Wednesday, October 17, 2007

Should the U.S. Have Joined Hitler and Attacked Russia in World War 2?

Question: Should the U.S. have joined Hitler early in World War 2 and attacked Russia?

This was seriously proposed early in the war (1939-1940) when Germany was slaughtering Poland, France, and other western European countries. Even at that time, we had many right-wingers in the U.S. more opposed to Communist Russia than to Fascist Germany. The theory is that, together, the U.S. and Germany would have easily defeated Russia and thus avoided the Cold War which occurred after World War 2. Also, many at the time thought Hitler was invincible and that we might as well join him.

But that is all wrong! Stalin was a monster and communism was bad but Hitler was an even worse monster and fascism was just as bad as communism. No, we did the right thing providing materials to Russia as much as we could until we actually were forced to enter the war.

It should also be pointed out that, even had we had formed an alliance with Hitler, and destroyed Russia, Hitler would likely have broken the alliance at some point and attacked us. Hitler was not know for keeping his word!

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Are you retarded? Compared to Stalin, Hitler's crimes where small. What most people don't reliaze is that Stalin had both Concentration camps and Death camps bigger then any thing tha Nazi's could ever hope to need. Plus given todays problem in regards to illegal immagration and oil, We should have joined Nazi Germany and the break down could have been: Germany- Europe, Africa, and the middle east.
Japan- Asia and aulstrila
America- The america's.
This would have stoped several problems that plaque the world today.

theidiotboy said...

no. although they were both against the comunist state they were not close enough(by far) to become allies i think. it would have (though) been very useful for the US to have two of its potential future enemies in war(witch proved out to ocurr).
stalin was an animal. a crazy animal thats for sure. still im damn right against what the other blogger said.

Panos Kakaviatos said...

Look at the numbers rather than at moral arguments. Stalin's army dwarfed Hitler's. At the beginning of Hitler's stupid invasion, he had some 20,000 T-34 tanks, for example: far better than anything Hitler could put on the battlefield until 1943. Hitler was bound to lose, and lose big as he did, against Russia. Records also show that Stalin had plans to invade all of Europe, as well, but Hitler beat him to the punch with his treacherous invasion. The Allies could not have fought against Stalin because it would have been a long, horrendous slog, and not very popular, coming after a long conflict already. It would have been the last thing the people wanted in the Democracies fighting the war. On the other hand, we did have the bomb, and that, along with a fairly strong Western military presence, stopped Stalin from going any further.