Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: A Few More Thoughts Link: http://www.takimag.com/blogs/article/a_few_more_thoughts1#4281 Post contents: @dylanwaco Thanks for the correction., it is good to have some realism in the assessment of potential allies, contingent enemies and troublesome friends. But, from a historical point of view, I fear that your view of World War II is a bit simplistic. If the war had been between STalin and HItler it would have been wise just to sit it out, and watch. But when World War II started in 1939 it was STalin who sat down and watched (actually he and Hitler shared in another Polish partition, just like Catherine II, Maria Theresa of Austria, and Frederick of Prussia had done in the eighteenth century). By the time Stalin gets in, France has been overrun, Germany has conquered Belgium, Holland, Denmark, Norway, and is forming alliances with Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria and had planned to invade England. To say at this juncture that the US went to war on the side of Stalin is to ignore a big area and a large population Of course, by then they **needed** Stalin. It was a marriage of convenience, but that led to too much self deception of what was really going on. In any case Stalin had one characteristic that made him preferable to Hitler: he knew when to stop, and he had an isolationist slavophile outlook, and isolationists, are more prone to stay put in their lands if only to preserve themselves from the "corruption" that foreigners bring. Sent at: 2008 10 16