the English Channel (who else was going to stop them in devastated Europe? - Russia made it all the way to Paris in the Napoleonic Wars). It certainly beat using nuclear weapons in Europe. Nukes in June 1944 though?
The US had a 4 year gap on the Soviets for operational nukes, more than enough time to force them to capitulate. If you have a reasonable concern that your enemy is going for world domination, which the Soviets were, why wouldn't you just wipe them out when there's 0 consequences? As for damage to Europe, it would barely be anything. The Soviets had their frontline but were out of manpower and moral. Once that was broken it wouldn't have required more than one or two bombs in Soviet cities to end it.
The US's behavior in WW2 makes no sense, unless you operate from the position that the US and USSR were under control by the same group.
It's more like your post makes no sense. There were no nukes in June 1944 or for a good while after that. Without the invasion of Normandy the Soviet Union has a free hand to march to the English Channel. For a time the US had a nuclear monopoly over a USSR that controlled the Eastern Bloc. It didn't force them out. Moreover, it is no secret at all that the Western Allies were trying to limit Communist gains by landing in Normandy and march east.
It's more like your post makes no sense. There were no nukes in June 1944 or for a good while after that.
It's obvious I'm talking about 1945 and onward.
For a time the US had a nuclear monopoly over a USSR that controlled the Eastern Bloc. It didn't force them out.
As none were used, and no attempt at destroying the Soviet Union was ever made. This is my entire point, the USA had the power to bring a permanent end to its supposed arch enemy, and yet refused to do so.
The whole context of the discussion is the non-nuclear period. That is the time before nukes were invented when the Western Allies invaded to keep the USSR from conquering the entirety of the European continent. In counter to this you seem to be saying the US not using nukes on the Soviet Union is evidence of some kind of Jew plot that they controlled both states. This is a bizarre interpretation.
[ + ] GreenSaint
[ - ] GreenSaint 0 points 11 monthsJun 6, 2024 23:58:01 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Doglegwarrior
[ - ] Doglegwarrior 3 points 11 monthsJun 7, 2024 00:55:11 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] NeverHappened
[ - ] NeverHappened 0 points 11 monthsJun 7, 2024 12:32:48 ago (+0/-0)
He died in 2008 before I knew a lot of what I know now. Bummer b/c I have so many questions.
[ + ] beece
[ - ] beece 4 points 11 monthsJun 6, 2024 19:43:50 ago (+4/-0)*
D day as a second front was opposed by most all US and british miltary planners as a damned stupid thing to do. Running an operation right up the Slavics was the best shot as we already had control of the med and had troops in Italy/Sicily heading north, but Stalin opposed that.
Stalin won. So did the jews. Great work to read: Victor Suvorovs "The Chief Culprit". Suvorov, a sydoname for a jewish NKVD agent who fled to the west, wrote it. Worthy read.
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy -2 points 11 monthsJun 6, 2024 18:58:07 ago (+0/-2)
Some of the better American fighting there. Let's face it though: D-Day was done to keep Russia from conquering EVERYTHING.
I suppose in connection with the battle achievements of the Western Allies though we can cite Patton. He is known to have conquered more territory faster than anyone else in the history of warfare. Or something like that.
The real tragedy was the war was fought at all.
Two books that attempt to exonerate Germany:
https://zlibrary-asia.se/book/2530908/4bd305/the-forced-war-when-peaceful-revision-failed.html
Hoggan was an anti-Semite and Harvard Ph.D.
By a German general:
https://books.google.com/books?id=gLSnAgAAQBAJ&printsec=copyright#v=onepage&q&f=false
[ + ] HeyJames
[ - ] HeyJames 6 points 11 monthsJun 6, 2024 18:59:47 ago (+6/-0)
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy -1 points 11 monthsJun 6, 2024 21:05:22 ago (+0/-1)
There is also an American misconception that we simply powered the Soviet military. Even Stalin said we helped a lot. But it can be overstated.
You could even argue the Soviets could have eventually won the war by themselves.
[ + ] HeyJames
[ - ] HeyJames 0 points 11 monthsJun 6, 2024 22:10:49 ago (+0/-0)
That's not even close to being a misconception. They had petroleum and maybe steel but that's about it. They would have all starved to death. The soviets burned their own food supply so the Germans couldn't get to it. They killed all their scientists and engineers off during the red revolution
Not even close. The war was lost due to fighting on too many fronts. The west, the east, the sea, north Africa etc. Had they just had simply the east to contend with, nobody disputes they would have won.
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy 0 points 11 monthsJun 7, 2024 15:57:36 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] s23erdctfvyg
[ - ] s23erdctfvyg 1 point 11 monthsJun 6, 2024 23:10:30 ago (+1/-0)
We had men willing and wanting to fight across the entirety of Europe, while the Soviet moral was borderline broken.
There was nothing stopping us from wiping the Soviet Union from the face of the planet, and yet we didn't as the jews that control the US and the Soviet Union were and most probably still are allied against us.
[ + ] NeverHappened
[ - ] NeverHappened 0 points 11 monthsJun 7, 2024 12:34:50 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] s23erdctfvyg
[ - ] s23erdctfvyg 0 points 11 monthsJun 8, 2024 20:11:16 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy 0 points 11 monthsJun 7, 2024 16:01:40 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] s23erdctfvyg
[ - ] s23erdctfvyg 0 points 11 monthsJun 8, 2024 20:22:03 ago (+0/-0)
If you have a reasonable concern that your enemy is going for world domination, which the Soviets were, why wouldn't you just wipe them out when there's 0 consequences? As for damage to Europe, it would barely be anything. The Soviets had their frontline but were out of manpower and moral. Once that was broken it wouldn't have required more than one or two bombs in Soviet cities to end it.
The US's behavior in WW2 makes no sense, unless you operate from the position that the US and USSR were under control by the same group.
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy 0 points 11 monthsJun 10, 2024 13:24:29 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] s23erdctfvyg
[ - ] s23erdctfvyg 0 points 11 monthsJun 10, 2024 19:35:56 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Joe_McCarthy
[ - ] Joe_McCarthy 0 points 11 monthsJun 11, 2024 13:10:30 ago (+0/-0)