PDA

View Full Version : Should the United Nations in 1945 carried on and fought the communists?



VonShlagnoff
01-01-2006, 04:23 PM
Would we have had a better modern world? Even if we had re-equipped the German army and allied with them would the UN have stood a chance against Russia?

Or were Britain and America to whacked out to carry on?

Would it have all gone horribly wrong and turned into a fight that would still be going on today?

Would nations like the Poles, the Czhecks and Hungarians and Yugoslavians have fought with or against the west?

WOLFMondo
01-01-2006, 04:39 PM
I don't think they should, the united nations was formed to stop wars, not start them, would have completely undermined it before it even got started.

mortoma
01-01-2006, 04:39 PM
Yes we should have!! If they would have made a few more A-bombs besides the two they made for Japan, they could have flown over Moscow from Germany
and ended it pretty quickly. The war weariness of the US and it's allies would not have mattered. Would have been easy to cleanup the Russian army after a few A-bombs leveled Moscow. They would have been disorganized without the upper eschelon of leadership in Moscow.

SeaFireLIV
01-01-2006, 04:41 PM
Not ANOTHER one! can`t you guys just let sleeping dogs lie?

Actually, stupid question.

neural_dream
01-01-2006, 04:41 PM
Trolls

joeap
01-01-2006, 04:43 PM
Very dumb never even clicked on the US Army vs. Red Army thread. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

danjama
01-01-2006, 04:47 PM
nah

Bearcat99
01-01-2006, 04:48 PM
Considering the world was already at war and the UN was started in 42... it was pretty toothless..... also see this (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/4611050783/p/1) thread.

Bearcat99
01-01-2006, 05:58 PM
OK..... I'll reopen it..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

danjama
01-01-2006, 06:00 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

A sad day for the forum...

neural_dream
01-01-2006, 06:06 PM
Originally posted by danjama:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

A sad day for the forum...
what he said.

If the "West" had attacked the "East" Oleg's ancestors maybe wouldn't have survived and you wouldn't play this game.

horseback
01-01-2006, 06:11 PM
Wouldn't have happened. The Soviets were charter members of the UN, and had the power to veto any resolution they didn't like.

The UN was able to intervene in Korea because the Soviet delagation had walked out in a huff over all the insults to their protege, Kim Il-Sung, Great Stalin, and the People's World Revolution. The rest of the Assembley promptly voted to endorse Truman's actions and continue the intervention.

The Soviet Bloc delegates never walked out again...

cheers

horseback

VonShlagnoff
01-02-2006, 04:31 AM
Originally posted by neural_dream:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by danjama:
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/353.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1241.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

A sad day for the forum...
what he said.

If the "West" had attacked the "East" Oleg's ancestors maybe wouldn't have survived and you wouldn't play this game. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hang on a mo, I certainly was not trolling, the last thing I wanted to do was annoy anyone.

My question may have been badly worded, but I was just wondering where people felt other countries allegences lay after the German/Japanese defeat.

Would or could the armies of countries that had been occupied or defeated like Germany and Austria, Poland, Finnland, Norway, Denmark, France, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Czechslovakia. I understand that some of these were occupied by the Russians, but some of them had democratic governments in them after the war until they had soviet sponsored coups.

Since 1917 the world had feared the advance of communism more than anything else, and dont forget after WW1 the allies continued to fight in the Russian civil war against the Communists, and that was after an horrific slaughter on the western front.

If you add the peak size of the armies of all the combatants except Russia and China together and the remove the number of killed/missing it adds up to 61,183,000 men, if you do the same for the Russians and Chinese it adds up to 9,900,000 men. Even if you take numbers off of both sides for people incapacitated or still in captivity, or even nations unwilling to fight thats a big sway towards the Allies.

Plus if you added the Allied and German technology level and the Allied manufacturing capacity together would that give the Allies an edge over the Russians?

And how is this queston off topic? The Cold war was a direct result of the way the end of WW2 was handled. And it is in the General discussion bit.

ploughman
01-02-2006, 05:20 AM
Yes and no. For one thing in 1945 the Soviets were only guilty of liberating occuppied territories and occuppying parts of Germany. So to do it then would have been 'pre-emptive.' Having said that you didn't have to be a clairvoyant to know that the Soviets were going to be a plague on the nations they'd liberated and the experience of Soviet liberation probably felt alot like Nazi occupation to the poor sods under the thumb of the Red Army. From that point of view, carry on. But we don't consider oppression in it's own right to be grounds for regime change do we? Ooh, what a can o worms this one is.

djetz
01-02-2006, 09:24 AM
"Liberating occuppied territories"?

Hmmmm. Do we have any Poles here? Latvians? Lithuanians? Czechs? Hungarians? Etc etc etc.

I'm Australian. In my country we took in a lot of refugees and displaced persons after WW2. I personally have met and talked to people of those nationalities who managed to escape from the communists that "liberated" their countries.

Some of them are parents or grandparents of my friends.

Considering how much the Poles in particular contributed to the allied war effort, selling them out to Stalin at the end of the war was - in my opinion - the worst thing the allies could have done. Absolutely shameful.

alert_1
01-02-2006, 09:36 AM
only guilty of liberating occuppied territories and
Disagree. They were perparing communist coup even before they started "liberating" Poles, Czechs, Hungarians...
Where is Kocur_ when we need him ... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

VonShlagnoff
01-02-2006, 09:38 AM
Originally posted by djetz:
"Liberating occuppied territories"?

Hmmmm. Do we have any Poles here? Latvians? Lithuanians? Czechs? Hungarians? Etc etc etc.

I'm Australian. In my country we took in a lot of refugees and displaced persons after WW2. I personally have met and talked to people of those nationalities who managed to escape from the communists that "liberated" their countries.

Some of them are parents or grandparents of my friends.

Considering how much the Poles in particular contributed to the allied war effort, selling them out to Stalin at the end of the war was - in my opinion - the worst thing the allies could have done. Absolutely shameful.

Thats my point, especially after Stalin had already shown his hand by not supporting the Polish Home Army's Warsaw uprising, despite having troops less than 10 miles away. At least the RAF were doing all they could to help by dropping supplies.