60 Years Ago This Week

OK, I'll admit that the US would not have been brought to its knees. And, yes, I am aware that back then the US was a net exporter of oil. I am such an old dinosaur that I'll be contributing to the oil fields one day soon myself. Why, I remember when gasoline was 22 cents a gallon, you young whippersnappers! I also remember the price shock of the oil embargo back in the early 70's. We are certainly not a net exporter of oil now, and he who controls the world's petroleum supply, controls the world. If Hitler had been able to secure the Mid East petroleum supply for Germany, that nation would definately have quite a bit of leverage at this point. I guess I am mostly pissed about the stupid war we are currently fighting which seems to have no real basis other than to give us a foothold in the Middle East oil fields. I imagine that had Hitler managed to take all of Europe and Russia, the same uneasy stance as we had during the cold war with the USSR would have been the most likely result.

[djacq75]

Originally Posted by marichiko

I imagine that had Hitler managed to take all of Europe and Russia, the same uneasy stance as we had during the cold war with the USSR would have been the most likely result.

In other words, after 400,000 dead and who knows how many more maimed, we ended up with just about what we would've ended up with anyway. Thank you for getting it!

Originally Posted by djacq75

In other words, after 400,000 dead and who knows how many more maimed, we ended up with just about what we would've ended up with anyway. Thank you for getting it!

Errrr... You're leaving out one minor detail - the 6 million killed in the death camps. Hell alone knows what that number might have been had Hitler conquered Britain and Russia both.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Errrr... You're leaving out one minor detail - the 6 million killed in the death camps. Hell alone knows what that number might have been had Hitler conquered Britain and Russia both.

Not to mitigate Hitler in any way, but Stalin did a fair bit of that himself, more than Hitler even. So it might have been a bit of a wash on that front as well.

Ummmmm... Stalin was most certainly a nasty character and I suspect the extent of his atrocities will never be fully known. Given the information available, though, Hitler out did Stalin nicely and I'm sure he would have out paced him when it came to exterminating the Russian people. At least the Gulags did not prominently feature creamatoriums. And don't forget the Jewish population of Britain who would have been wisps of smoke floating across the Atlantic.

[djacq75]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Errrr... You're leaving out one minor detail - the 6 million killed in the death camps. Hell alone knows what that number might have been had Hitler conquered Britain and Russia both.

For starters, the death camps weren't death camps until after the Wannsee Conference in 1942. What is generally thought of as the Holocaust--the Final Solution--was not proposed or implemented, much less known about, until after the U.S. entered the war, and therefore cannot be used to justify its entry.

Prior to 1941, if you had stacked up Hitler's murders against Stalin's, Hitler would've come out looking like a kitten by comparison. Only with Barbarossa did he begin to catch up to Stalin's record.

But all of this begs the question: is it America's job to police the world? And if so, should we have invaded the USSR in 1932 or 1933 to stop the deliberate starvation of 7 million Ukrainians--rather than extending the red killers diplomatic recognition, as FDR enthusiastically did? If your answer is no, then don't come with any sob stories about the Holocaust. The principle is the same.