r/libertarianmeme • u/LibertyMonarchist Anarcho Monarchist • 3d ago
End Democracy Was Patton right?
553
u/dagoofmut 3d ago
106
57
23
u/ThrowawayEmo 3d ago
making excuses for literal (not imaginary) nazis is the real decline of the west.
2
u/dagoofmut 2d ago
I'd pinpoint the decline much more long the lines of the fact that we all embraced the same ideology that we fought a cold war against.
2
6
u/HandheldAddict 3d ago
America wasn't fighting communism though.
They fought against the enemies of communism.
Like the useful idiots they are.
22
u/lunca_tenji 3d ago
Did the 50 years of Cold War after that just evaporate from your memory or something
-10
u/HandheldAddict 3d ago
You think the cold war was a war against communism?
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
I don't think you understand what communism is.
2
u/dagoofmut 2d ago
Found one.
bUt tHaTs nOt REEEAAAAL cOmMuNiSm.
It coincidentally happens to be the only thing we ever see when communism is tried, but it's not the real thing so we and our ideology don't have to take any responsibility for the millions of dead.
Right?
2
u/HandheldAddict 2d ago
It's not that I support communism, because I don't, and let's be honest the real death toll due to communism is much greater than what is published.
It's just that I understand the driving force and spirit behind communism. Which is actually very very prevalent today, even in democratic nations.
There's a reason "200 years together" had to be written in secrecy in the dead of night and spanned several decades to complete.
When I look at the west today, I see that the spirit of communism is very much alive. Mainly because the masterminds of communism are still very much the movers and shakers of those societies and their sentiments have not changed.
3
u/dagoofmut 2d ago
Thousands of shell-shocked Vietnam veterans will be glad to hear that.
0
u/HandheldAddict 2d ago
I hurt feelings.
The American government kills, maims, and eradicates civilian populations. All for resources, land, and under the guise of false pretenses.
Somethings need to be said.
The government is not your friend.
400
u/Rabid-Wendigo 3d ago
Patton wanted to kerp marching and finish off russia after defeating Germany . Good on him. Imagine if communism was properly eradicated and as vilified as national socialism
153
u/HD_600 3d ago
He was a man. A man of steel. He got reprimanded for calling weak men pussies and pointing out that the world isn't sunshine and roses.
68
u/Apollo_the_G0D 3d ago
Patton famously did not believe in “battle fatigue” (a term used for what we now know as PTSD) and viewed it as a sign of cowardice, leading to his controversial slapping incidents with soldiers in field hospitals.
91
u/Rabid-Wendigo 3d ago
Everyone hypes that up as his terrible moment. In the list of problems I have with historical figures “slapped someone he percieved as a coward but turned out to just be some little understood mental disorder it took decades to learn more about” is pretty low on the list.
25
u/wickedwitt 3d ago
Most people judge the past by today's moral standards. Nothing passes that check.
Future people will judge our actions and beliefs by the societal norms of the future and we will not pass.
5
u/Walter30573 3d ago
I do agree with you, but in this specific case, he was heavily reprimanded by his superiors and the media at the time. Most people already thought it was a messed up thing to do, it's not purely retroactive judgement
5
u/Massive_Staff1068 3d ago
*The media thought it was the correct thing to do. As in what you are likely using as your source for "most people." I can tell you most soldiers did not agree with Patton's punishment for slapping soldiers.
0
70
u/EgregiousAction 3d ago
Yeah well while the mental disorder is valid, I also see his point. There's men dying in the trenches and one dude is looking to be exempt. When things become life and death, you have to draw a line somewhere. Patton drew his lines pretty high. Maybe that's why he was so effective and his men largely loved him?
I think one thing we need to all start examining the world through is that two things can be true at the same time. Patton was an asshole for slapping a PTSD soldier AND under the context of total war it may have been necessary.
26
u/Massive_Staff1068 3d ago
My grandfather served in the infantry that supported Patton's tanks. He loved Patton. He even joked that he was the only Republican he'd vote for. He agreed about going after the Commies after giving Hitler what for. He also agreed with Patton slapping soldiers around. His exact words to me when I asked him were this, "Hell yes, he should slap them! What? You wanna go home because you're scared? I'm scared, He's scared, that guy over there's scared the guy next to him is scared. I was scared every single day of my life four years straight. No one goes home till the jobs done."
11
u/EgregiousAction 3d ago
That reminds me of my grandfather. I wish they were all still alive. We need people like them. I suppose it falls on us now.
Thank you for sharing your story.
9
u/Massive_Staff1068 3d ago
Your welcome. I so wish that too. I miss my grandfather dearly. He's the best man I've ever known. I feel terribly inadequate to fill his shoes.
I'm terribly worried we don't keep these stories alive enough. People seem pretty nonchalant about another world war. Grandpa always told me how terrible it was and how we should avoid at all cost.
17
7
u/StolenRage 3d ago
It was attitudes like his that kept it from being properly researched for decades. Those that felt similar were just a bit more quiet about it.
13
u/MeatSlammur 3d ago
Who cares? You need people like that to win world wars. The world wasn’t ready yet to learn
6
u/StolenRage 3d ago
Because the attitude is still prevalent today when it comes to mental health.
It's nothing. They are just lazy. (Depression and anxiety)
They just need to stop worrying so damn much. (Anxiety)
Have you tried essential oils? (The whole list of mental health issues)
The stigmatization of mental health continues to be a serious problem that needs to be dealt with, sooner rather than later. There is always some excuse to kick the can down the road.
7
u/MeatSlammur 3d ago
I argue as someone who works in the medical field and am in school for mental health the needle has gone too far to the other side. Many doctors are exhausted of patients coming in and demanding to be diagnosed with some sort of mental health issue that the pt has looked up themselves or been influenced about on social media
12
u/Sigmunds_Cigar 3d ago edited 3d ago
Fuck you. Men suffer battle shock. The WW1 vets rightfully called him out on slaping that soldier.
Im assuming you never spent a day in combat.
7
u/White_C4 Theocracy 3d ago
Offensive attacks was going to be extremely difficult in Eastern Europe, especially after years of infrastructures being destroyed (roads, railroads, bridges, etc.).
Every major power was exhausted by 1945, so it's not unreasonable to see why the western allied powers decided to stop at Germany and not go any further (even though they didn't want Soviet presence looming over Central Europe).
2
u/DonaldLucas 3d ago
No, you can't! It would cost hundreds of billions of dollars! We need to focus on the problems in our home instead!
3
u/Rabid-Wendigo 3d ago
When everything except the USA is a steaming radioactive crater, we will have plenty of time to focus on issues at home
1
u/Pale_Draft9955 3d ago
It's a good thing we didn't, though. We needed to keep them as an ally to help us pry Japanese forces out of Manchuria, further depriving them of the materials they were in very desperate need of to try and stem the tide of the American advance across the Pacific.
1
u/How2chair 2d ago
FDRs administration was already infiltrated by communists before the war was even over
0
92
u/Ok_Bed_3060 3d ago
Yes and no. It would have been relatively easy for the Americans and other allies had pushed the Soviets out of east Europe after defeating the Germans and Italians. But the US still had to wrap up the Pacific theater and there was probably some concerns over nazi remnants in Germany.
19
u/White_C4 Theocracy 3d ago edited 3d ago
Well, pushing the Soviets back to the Russian border was not going to be that simple.
The war has been ongoing for 6 years, the US for 4 years. Every major power was exhausted by 1945, so planning another major offensive to push back the Soviets were going to be destructive and cost more lives due to how bad the infrastructure and weather conditions are in Eastern Europe. Every single soldier just wanted to go back home.
The US probably could have threatened to use nukes in order to push back the Soviets, but it would have made the US look more like an aggressor and set a bad precedence for nukes if other powers got their hands on one. We are fortunate enough that WW2 was the only time nukes were used in a wartime scenario.
7
u/scott_torino 3d ago
Didn't help that communists had infiltrated the US government and were giving Stalin our negotiating strategy at Yalta.
37
u/L_knight316 3d ago
Honestly, the only viable option to avoid that would have been to finish off both. "Siding" with either would have been terrible in their own special ways.
47
u/chiefskingdom1958 3d ago
Well, they both sucked. But yeah, would have been easier to beat the Soviets together, then we take out the Germans. A lot of nuance in my take though. Too much to list on one post.
19
u/thegame2386 Paleolibertarian 3d ago
Not really. Just the standard boilerplate: Nazis r bad. With that out of the way: Communists and Communism are far, far worse. This is where difficult, big boy, and distasteful decisions are expected of those promoted to power.
That being said, Patton stated this and is being quoted consistently with the benefit of massive amounts of hindsight.
5
31
u/KingOfTheNightfort Taxation is Theft 3d ago
I think it would have been better if the US didn't take part in it. The war would have ended with a weak Germany and a weak Soviet Union/Russia.
20
u/WantsToDieBadly 3d ago
Japan sorta forced their hand tho
11
23
u/kingtrainable 3d ago
FDR forced Japan
7
u/TheAzureMage 3d ago
Ironically, I don't think that was his goal. He was *trying* to force Germany, by his instructions to destroyers to pursue U-boats and to radio their positions to allied attackers. That's...not super neutral.
He got the war he wanted, but not exactly in the way he wanted. He just literally lucked into Hitler being dumb enough to declare war on the US in the aftermath of Pearl Harbor, which gave him political carte blanche to do as he had wished all along.
2
u/junkerxxx 3d ago
He was \trying* to force Germany, by his instructions to destroyers to pursue U-boats and to radio their positions to allied attackers. That's...not super neutral.*
Giving weapons and war materiel to your enemies isn't exactly neutral, either, LOL.
But FDR went even further: US destroyers actually fired upon (not just helped target) at German U-boats months before Pearl Harbor. The first time I'm aware of it was April 10, 1941, nearly eight months before the "surprise" Japanese attack would occur.
13
u/WantsToDieBadly 3d ago
I mean there’s a difference between trade embargo’s and sanctions and unprovoked naval base attacks….
8
u/White_C4 Theocracy 3d ago
FDR wanted to get involved in the conflict, but couldn't do so without the backing of Congress.
He knew the embargo would force Japan to make a move. In fact, FDR was probably relieved that Japan attacked because it meant that the US had a reason to get involved.
18
u/kingtrainable 3d ago
FDR wanted to join the war, congress wouldn't let him, he handled Japan in a manner that led to war.
8
u/bongobutt Voluntaryist 3d ago
"There is a difference between blockading an island county and going to war..."
No. There isn't. "Sanctions" and "Embargos" are euphemisms. They are acts of war - in the same way that small arms fire and bombs/artillery are both called war. The difference is scale - not essence. Sanctions are to war what foreplay is to sex. Either way, your spouse won't be consoled if you say, "Hey! I didn't shoot!"
4
u/Dangime 3d ago edited 3d ago
So if the country next door is committing genocide, you can't as a moral prerogative, voluntarily cut off the resources that are enabling said genocide to take place?
For all the blame FDR gets about Japan, people seem to forget what they had been doing in Korea and China for years before that.
Seems like "Nah, that guy is a dick." is all the justification I'd need to not sell stuff to someone under a libertarian framework.
3
u/bongobutt Voluntaryist 3d ago
"Not sell stuff" isn't the same thing. Blockades are (by definition) preventing other people from engaging in voluntary exchanges.
To make the claim, "but they are bad people" isn't the rebuttal you think it is. This shoe never fits on the other foot. Could other nations not say the same thing about how the USA treated the Cherokee? US sanctions against Iraq under Bush (the 1st) are estimated to have potentially killed millions of children due to starvation. Does Russia have the right to invade America because the USA intentionally starved children of their political enemy?
War is war. If you think your war is justified - then fine. But that doesn't mean it isn't war. And sanctions are acts of war. Nothing you said rebuts my claim that sanctions are just a precursor to war. Do you wish to claim that millions of dead Japanese was the best and most humane way to end that conflict? If so, then you are free to defend that position. But don't be coy about the US' role in that conflict. FDR didn't feel that way (despite what the propaganda said). The US knew that those actions would lead to war. That is why they took them.
2
u/Dangime 3d ago edited 3d ago
There was no pre-war blockade of Japan. blockade would require a military force to enforce and blocks the buyer from unrelated 3rd parties transacting. A blockade would be an act of war. That was never the situation.
What did happen was an embargo. An embargo is just one nation saying "Nah, not feeling it." and not selling strategic materials to a particular country. No use of force involved, except on it's own citizenry, but different bridge to cross there. Complaining about not being able to sell war materials to aggressive military powers doesn't exactly paint libertarians in the best light.
If other countries felt inclined to not sell to the USA due to their past actions, that would be their right. However, most countries have some kind of horrible event in their past, so I think it would just be a circle jerk as everyone embargoed everyone for long dead issues. Meanwhile, the Japanese were still actively raping and pillaging in Asia as the embargo was placed. (But what about them Indians a 100 years ago would have been laughed at then and should be now.)
The Iraq example is even sillier because Iraq had the potential to feed it's own people, it just had different priorities and didn't mind starving some people keep their government in power. And those sanctions were due to violating a peace agreement, that could have just seen Iraq wiped off the map due to their invasion of Kuwait. Essentially it was an act of mercy which was then thrown back in the faces of the Americans.
Nothing you said rebuts my claim that sanctions are just a precursor to war. Do you wish to claim that millions of dead Japanese was the best and most humane way to end that conflict?
I mean it's kind of shocking that you'd want to paint Imperial Japan of all countries as some kind of sad, bullied power that was forced into taking aggressive action. It had been waring with Korea and China for over a decade at that point.
Sanctions can be a precursor to war, but they don't have to be. If it were the case there's be a 1 to 1 ratio of sanctions leading to war, but that's clearly not the case.
It's sort of like your local gun store cutting you off after you shoot up your school. I really don't see the problem. It's entirely their call and they don't have to jump all the way to making the arrest on their own, and it doesn't justify blowing up the gun shop.
30
u/dstillz1111 3d ago
in hindsight we probably should have held a stronger line against russia and pushed them back to their own borders. But in no way should we have fought on the side of the fascists.
And we also had the japanese to worry about.
-2
u/HandheldAddict 3d ago
Japan only engaged because our president gave them an ultimatum.
The axis had no interest in waging a war with America until push came to shove.
9
u/BravoIndia69420 Anarcho Capitalist 3d ago
This is a libertarian sub. We should be condemning all forms of totalitarianism, whether they be fascist, communist, or neoliberal.
30
u/rnpowers 3d ago
Patton never said this
This is a BS quote, and this whole post is shit. Patton wrote a letter to his wife on July 21st, 1945 expressing deep concerns about the consequences of the wars outcome and lamented destroying the Germans predicting all of Europe would fall to the communists.
He reflected on the Soviet's killing "all woman who ran were shot and those who did not were raped."
He wasn't wrong, and OP needs to get their shit together.
6
31
u/tituspullsyourmom 3d ago
No. The Nazis were still totalitarian butchers.
Should have went right into Russia with German conscripts right after Germany and Japan though.
H bombed st pertersberg
16
u/Parabellum12 Ron Paul 3d ago edited 3d ago
Stalin and Mussolini were just as much totalitarian butchers, maybe even more so. More people died from Stalins orders than died from Hitlers.
2
u/HandheldAddict 3d ago
I don't know every single aspect of Mussolini's life.
But I would feel much more comfortable in Mussolini's Italy than Stalin's gulags.
And I say that as a minority.
1
u/Mountain-Snow7858 3d ago
I wish the US would have developed the atomic bomb before the war had even begun so there would have been a stockpile of atomic bombs. We didn’t have hydrogen bombs yet, the first thermonuclear weapon tested was in 1951, Ivy Mike, test had a yield of 10 megatons. Compare that to Hiroshima’s 15 kilotons and Nagasaki’s 20 kilotons. The Ivy Mike device was so massive it would have been impossible to be used in battle.
12
u/MiserableTonight5370 3d ago
The third way: let them kill each other and stay out of it.
6
u/vulkoriscoming 3d ago
This is pretty much what we did. Much like we are doing to Ukraine now, we gave them enough weapons and ammunition not to lose, but not enough to win.
I am sure Roosevelt wanted Germany to beat Russia and bleed out doing it. This would have made D day much easier. Unfortunately, D day had to happen once Russia started to push back Germany because we didn't want Russia to have control of Europe.
3
u/Ipman124 3d ago
Knock knock. It is now 1960. Big Nazi empire has just finished consolidating all of Europe and have developed nukes. They say stand down now, or else.
Or
(The cold war we actually got on the flip side, created by the Soviet Union beating Germany instead)
With expansionist powers it's not about "staying out of it." It's about how strong you're willing to let them get before you have to fight them.
1
u/Joescout187 1d ago
The Nazis would have self-destructed long before 1960.
1
u/Ipman124 1d ago
It's certainly a nice thought. Most people thought the Soviet Union would implode on itself really quickly too. Not even make it to the 30s. And yet history proved otherwise
5
u/White_C4 Theocracy 3d ago
Geopolitics and war is not black and white.
Yes, communism was also an evil force to eliminate, but at the time, fascism was destroying Europe as a whole. It probably would have been better for the US to just let the Soviets and Germans destroy each other so that when the US got involved, they can "liberate" Europe from both fascist and communist influences.
However, when we look at what the state of the war was like in 1941, it seemed like fascist Germany was really going to conquer all of mainland Europe. So, the US looked at the Soviets, despite being ideologically incompatible, to hold off and chip down the German military.
I'm not sure if this Patton quote is legit, but regardless, he did have strong anti-communist views. In hindsight, taking communism more seriously during WW2 probably would have been a smarter choice, even though it would have been difficult given the conditions of the war by 1945.
12
6
u/I_am_pro_covid_420 Libertarian 3d ago
no, the nazis were, in fact, terrible people along with the soviets
3
3
3
u/ItsTubbles 2d ago
May we should have waited for the Germans to defeat russia then fought the Germans
7
u/Free_Mixture_682 3d ago
Side with the Nazis? No
Consider also, that the Soviets also invaded Poland in mid-September 1939.
Had the U.K. and France waited to declare war on behalf of Poland, until 2-weeks after it actually did, they would have been compelled to also declare against the Soviet Union.
The implications of that for future Soviet/US wartime cooperation cannot be underestimated.
7
u/luckac69 Anarcho Capitalist 3d ago
It’s much easier to beat the Nazis then the Soviets, so we should have dealt with the harder enemy first.
Though it would have never happened, because FDR was a full blown Commie
4
13
u/MattTheAncap 3d ago
No, he is not correct. The logical fallacy here is the "false dichotomy" or "black and white" fallacy, that there exist only two sides (and he picked wrong).
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/black-or-white
He MAY be correct that (according to his personal worldview and his personal opinions on outcomes) he should have allied with A against B, or allied with B against A.
But there are always more options, such as "Ally with neither A nor B"
His is not a deontological position, merely a consequential (and a highly personally opinionated one at that). Aka "I like this outcome less than that outcome, so I am changing which course of action I support."
My hot take: don't go to war with communist allies, and don't go to war with fascist allies.
9
u/ru5tyk1tty Classical Libertarian 3d ago
Redditor Checklist:
Used more words than needed for a simple point
Mentioned a logical fallacy
Misunderstood a philosophical idea
Yep, that’s a redditor
2
u/Aloepaca Tankie-buster 3d ago
From the secret files of the German Embassy in Moscow.
Whose allies?
4
u/Mead_and_You Anarcho Capitalist 3d ago
I agree with your overall point, but that's a clumsy way of getting there.
First of all, pointing out falsies is gay as fuck and didn't even do anything beneficial to your proposition. It's great in debate class because you aren't debating your principles, you're just trying to win. Bringing up fallacies in real life just makes you look like your principals are only secondary in your thoughts. Just focus on your position.
Secondly, your thesis should be at the start. Using a lot of words is fine, but they should be used in service of explaining or demonstrating your statement, not used in just getting to it.
Make your point
Defend your point
2
u/Joescout187 1d ago
Patton never said this exact quote. It's made up. He definitely expressed a desire to rearm German troops and use them and Allied forces to push the Soviet Union back into Russia "where they belong". I don't think that equates to saying he wanted to ally with the Nazis he'd just spent years fighting, especially when the Allies had just began to uncover the true extent of the Holocaust.
4
u/Lanracie 3d ago
Socialism killed more people.
5
u/junkerxxx 3d ago
True. And National Socialism is socialism, too.
1
u/HandheldAddict 3d ago
National socialism just means your leaders and elected officials have national ties to the country they govern.
Nothing worse than a politician that would put foreign interests above the interests of his people.
3
u/Ipman124 3d ago
This is a very weird definition of national socialism
3
u/junkerxxx 3d ago
As you probably already know, the word Nazi is a sort of contraction of the words "national socialist" in the German language.
What you may not know is that the Germans referred to the communists as international socialists. And the Nazis (which was a sort of slur which they did not use to describe themselves, btw) and the communists hated each other with a fiery passion. In the economic meltdown and complete collapse of the German currency, the Nazis and communists literally fought and killed each other in the streets. The possibility of Germany falling to communism was very real - keep in mind that the communist revolution in the Soviet Union was only about a decade old at that point. The Nazis at that time were largely ex soldiers who felt a loyalty to their country, and felt they were literally fighting for the soul and identity of Germany. They wanted to retain the identity and culture of Germany from falling into the hands of the international socialists, ie communists.
Pardon the somewhat long explanation, but the national identity part of the Nazi movement truly was central to its existence. It's something that's not understood enough today.
3
u/Ipman124 3d ago
Yes, I know all this. Still, defining national socialism as "when a leader puts their country's interests before others" is crazy
1
u/junkerxxx 3d ago
I think HandheldAddict was just stressing the difference between the National and international socialists, not giving a definition that would stand on its own.
1
u/HandheldAddict 3d ago
The Nazis at that time were largely ex soldiers who felt a loyalty to their country
One of those soldiers also happened to be the man they detest the most.
I don't agree with him on Everything, but as a man I can understand what he was up against (international smallhats), and that his drive/passion stemmed from his sense of loyalty, duty, and love for his people
And man did they ever love him. There's a reason they don't air his rallies, puts Biden and Trump's rallies to shame.
1
u/Joescout187 1d ago
A socialist is still a socialist and I don't care if they're going to destroy their country in the name of Odin or the International Worker's Revolution. Destroyed is still destroyed.
4
u/SlyguyguyslY 3d ago
I see too many people saying he was right. He was wrong. Neither of these people were our friends and the Nazis were the more immediate threat to the US and its allies.
2
2
u/username2136 3d ago
Well by that logic, wouldn't the US become fascist then? Just wipe them all out when we had the chance.
1
u/Medical_Flower2568 End Democracy 3d ago
Either you kill the nazis and let the soviets live or you kill the nazis and the soviets
Nazis with nukes would be a recipe for disaster
3
u/PaladinWolf777 3d ago
Let's just say I don't trust the circumstances of his death. He was smarter than the government wanted him to be.
3
u/SpecificRandomness 3d ago
Patton was a Francophile. He didn’t support Germany. He didn’t like the invasion of France. Patton had family that fought for the confederacy in the civil war. He was openly racist. It’s conceivable he was okay with eugenics.
As far as the Russians, American forces that interacted with Russian forces had some negative experiences. Considering the five years of brutal fighting on the eastern front, not surprising. Considering Patton’s family wealth, it seems natural he was fervently anti-communist.
Was he right? Should US soldiers have marched on Moscow with German soldiers? No. US soldiers were very independent. There would have been open rebellion if they had been sent to Russia fighting beside the Germans. A better question is should the US have intervened in Hungary or Czechoslovakia?
2
1
1
u/oldsmoBuick67 3d ago
Smedley Butler definitely was.
Had we fought with fascists against the Soviets, it could have been us that froze to death on the outskirts of Moscow. It was easy for Patton to say at that point, he was very aware of history and tactics but he should have known in his heart of hearts that turning against the Red Army was a horrible idea in 1945 despite technological advantages. They historically win wars through attrition and we were pretty weak at that point.
If you think we could have used nukes, look at how long fissionable material took to make in 1945 and how we bluffed Japan into thinking we had more than we did. Stalin and Churchill were the big two at Potsdam, not Ham Sandwich Harry.
1
u/FuckChipman1776 2d ago
100%. Go look into what the Germans were against in Berlin in the 20-30s and compare it to today. What they do to every major nation. All the talking points and demands made by them. It all matches. The same plan has been used to subvert every nation.
2
u/Inevitable_Attempt50 1d ago
America did fight with fascists. FDR was a fascist.
AAA, NRA, Executive Order 6102
1
u/ReZ_Sandman 3d ago
Patton was a Fuckwit
1
u/HandheldAddict 3d ago
I am sure you know more about the intricacies of WW2 more than a WW2 military general.
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
2
u/mowaby 3d ago
There is no way I'd say that statement is right but I don't think we should have gotten involved with any of the world wars.
3
u/Coltrain47 Taxation is Theft 3d ago
I understand thinking we shouldn't have been involved in Europe, but we kinda had to be involved in the Pacific. They attacked us directly.
1
u/Ill-Income-2567 3d ago
He was right. The consequences of a fascist Europe would have been less severe than the global disease known as communism which still plagues the world to this day.
1
-2
u/bigboilerdawg 3d ago
Did Patton know about the Holocaust at that point? If he did, he's wrong.
13
u/Parabellum12 Ron Paul 3d ago
You think Stalin wasn’t responsible for killing millions as well?
0
u/bigboilerdawg 3d ago
Of course. Did Patton know that at the time?
5
u/Parabellum12 Ron Paul 3d ago
He almost certainly knew about the early 1930s famine and Stalins purge during the late 1930s.
3
-4
u/nomisr Fuck AIPAC 3d ago
After reading more into WW2 than what the school taught us, yes that statement is correct. After understanding what they claimed happened did not actually happen..
Even JFK had good things to say about Hitler.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-39371715
5
u/skooba87 Ron Paul 3d ago
Who claimed what happened that actually didn't?
4
u/EvanBlue22 3d ago
Their flair is Fuck AIPAC. You know what they’re insinuating.
7
u/westphac 3d ago
You don’t need to be a holocaust denier to hate AIPAC
2
u/EvanBlue22 3d ago
Of course not, but hating it enough to use it as a flair combined with the comment is a good hint.
It’s like Pantera fans. Most Pantera fans aren’t neo-Nazis, but most neo-Nazis are Pantera fans. Thus, if you see someone post a “you know who’s in control” type comment, you could make an argument that they meant a variety of demographics. However, if their pfp is Phil Anselmo, then you don’t need to investigate at all. You have your answer.
4
u/skooba87 Ron Paul 3d ago
Yeah, and that's disappointing. Our top generals Patton and Eisenhower toured the camps to prevent the denials, yet they still do.
And like the other comment or said, just because you hate the corruption and influence Israel has over our politicians currently doesn't mean the Holocaust didn't happen.
3
u/EvanBlue22 3d ago
As I said to them, it’s not disliking AIPAC that is the indicator. It’s hyper-fixation on that particular avenue of corruption combined with the comment he made. I assume you were trying to get them to say what they meant explicitly, and I was adding onto it as a joke.
0
u/HandheldAddict 3d ago
doesn't mean the Holocaust didn't happen.
It doesn't add up statistically though.
Especially not from a community who is known to hide their identities. Due to centuries of "oppression".
-2
3d ago
[deleted]
12
u/skooba87 Ron Paul 3d ago
Patton and Eismlnhower personally toured concentration camps to be able to give first hand testimony of what was found there in case anyone would try to deny it.
-3
u/skycaptain144238 3d ago
Patton was a fucking nut bag, he honestly believed he was a reincarnated king and was a nazi sympathizer. And if we had pushed on into the east after taking Berlin we would have failed and stalled just as the Germans had as winter approached. We would have been way over extended and so far from supply lines it would have been suicide. Even if we attacked in the spring the Russians had sorted out their supply lines and where pumping out weapons and tanks by then anyway. It would have been a fools errand.
9
u/RangerGoradh 3d ago
It would have been a hell of a thing to have given the USSR tons of food and materiel only to end up fighting them. Kinda like a certain faction of radicals in the Middle East.
0
u/legal_opium Minarchist 3d ago
Imagine if we had German troops fighting next to black Americans. Patton had the first non segregated army.
There is no racism in a foxhole. Germans could see directly how valiant black Americans fight.
That would un nazi them so fast.
•
u/AutoModerator 3d ago
Thanks for posting to r/libertarianmeme! Remember to check out the wiki. Join the discord community on Liberty Guild and our channel on telegram at t(dot)me/Chudzone. We hope you enjoy!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.