• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What Should the US Have Done After Nazi Germany Fell?

phattonez

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
 
phattonez said:
In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting war with the Soviet Union was an option?
Hey, that hubris ruined Napoleon, ruined Hitler, but third time lucky, huh?
 
Grand Mal said:
Are you suggesting war with the Soviet Union was an option?
Hey, that hubris ruined Napoleon, ruined Hitler, but third time lucky, huh?
Click to expand...

So you were fine with essentially ceding Eastern Europe to Stalin?
 
phattonez said:
In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
Click to expand...
I don't know that anyone could have. I think most countries, and especially Europe, were just done with the war. I dont think the political or national (or international) will was there to stop the Soviets.
 
Grand Mal said:
Are you suggesting war with the Soviet Union was an option?
Hey, that hubris ruined Napoleon, ruined Hitler, but third time lucky, huh?
Click to expand...
Of course war with the Soviets was an option. Just not a palatable one.
 
phattonez said:
So you were fine with essentially ceding Eastern Europe to Stalin?
Click to expand...

What? What do you think I had to do with it?
This is your thread, on a history subject, and you devolve into a personal attack after the first reply? Have you got anything to say about your own topic or is this just you, looking for a squabble?
 
Grand Mal said:
What? What do you think I had to do with it?
This is your thread, on a history subject, and you devolve into a personal attack after the first reply? Have you got anything to say about your own topic or is this just you, looking for a squabble?
Click to expand...

That's not a personal attack, I was just hoping you would provide more substance. Of course another war would have been tough, but it's not as if Soviets owning Eastern Europe for half a century was a neutral option.
 
phattonez said:
That's not a personal attack, I was just hoping you would provide more substance. Of course another war would have been tough, but it's not as if Soviets owning Eastern Europe for half a century was a neutral option.
Click to expand...

Europe was done with war, the entire continent was razed to the ground, it would have been purely the US fighting the Soviets. Do you think it would have been worth millions of American lives to try and take Eastern Europe from the Soviets?
 
Carjosse said:
Europe was done with war, the entire continent was razed to the ground, it would have been purely the US fighting the Soviets. Do you think it would have been worth millions of American lives to try and take Eastern Europe from the Soviets?
Click to expand...

That's what I'm asking. And do you really think it would have taken millions of American lives? The US lost 400,000 in the entirety of WWII. The Soviet Union had 20 million civilian and military deaths. I wonder how much strength they had left.
 
Carjosse said:
Europe was done with war, the entire continent was razed to the ground, it would have been purely the US fighting the Soviets. Do you think it would have been worth millions of American lives to try and take Eastern Europe from the Soviets?
Click to expand...

Depends.

Hundreds of millions went on to die due to influence from Communism.
 
phattonez said:
In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
Click to expand...
What really could have been done? I'm not very familiar with the history of that period, but Stalin simply ignored his Yalta promise to allow free elections in Poland, so a tougher stance in negotiations likely wouldn't have done much. Keeping in mind that the Communist regimes were by-and-large externally imposed and widely despised by their citizens, George Kennan's containment policy was probably the wisest choice: provide support to the European democracies to rebuild themselves and thus eliminate the destitution and hopelessness that extremist ideologies like communism rely on. Kennan correctly predicted that, in time, the inability of Soviet communism to expand combined with its oppressiveness and inefficiency would cause the regimes to collapse in on themselves.
phattonez said:
So you were fine with essentially ceding Eastern Europe to Stalin?
Click to expand...

What do you mean by "ceding?" Again, this isn't something I'm that knowledgeable about, but Stalin's imposition of Communist regimes in Eastern Europe was a brute fact, not something that the Western Allies could have reasonably chosen to prevent. Stalin considered maintaining Soviet domination over Eastern and Central Europe as a vital national security interest, given the devastation that a united and unchecked Germany wrought upon Russia in both world wars, so nothing short of making World War II even bloodier would have driven out the Soviets.
 
phattonez said:
That's what I'm asking. And do you really think it would have taken millions of American lives? The US lost 400,000 in the entirety of WWII. The Soviet Union had 20 million civilian and military deaths. I wonder how much strength they had left.
Click to expand...

Quite a bit, they still vastly outnumbered American forces in Europe. Do you really think making the mistakes of Nazi Germany would go any better for America?
 
phattonez said:
In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
Click to expand...

There was little the US could do at that point. European allies where not going to war with the Soviets, nor where they in much shape to do so even if they wanted to. Without those allies, the US would have been powerless to stop the Soviets. Furthermore, the US at the time was preparing for an invasion of Japan, which was going to be massive in it's requirements of men and material. We simply could not afford to go to war with a country more powerful than any we had faced while getting ready to take part in the biggest amphibious invasion ever in Asia.
 
phattonez said:
That's what I'm asking. And do you really think it would have taken millions of American lives? The US lost 400,000 in the entirety of WWII. The Soviet Union had 20 million civilian and military deaths. I wonder how much strength they had left.
Click to expand...

This is kinda a stupid question. We did not at the time know what exactly would happen with the peace, and we did not know how many casualties would occur if we went to war with the Soviets(the answer would have likely been "alot"). We worked from assumptions, guesses, and best choices. At no point was war with the Soviets probably a best choice based on what was known then(and that remains true today).
 
phattonez said:
In the aftermath of WWII in Europe, Stalin proceeded install a Communist government in Poland, and East Germany remained Soviet controlled. Should the US have done anything differently to not let Eastern Europe fall into the hands of the Soviets?
Click to expand...

Going to war with the Soviet Union was not a good idea. It could've easily resulted in all of Germany going over the Soviets, instead of just the Eastern half.
 
phattonez said:
That's what I'm asking. And do you really think it would have taken millions of American lives? The US lost 400,000 in the entirety of WWII. The Soviet Union had 20 million civilian and military deaths. I wonder how much strength they had left.
Click to expand...

The Soviets had roughly 2 million men reaching military age each year. Even with all their losses, the Soviet Population was still over 160 million. They would've also likely conscripted hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans to fill in their ranks.
 
Last edited:
Carjosse said:
Quite a bit, they still vastly outnumbered American forces in Europe. Do you really think making the mistakes of Nazi Germany would go any better for America?
Click to expand...

The mistake of Nazi Germany was to invade Russia. What I'm talking about is liberating Eastern Europe.
 
Jredbaron96 said:
The Soviets had roughly 2 million men reaching military age each year. Even with all their losses, the Soviet Population was still over 160 million. They would've also likely conscripted hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans to fill in their ranks.
Click to expand...

So why didn't the Soviet Union continue westward?
 
Redress said:
There was little the US could do at that point. European allies where not going to war with the Soviets, nor where they in much shape to do so even if they wanted to. Without those allies, the US would have been powerless to stop the Soviets. Furthermore, the US at the time was preparing for an invasion of Japan, which was going to be massive in it's requirements of men and material. We simply could not afford to go to war with a country more powerful than any we had faced while getting ready to take part in the biggest amphibious invasion ever in Asia.
Click to expand...

Redress said:
This is kinda a stupid question. We did not at the time know what exactly would happen with the peace, and we did not know how many casualties would occur if we went to war with the Soviets(the answer would have likely been "alot"). We worked from assumptions, guesses, and best choices. At no point was war with the Soviets probably a best choice based on what was known then(and that remains true today).
Click to expand...

I guess my point is that Britain and France initially declared war because Hitler invaded Poland. As a result of the war, what did they accomplish? The Soviet Union had Poland. So what did Western Europe get out of the war?
 
phattonez said:
I guess my point is that Britain and France initially declared war because Hitler invaded Poland. As a result of the war, what did they accomplish? The Soviet Union had Poland. So what did Western Europe get out of the war?
Click to expand...

The British had a greed to aid Poland, which did not necessarily mean going to war with Germany. It chose to go to war with Germany to counter German aggression and because Germany was seen as a threat, not because they really cared much about Poland.

Further, it should be noted that in a war between the Allies and Soviets, Poland would have been further decimated. It was in rough shape after WW2 as it was, but it would have been in far worse shape after such a hypothetical war with the Soviets. Likewise Germany and most of the rest of Eastern Europe. Fighting a war that they could not afford, to defend people who would suffer the most in such a war, really makes it a pretty bad idea.
 
phattonez said:
So why didn't the Soviet Union continue westward?
Click to expand...

There was neither a need nor a desire to do so. The main goal of the USSR was the destruction of Nazi Germany. That had been accomplished at that point.
 
phattonez said:
I guess my point is that Britain and France initially declared war because Hitler invaded Poland. As a result of the war, what did they accomplish? The Soviet Union had Poland. So what did Western Europe get out of the war?
Click to expand...

The destruction of Nazi Germany.
 
phattonez said:
So why didn't the Soviet Union continue westward?
Click to expand...

For the same reasons the allies did not want to the Soviets. Stalin greatly expanded his sphere of influence and defeated Hitler, he achieved his goal and did not want to fight the Western Allies.
 
The only way that the USA could have kept the USSR out of Eastern Europe would have been by using nuclear weapons.

My guess is that idea was considered and discarded.

How would the USA beat war crimes charges if it had done that?

In any case Russia is pretty much out of Eastern Europe right now except the part that belongs to Russia.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
The British had a greed to aid Poland, which did not necessarily mean going to war with Germany. It chose to go to war with Germany to counter German aggression and because Germany was seen as a threat, not because they really cared much about Poland.

Further, it should be noted that in a war between the Allies and Soviets, Poland would have been further decimated. It was in rough shape after WW2 as it was, but it would have been in far worse shape after such a hypothetical war with the Soviets. Likewise Germany and most of the rest of Eastern Europe. Fighting a war that they could not afford, to defend people who would suffer the most in such a war, really makes it a pretty bad idea.
Click to expand...

But you do agree with me that in the end, Western Europe actually gained nothing. Germany clearly lost, but the Soviet Union gained all of Eastern Europe. In that sense, wouldn't you say that the Soviet Union won WWII?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom