"Fuck Nazis" - the all-uniting cry 20th Century History (media.piefed.social)
 
"Fuck Nazis" - the all-uniting cry

all 58 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 72 points 1 year ago (11 children)

The US was happy enough with the Nazis until Japan forced them to take a side

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 70 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    And the USSR was very happy with the Nazis until Germany attacked them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    True, I just hate that the US acts as though they played the biggest part in the war when countries like Canada were there from the start

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The US was playing the isolationist card until we got brought into the mess personally, but isn't that usually how things are? Didn't Canada go early on because they were part of the Empire still? The US was still needed even if it was late to the party, Churchill himself hinted in his Fight on the Beaches speech about "until, in God’s good time, the New World, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of the old."

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Didn't Canada go early on because they were part of the Empire still?

    That was a true for the first world war but Canada entered the second world war as an independent nation.

    And yeah, like the US helped a lot but that's mostly because they walked in at the end with a fresh army after everyone else had years of fighting. It's very American exceptionalist to narrow the "victors" of WW2 down to the UK, the USA and the Soviet Union.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago*

    The USA played an outsized role in propping the Soviets and British when they were getting curb stomped.

    The Soviets played an outsized role fighting the Germans in the east and tying them up and grinding them down.

    America played an outsized role in the war in the Pacific and helped the allies win the war in Europe. The pacific was our war, Europe was just a theater.

    It’s hard to say the Soviets could have won if the USA hadn’t helped the allies open another front in Europe, but it’s also impossible to say they couldn’t have. Maybe in the absence of lend lease their territory would have been large enough to get themselves off the floor on their own. Who knows. It’s all hypothetical.

    They all played their role. Nobody did any of it single handedly.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    The USSR sent weapons to the Stalinist faction in the Spanish Republic, hoping after the war they would become a puppet state.

    The efforts of the Anarchists during the war (establishing stateless, horizontal power structures) were undermining that effort, thus the Stalinists turned on them (and the anti-stalinist Marxist faction) mid-war, calling them 'secret fascists' helping the enemy, and proceeded to round them up for execution.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] [S] 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The US was supplying the UK and France from the very start of the war, ending a near-decade long embargo on munitions export, and Lend-Lease began before Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    You couldn't have said it better. I am getting tired of memes of US being happy enough to profit from either side until they got dragged into WWII by Japan. Even though that is true (private companies with operations on both sides of the Atlantic are the ones who profited more), the US have helped China and the Allies more through lend lease and embargo as you mentioned. It is also important to remember that US ships and German u-boats were already skirmishing for well over a year before WWII, because US ships were supplying UK after France fell.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    Under the Cash‑and‑Carry and Lend‑Lease programs, Britain, the Soviet Union, China and others paid for U.S. war material largely with gold.

    Those inflows swelled U.S. Treasury gold holdings from about 30 million oz in 1939 to ≈574 million oz—over half of the world’s official gold stock—by 1945.

    Contemporary accounts note that by the late‑1940s the United States controlled around 70 % of global gold reserves, a figure that stemmed from wartime payments.

    During this time period the US saw a reduction in unemployment by 7% and wages rose 20 to 30% pulling millions of Americans out of poverty.

    The GI bill, employment act and housing act were all introduced on the back of this accrued wealth.

    Of greatest impact was that these gold reserves allowed the US to set its dollar as the global reserve currency via the Breton Woods system, which led to a persistent balance of payments surplus and cheap overseas borrowing.

    In simpler terms, America could borrow at the lowest interest rates since it now had the highest credit rating in the world (turns out people trust you to pay back your loans when you have 70% of the worlds gold stockpiled).

    So, while I hear where you're coming from, I think it's a stretch to think there weren't politicians, industrialists and even ordinary citizens who saw that the war was rapidly improving their material circumstances (at least those that were not part of a targeted minority group). I'm sure there was fear the war would show up at their doorstep but it ultimately never did in the way Europe and other nations sustained profound infrastructure loss.

    WW2 is what made the US the economic powerhouse it is today. I think that outcome alone would support that there were some, if not many, who didn't mind seeing the war go on since it worked immensely to their financial benefit.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago

    Bullshit. Read a fucking book.

    The US was supplying Allies and building a military industry well before Pearl Harbor. FDR was itching for a reason to join the Allies but popular sentiment was still very anti war.

    I'm too inebriated to write an essay, but do yourself a favor and look up:

    • Neutrality acts
    • Cash and carry
    • Lend-lease agreement
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 1 year ago* (3 children)

    An imperialist, an imperialist, and an imperialist put down their differences to fight a nationalist-imperialist?

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago*

    In the Russian Civil War, the Russian Bolsheviks seized control of the former empire's territories and founded the Soviet Union (USSR). Although claiming to be anti-imperialist, it had many similarities with empires. It was involved in many foreign military interventions and in regime change throughout the world, as well as Sovietization. Under Joseph Stalin, the USSR pursued internal colonialism in Central Asia[2] by massive forced resettlement. Under the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany divided eastern Europe between themselves. At the end of World War II, most eastern and central European countries were occupied by the USSR; these Eastern Bloc countries were widely regarded as Soviet satellite states.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_imperialism

    So yes, this is essentially three imperial states joining forces to fight a fourth imperial state (Nazi Germany) which was perceived as an existential threat to them.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
    [–] 21 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Sadly there are elements in all 3 that also wanted to co-operate with the Nazis. Luckily they weren’t able to be influential enough.

    We must always remain vigilant.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] [S] 10 points 1 year ago

    Indeed. The US had its German-American Bund and Silvershirts who were admittedly marginal, but a large minority of the population who would've been happy to simply sell Germany materiel - or starve the Allies of the same.

    A person's voice is a powerful tool - and stopping the worst from occurring can buy enough time for deeper developments to take root.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 20 points 1 year ago* (15 children)

    Sarah Paine (prof at the us navy war college) made a great point in a video I saw a while back.

    WW2 starts. The UK and US are already building prototype four engine bombers, what it takes to attack deep into the continent.

    Japan, Germany? Nothing even on the drawing board, much less in prototype production.

    Japan and Germany picked a fight with an industrial powerhouse, protected by two oceans, without the means to attack even the coasts of that country in any meaningful way. Literally, even if the entire imperial japanese navy went right for the west coast, they would have lost, and that's saying their logistics could stretch that far (they couldn't, literally didn't have the oil/gas).

    The germans were even worse off. And even if you could slap the coasts, lol, what the fuck good is that going to do? There's THOUSANDS OF MILES of factories rail and resource extraction happening inside the US. It's the largest producer of refined petroleum at the time.

    Japan and Germany never had a farts chance of striking detroit, pittsburgh, toledo, fort worth, hundreds of cities with thousands of factories and mines etc.,

    WHAT KIND OF FUCKING MORON DRAWS AN ENEMY LIKE THAT INTO THE FRAY? How fucking dumb do you have to be lol?

  • source
  • hideshow 15 child comments
  • [+] 8 points 1 year ago (14 children)
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    neither of these explains how either germany nor japan thought it could win. choosing to start a military conflict when you have neither the production nor resources to win it is simply stupid.

    yeah, the oil embargo was real, just like japan's manchurian ambitions (which was what precipitated the embargo).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    They thought they could win because they thought they were the superior people. They each had superficial martial systems while prioritizing loyalty and zealotry. Anyone with a brain was meticulously rooted out and replaced with a goose stepper.

    They thought our factories were less than their willpower. They just had to show us what real war was like and we'd falter. We didn't have the guts to prosecute a war to the end. They drank an industrial sized batch of koolaid and lost to math.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    They thought our factories were less than their willpower. They just had to show us what real war was like and we’d falter. We didn’t have the guts to prosecute a war to the end.

    which, you'd think of all the countries that suffered horrendously from WW1, everyone would have had their fill of 'real war' and fought for diplomacy.... anyone who's viewed as 'gutless' after that bloodbath is simply being underestimated.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] 4 points 1 year ago* (9 children)
  • [–] 9 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    They thought that Pearl Harbor wouldn't start a war.

    What did they think they were going to accomplish, then?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [+] 4 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    If true, that was incredibly dumb of them

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Had they managed to sink the entire fleet at port, had the carriers not been put on maneuvers, etc … it might have worked some.

    “We just destroyed your entire fleet, if you just turn the oil back on we won’t attack further”

    Common bully tactic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    Had they managed to sink the entire fleet at port,

    see this is what I'm talking about: you can't. japan and germany together couldn't pull it off because our fleets were spread up and down the east and west coasts and the gulf.

    the literally did not have the capability to attack anything further than hawaii.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I'm curious how a WWII where the entire Pacific fleet was docked in Pearl Harbor when attacked would have turned out.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    In hindsight probably not terribly different, just woulda taken longer

    The logistics and manufacturing capability of the USA far outpaced all the other nations at that time.

    Midway is a good example of how outclassed Japan was from the outset.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Japan was backed into a corner with the embargo

    backed into a corner?

    The embargo could have stopped as soon as their imperial ambitions on manchuria ended.

    ah, they wanted to steal a chunk of china/korea, AND keep that cheap american crude flowing?

    see you don't get things both ways sparky. They weren't baked into a corner any more than the US was backed into a corner by opec in the 70s - because being backed into a corner MEANS something. It's called death ground. This is a real thing, if you were anything but a random schmuck on the internet claiming not to be a cia plant, you might have studied it at the state dept or army war college.

    being backed into a corner means you have no other choice; being on death ground - your only option remaining is to fight until the last.

    japan was not backed into a corner, any more than it was on death ground - but they'd find out what both those terms meant in 5 short years. think of it, 5 short years to turn the entire production of this continent onto two TEENY TINY targets - japan and germany.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • load more comments (-1 replies)
  • [+] 8 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    Germany wanted to ally with the US a

    bwahahahaha. yeah a little problem there called ROOSEVELT. Adolph hated Roosevelt.

    So no, germany never saw that as a real possibility, esp after America First died on Dec 7th.

    But to be clear: they did it with intention, they mulled it for 3 fucking days. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_declaration_of_war_against_the_United_States

    They 'knew' what they were doing and did it with zeal. Make no mistake, Germany didn't want to be allied with the US we know, they wanted a puppet state run by quislings and Lindbergh.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-2 replies)
    [–] 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Did they? The capitalists and communists only joined after being attacked. Before that they were happy to ignore or collaborate with the nazis.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] [S] 7 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I mean, I would say that picking fights they can't win with more enemies than they could handle is part of the Nazi fuck-up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Capitalist Dictatorship (2025 America)

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago

    Man... Why'd they have to represent nazism with a dog? 🥺

  • source
  • [–] 17 points 1 year ago (6 children)
  • [–] [S] 20 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    All things are relative, and the standards were... low around WW2.

    Consider it the ignominious position of 'victory by default'

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] [S] 12 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    The communists would have fought alongside you if you only laid off the Pervitin long enough to not decide to ratfuck them for the lulz

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment