In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
Are you suggesting war with the Soviet Union was an option?
Hey, that hubris ruined Napoleon, ruined Hitler, but third time lucky, huh?
I don't know that anyone could have. I think most countries, and especially Europe, were just done with the war. I dont think the political or national (or international) will was there to stop the Soviets.In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
Of course war with the Soviets was an option. Just not a palatable one.Are you suggesting war with the Soviet Union was an option?
Hey, that hubris ruined Napoleon, ruined Hitler, but third time lucky, huh?
So you were fine with essentially ceding Eastern Europe to Stalin?
What? What do you think I had to do with it?
This is your thread, on a history subject, and you devolve into a personal attack after the first reply? Have you got anything to say about your own topic or is this just you, looking for a squabble?
That's not a personal attack, I was just hoping you would provide more substance. Of course another war would have been tough, but it's not as if Soviets owning Eastern Europe for half a century was a neutral option.
Europe was done with war, the entire continent was razed to the ground, it would have been purely the US fighting the Soviets. Do you think it would have been worth millions of American lives to try and take Eastern Europe from the Soviets?
Europe was done with war, the entire continent was razed to the ground, it would have been purely the US fighting the Soviets. Do you think it would have been worth millions of American lives to try and take Eastern Europe from the Soviets?
What really could have been done? I'm not very familiar with the history of that period, but Stalin simply ignored his Yalta promise to allow free elections in Poland, so a tougher stance in negotiations likely wouldn't have done much. Keeping in mind that the Communist regimes were by-and-large externally imposed and widely despised by their citizens, George Kennan's containment policy was probably the wisest choice: provide support to the European democracies to rebuild themselves and thus eliminate the destitution and hopelessness that extremist ideologies like communism rely on. Kennan correctly predicted that, in time, the inability of Soviet communism to expand combined with its oppressiveness and inefficiency would cause the regimes to collapse in on themselves.In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
So you were fine with essentially ceding Eastern Europe to Stalin?
That's what I'm asking. And do you really think it would have taken millions of American lives? The US lost 400,000 in the entirety of WWII. The Soviet Union had 20 million civilian and military deaths. I wonder how much strength they had left.
In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
That's what I'm asking. And do you really think it would have taken millions of American lives? The US lost 400,000 in the entirety of WWII. The Soviet Union had 20 million civilian and military deaths. I wonder how much strength they had left.
In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
That's what I'm asking. And do you really think it would have taken millions of American lives? The US lost 400,000 in the entirety of WWII. The Soviet Union had 20 million civilian and military deaths. I wonder how much strength they had left.
Quite a bit, they still vastly outnumbered American forces in Europe. Do you really think making the mistakes of Nazi Germany would go any better for America?
The Soviets had roughly 2 million men reaching military age each year. Even with all their losses, the Soviet Population was still over 160 million. They would've also likely conscripted hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans to fill in their ranks.
There was little the US could do at that point. European allies where not going to war with the Soviets, nor where they in much shape to do so even if they wanted to. Without those allies, the US would have been powerless to stop the Soviets. Furthermore, the US at the time was preparing for an invasion of Japan, which was going to be massive in it's requirements of men and material. We simply could not afford to go to war with a country more powerful than any we had faced while getting ready to take part in the biggest amphibious invasion ever in Asia.
This is kinda a stupid question. We did not at the time know what exactly would happen with the peace, and we did not know how many casualties would occur if we went to war with the Soviets(the answer would have likely been "alot"). We worked from assumptions, guesses, and best choices. At no point was war with the Soviets probably a best choice based on what was known then(and that remains true today).
I guess my point is that Britain and France initially declared war because Hitler invaded Poland. As a result of the war, what did they accomplish? The Soviet Union had Poland. So what did Western Europe get out of the war?
So why didn't the Soviet Union continue westward?
I guess my point is that Britain and France initially declared war because Hitler invaded Poland. As a result of the war, what did they accomplish? The Soviet Union had Poland. So what did Western Europe get out of the war?
So why didn't the Soviet Union continue westward?
The British had a greed to aid Poland, which did not necessarily mean going to war with Germany. It chose to go to war with Germany to counter German aggression and because Germany was seen as a threat, not because they really cared much about Poland.
Further, it should be noted that in a war between the Allies and Soviets, Poland would have been further decimated. It was in rough shape after WW2 as it was, but it would have been in far worse shape after such a hypothetical war with the Soviets. Likewise Germany and most of the rest of Eastern Europe. Fighting a war that they could not afford, to defend people who would suffer the most in such a war, really makes it a pretty bad idea.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?