75 years ago today

Discussion in 'West Mall' started by ShAArk92, Jun 6, 2019.

  1. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Yes, but for the wrong reasons. Or the treaty may have been written in the context of an Allied defeat. You don't seem to account for that very possible outcome.

    I don't know why you would think that. And how long is "a while?". Keep in mind that Hitler didn't invent the idea of expansion to the East. He just happened to be the one who tried to force it. German nationalists were generally supportive of it, because they favored unifying ethnic Germans (who were spread all over Europe) into a unified German Reich.

    Did it extend the war? I'm not sure how that could be the case unless we're talking about an Allied defeat.

    And you are correct that the war was a factor in the Russian Revolution, but Russia's problems were deeper than the war. Had it ended sooner, those problems wouldn't have gone away.

    The occupations of Germany and Japan were different for two reasons. First, the underlying wars were different. We inflicted complete and utter destruction on the people both physically and psychologically. They were totally broken as human beings. Second, we had a massive occupation force that criminalized the underlying ideology under penalty of being summarily shot and destroyed all symbols of that ideology. That's why those nations folded and became manageable. We've never done anyone even close to that in the Middle East or really anywhere else.

    You do know that's only possible with a naval presence that protects shipping routes, right? We just take it for granted, but the US Navy (and previously the Royal Navy) is the main reason we don't have pirates attacking and robbing trade vessels all over the oceans.

    I'm not talking about understanding the nations. I'm talking about understanding how a nation's leaders perceive the United States and its presence in various areas. Those are separate issues.

    So where should we start? And what's the contingency plan if the areas we abandon turn out not to be the peace-loving choirboys we assumed they were? Keep in mind that the places where we have a military presence are in regions where there has been trouble. We didn't go there for no reason.

    So how often do you think we should patrol those areas?

    What's wrong with putting missile defense in Eastern Europe?

    With the US becoming a major producer of oil, we'll have less need to be involved in the Middle East. However, we can't protect our citizens from Islamic terrorism if we can't go where they are. And again, their religion dictates that they not leave us alone, so conflict between the Islamic world (as divided and diverse as that world may be) and the rest of the world willl always be a major security issue as has been since the 8th century. The problem existed before we had ships in the Persian Gulf and before we had some troops in the Middle East (and we don't have that many nor do we have a presence in many Islamic countries), and it won't go away if we leave. We'll just be in a far weaker position to stop them if and when they decide they want more converts.
    Last edited: Jun 15, 2019
  2. Dionysus

    Dionysus Cocky + Relaxed Admin

  3. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Thanks Dion! I'm 43 today but don't feel a day over 75.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Funny Funny x 1
  4. Dionysus

    Dionysus Cocky + Relaxed Admin

    My fellow Gemini* ... tomorrow’s my b-day

    * I’m not into astrology but I read somewhere that Gemini’s are smart and charming so I kinda want to believe... :idk:
  5. HornHuskerDad

    HornHuskerDad 5,000+ Posts

    ^Happy Birthday, young man! I remember being 43 - I think (since I'm 75 now, that was 32 years ago; as you age, the first two things to go are your memory and - and - I forgot the other one). :smile1:
    • Funny Funny x 3
  6. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada Liquor Man

    Mine was Tuesday the 11th.

    It's a damned Gemini convention around here. And wouldn't you know it? Attendance is double what was projected...
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Hot Hot x 1
  7. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    Well, a happy early birthday to you! And yes, Geminis are clearly smart, charming, and all other good things. Never known a Gemini who sucked.
  8. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada Liquor Man

  9. Dionysus

    Dionysus Cocky + Relaxed Admin

    Happy belated young Sangre, both of you
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Vol Horn 4 Life

    Vol Horn 4 Life 5,000+ Posts

    Cancer here....I'm a lover not a fighter.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  11. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada Liquor Man

    Any chance of banning this guy?
    • Funny Funny x 2
  12. Dionysus

    Dionysus Cocky + Relaxed Admin

    I’ll check with the board
  13. Sangre Naranjada

    Sangre Naranjada Liquor Man

  14. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    You're right I wasn't thinking about that. Not sure Germany winning was any worse than the Allies winning in terms of any treaties. I simply don't know. Remember Germany started the war (which is on them) in order to protect Austro-Hungary from a Russian invasion due to the conflict between Serbian nationalists and the Austro-Hungarians. Germany didn't enter the war to expand. Maybe they would have done so but they would have had the Russians to contend with still.

    What I do know is that the war was at a stalemate before the US entered. If things proceeded similarly there would have been a more equitable negotiation as no one had truly won the war.

    Your comment about Germans wanting to unite all ethnic Germans, I will have to take your word for it. I don't doubt it. Creating true nation states was the aim back then.

    It could have ended sooner as a negotiated peace after a stalemate. Many historians think that was the leading possibility.

    Russian was a bad place to be under the Czars just like it is now. The issue I am talking about is that a small group took over the Russian government in Feb 1918 because the Russian army was fighting a war. If the Russian army is Russia it is very unlikely that the take over occurs. People had tried before, and am sure afterwards, but the rebels picked their timing for a reason. Some of those rebels were liberal democrats. It wasn't until Oct that the Bolsheviks took over.

    There are also great cultural differences that led to Germany and Japan capitulating. Afghanistan and Iraq are still tribal cultures. Defeating a strong man in a capital city doesn't mean anything to the tribes.

    Also, we destroyed Iraq pretty completely. I don't think you can say the US didn't try to dominate through force and intimidation. The estimates are that the conflict has killed around a million Iraqis. The only thing that pacified them was paying off their Sunni tribal leaders to fight the others. It worked.

    The other factor is that it is one thing outlaw a political party in Germany. They still had nonliberal parties just not Nazis. There was cultural similarity that helped. With Japan it was more difficult to end emperor worship. All we had to do was drop 2 nukes. If only we would have dropped a nuke on Iraq or Afghanistan maybe they would renounce Islam. In Iraq we did end the Baathite party, so we tried.

    There are multiple ways to skin a cat. US global hegemony isn't the only way to protect shipping lanes. But I agree there needs to be protection against pirating.

    Don't know we need to.

    Nothing if you don't mind the reaction by Russia. The military knows that countries in Eastern Europe into Russia are vulnerable and the countries all know it too. They also know that Russia deals with that vulnerability by extending their effective borders to protect Moscow. As NATO moved east it threatened Russia. A missile system further threatened them. As a reaction they took Crimea and Eastern Ukraine. They did wrong. But it was expected or should have been expected by our military if they knew their history. That is all I am saying. We feel more comfortable when the US extends power but some countries don't. Most can't do anything about it, some can. Russia can do a little and they did.

    I am aware of Islamic doctrine and history. I know they are a threat.

    My question is if Islamic countries want more converts why is it the sole responsibility of the US stop the conquest? Also, is a military conquest really the biggest threat from the Muslim world? I would say it is mass immigration into Europe and setting up areas governed by Sharia. The violent threat is terrorism not conquest. So I don't get what your point is.

    For the oil issue. The Islamic and totalitarian countries who are major oil producers still have to sell their oil if they want money. That means they have to sell to the US and Europe. That means we have to make some concessions to them at times, even military cooperation. But I still don't see how that requires the US to be THE power in every area of the world.
  15. Monahorns

    Monahorns 2,500+ Posts

    • Like Like x 1
  16. Mr. Deez

    Mr. Deez 10,000+ Posts

    I was traveling when you posted your last comment and forgot to respond. I'll get to it soon.

Share This Page