Thursday, 23 August 2012

Yalta

If you really want to piss-off a Pole, just say 'Yalta'. Even today, Poles view the US and British betrayal of their nation with a resentment so deep-seated it's hard to get them to even talk about it without half a litre of Zubrowka and apple juice under their belt. Roosevelt, with all the ardour of a Labrador bitch in heat and all the intelligence of a Rottweiler, offered his crippled frame for Stalin to abuse at will, and with it the freedom of the whole of western Europe. In vain did Churchill rage against Roosevelt's infatuation with Big Joe, in vain did he argue for a firm US / UK stand against Soviet expansionism. But Roosevelt was not only an extremely stupid man, he was stubborn with it. This was the same klutz who had green-lighted the Morgenthau Plan. And he was so in love with Uncle Joe that he betrayed the Polish nation for a rictus smile and a pat from his master. It's just bad luck for the UK that the Poles hold us equally guilty - despite Roosevelt's threats to chop us off at the knees economically unless we agreed with him. 

So it will be with great interest that I will look at the complete US archives relating to Katyn when they are released on 10th September. By Yalta, the Russian responsibility for the massacre should have been well established by intelligence agencies; the question is, how much did Roosevelt know, and how much did he choose to ignore?

13 comments:

Rush-is-Right said...

FDR was just as big a fucking idiot as Woodrow Wilson who took us all up the arse in 1918.

The are, jointly the worst ever POTUS until modern times.

G. Tingey said...

Rossevelt was DYING at Yalta.
I think one should make allowances for that?
Your hate and spite against a great man is vile - he wanted IN to WWII in 1940, but the fascist-fronts (like Henry Ford) in the USA would not let him.
Worst POTUS since Buchanan?
Easy ... Geo W. Shrub.

cuffleyburgers said...

Both of the above - FDR did go out on a limb to get the US into the war, but with hindsight one suspects his motives were more to do with being there to pick up the pieces of the collapsing British Empire, and his performance at Yalta would seem to confirm that.

Could we have won without them? Yes I think we probably would, but this was only possible after STalingrad, and curiously it is about then that the US got involved as well.

Anonymous said...

Pre WW2 the Americans were heading for a double-dip... It's not like he didn't brew up the confrontation with the Japanese. His antipathy towards the Brits and Churchill is well documented as is his avarice about the British Empire. In all quite a toxic brew. Bled us dry with cash on the nail before putting us on tick - never made Stalin pay for 'owt and let his crony Hopkins secretly give Stalin teh A-bomb - luvverly chap.

Roosevelt's administration looks a bit of a re-run of the Republican side in the Spanish civil war = riddled with Stalin's boys...

http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/the-treachery-of-harry-hopkins/

Weekend Yachtsman said...

Not just Poles - don't forget the Cossacks.

Much evil was done at the end of the war, but I guess we were exhausted and broke.

It is never good to judge the actions of others, in other times, by our own standards and with the hindsight of sixty years of sort-of peace and ease.

But it's hard to forgive the deviousness and brutality shown to these people by supposedly honourable British officers - some of whom later became highly-respected members of our top establishment, even Prime Ministers.

Bill Quango MP said...

Can't believe what I'm reading.
Without FDR there would be no UK, never mind British empire.

British empire could have defeated Nazi Germany WITHOUT the USA?

How so? Who would we borrow 1000% of GDP from? Where did Stalin get the trucks to transport his troops from the middle of the USSR where they were waiting for the 1942 nazi summer offensive that never was , over to Stalingrad?
Where does Stalin get the locomotives,grain,shoes,boots,ammunition, jeeps,telephones,typewriters etc without them being GIFTED -FREE _GRTIS- from the USA.

And there was no 'On-tick'. Not ever.
If you want to believe our post war politicians who for decades never made clear where the POST WAR US loans, on the world's most generous terms, came from, fine. Keep your eyes closed.

But we in the UK were GIFTED- Free- No Charge - Gratis and for nothing every single gallon of fuel,sack of grain, Browning .303 round, tinned fruit crate, Sherman tank, truck, Transport aircraft, ship repair facility, Liberty ship, escort aircraft carrier, C-47 transport, packet of fags and silk stocking that came from the USA after the lend lease was signed.
It was ALL FREE!

I'm just appalled that one of the greatest US presidents, in terms of how he helped the British Empire, Even if he was keeping an eye on the end game, gets such a mauling from such a normally balanced and knowledgeable blog and readership.

Rush-is-Right said...

"Without FDR there would be no UK, never mind British empire."

Bill, here's the news. There is no British Empire, and that was one of the main war aims of FDR.

And as to the bloke who suggested that FDR wanted to bring the USA into the war almost from the start is he suggesting that Pearl Harbour was an inside job? If had wanted it so, the US would have been in from any time he liked. He held out until he had no choice, meanwhile profiteering from such scams as lend-lease.

Raedwald said...

Bill; as Prof David Reynolds remarked "the consequence of becoming the arsenal of democracy meant that the United States pulled itself out of its depression in such a spectacular way that the war time draft is the biggest of all the New Deal work relief programmes. You put all these men out of unemployment and into the armed forces and you generate all this hardware which is the basis for America’s industry in the post-Cold War period. You know it’s the development of California, the whole West Coast, all the military industrial complex stuff out there."

Roosevelt's commitment to destroy the British Empire - including a suggestion to Stalin at Tehran that India would benefit from being governed 'on the Soviet model' - blinded him to Stalin's intentions. A very stupid man with a misplaced belief in his ability to charm a dictator with the blood of millions on his hands.

No good word for FDR from this quarter, Bill.

thumrat said...

Without the U.S. we would have been not much more than an irritant to Germany.

In fact, we may well have bowed out because we damn well couldn't have fed ourselves without America.

Whatever the final cost it would have been cheap at twice the price.

G. Tingey said...

cuffleyburgers
USA entry to WWII - 7/8 December 1941
Battle of Stalingrad Nov-Jan 1942/3
About a year's gap, so NO.

Anon
& the Franco side in the Spanish Civil War?
Pot meet Kettle!
Furthermore, Stalin's front-men DIVIDED the legitimate republican side - it is entirely possible that they HELPED Franco to win, in the final analysis - oh dear.

Weekend Yachtsman
Totally agree - which must be a first!

Agree also with Bill Quango
We must remember that Land-Lease was cancelled, by Truman, on very bad advice - & he stated, later, that this had been a mistake, but was too late to rectify.

Rush-is-Right
( your nom de plume suggests insanity, incidentally)
NO, of course Pearl was not an inside job?
FDR was really concerned about the Nazis, and their US supporters, like the sforementioned H Ford.

thumrat
I have heard the expression, re our position in Oct-Nov 1942 as "hanging on by our eyelashes"
Which adequately expresses the problem.


Peripherally, what really annoys me, having been born almost exactly 9 months after VE day ... after we had spent all our treasure & a great deal of blood, is seeing "the shadow taking another shape & growing again" (locate that quote - I know where it comes from, of course)
In the form of what is usually called "isalmism" or "khalifa" - a pure new (old) way to replace the corrupt decadent West, and kill all the jews & put women into Kinder, Kirche, K├╝che positions and leabensruam and .....

Anonymous said...

There's still much about WW2 that is touchy obviously - some myths are collapsing before others.

My present favorite - and it concerns Poland - is that "Germany invaded Poland" - which is distortion by omission - big time.

Germany and Russia invaded Poland, Stalin taking the larger part of the territory - the Wehrmacht and the Red Army held joint victory parades. Stalin decided to try annexing the Finns at the same time and we sided with the Scandinavians ... I'm unsure of the detail of FDR's view on this but IIRC he essentially assented to Joe's expansionism. When in Russia a couple of years ago I read in local sources that the Kremlin archivists had found a plan by Stalin for westward expansion in the early 1940's...

Quite unpalatably putting Adolf in the role as saviour of Europe... Which is going too far for me personally.


Anonymous said...

G. Tingey

note I didn't infer that Stalin's boys were successful - merely that entryism was a large part of Stalin-Soviet policy at the time. Many of the blunderers got the bullet... Most American historians are desperate to gloss over much of this - incidents like the story of George Racey Jordan jarr with the myth....

G. Tingey said...

Essential reading:
Bullock's "Hitler & Stalin, Parallel Lives"
&
W H Shirer, of course.