Ole Sarge: Your grasp of history is beyond the Pale. You do realize that Japan was not out of the war when Germany surrendered and that the Soviets had pledged to enter that war!

Try reading up on the Potsdam Conference.


Nagy: You neglected to mention to whom you are addressing this, but it seems it might be myself. You are continuing your disappointing habit of labeling various people ignorant of aspects of history, when they either clearly are not, or at least have not shown they are.

Why are you pretending I know nothing about the Potsdam Conference? Why are you telling me that Japan fought on for months after the surrender of Germany? Very few of my worst enemies would make such a false charge. Is it possible that you are assuming all those decisions at Potsdam and before that Yalta, are not to be questioned? Is it possible for a person to be aware of them, yet view them as a simple blueprint for an old fashioned spheres of influence? Gasp, are there historians who do not accept the court history about this period of time, who view the men responsible for those agreements as ARCHITECTS OF ILLUSION, who are not fans of SUCH A PEACE?


Ole Sarge: Lend lease shipments to the USSR stopped on Sept 20 1945. Japan surrendered Sept 2.


Nagy: If this is to me, it only supports my point; the final Lend Lease shipments had nothing to do with winning the war, and everything to do with financing the creation of the Soviet satellite empire. Did I make the mistake of saying that Lend-Lease to the USSR stopped with the surrender of Japan? That is just a slip-up. I contended that the purpose was to finance the reach and consolidation of Soviet arms deep into Europe; a venture that was obviously not yet secure when Japan surrendered.


Ole Sarge: The USSR did not receive 200,000 but rather the United States shipped 152,000 trucks to the Soviet Union. These were shipped throughout the Lend Lease period and were destroyed at a prodigious rate!

Stop making up stuff and presenting them as facts.

One cannot have an intelligent conversation with someone who presents mythology as fact.


Nagy: I believe the mythology is on your part. I only rounded the figure off, but it is far more than your figure. My library is in shambles, and it will be very difficult to find this on the internet, so until I find the time to pore through it, you can pretend you really got me on this. Nevertheless, let us pretend that my figure is totally wrong and yours absolutely correct. The point still stands; the Soviet horse and buggy logistical system was enough to defeat the Germans, but not enough to follow them all the way back to the Fatherland, replacing the Nazi yoke along the way with their own.

However, I will ask you this, even though you prefer to treat me as if I know nothing: A couple years ago I quoted from memory something Franklin D. Roosevelt said to William Bullitt: "I know, Bill, I know it, but somehow, I don't think Stalin is that kind of man. I think if we give him everything he wants and ask nothing in return, noblesse oblige, he won't annex anything, and help us after the war to work for freedom and democracy." Since you clearly know much about this period, and I have not yet managed to rescue my library from the "organization" my wife visited on it, how close was I to getting it verbatim?

The quote resides in the memoirs of William Bullitt, Roosevelt's first ambassador to the USSR. It was summer, 1941, and Bullitt had just presented evidence of Stalin's exterminations of his own people as an argument against making an alliance with Stalin, and sending him any material aid. The UHH user flat out accused me of making it up. Despite your insults, I recognize that you actually have considerable knowledge, and I do find that fascinating. I wondered if you recall this comment, and have rapid enough access to Bullitt's memoirs to verify his verbatim statement.

I also wanted to ask if you think the State Department pros were justified in referring to Joseph E. Davies' MISSION TO MOSCOW as SUBMISSION TO MOSCOW?

phlash46: Not a fan of The Donald, but, given your view of history, perhaps we'll stay home next time and let you muddle through on your own…


Nagy: Are you aware that the Lend-Lease shipments continued to the Soviet Union after the German surrender? Are you also aware that without the half a million Studebaker trucks those shipments included, the Soviet logistical system was primarily horse and buggy?

If you know this, what makes you conclude that the result of World War II was better for everyone, because of the American role in the Allied victory? Nazi Germany was already on its way to certain defeat after Kirsk.

The American aid to Stalin assured that the Hitlerian yoke would be replaced by that of the bank-robbing seminarian. The people of Eastern and Central Europe might indeed have been better off if the US did not finance the rise of a new conqueror.

Jimlast: Nukes? Check the long Bataan march after the MacArthur escape from Corregidor, Phillipines. Cruelty beyond!


Nagy: I see: The actions of some justify collective punishment of others who were not involved. I wonder if you are one of those who would extoll the US as the world capital of freedom, democracy, human rights, and due process. I wonder if you pretend you support the Constitution, or indeed the rule of law.


Ken Hubert: Since you obviously don't like this country, you can always slip back South of the border. I would gladly help you leave.


Nagy: Why don't you attempt to mature intellectually enough to understand the difference between not liking a country and criticizing its policies? Or perhaps, you could take something I said with which you do not agree, and address it, instead of bothering me with your ad hominem garbage? I certainly do not need your moronic advice about where I should live.

richosob: You're right, the estimate of Americans killed in an invasion of the Japanese homeland were up at 250,000 Americans killed and over 5,000,000 Japanese. In my estimation those nukes saved millions of lives.



Nagy: Indeed: the ghost of Japan, starving, with its industrial capacity in ruins, and its armed forces no longer existing as cohesive entities would have inflict three times the casualties that Japan as a world popper did. I would have said that, too, if I had to explain the atrocity of dropping atomic bombs on human targets.