A historian on Shrub's distorted Yalta history...

[TreasonousBastard]

http://hnn.us/articles/11835.html

<...>
America has had its own "stab in the back" myths. Last year, George W. Bush endorsed a revanchist view of the Vietnam War: that our political leaders undermined our military and denied us victory. Now, on his Baltic tour, he has endorsed a similar view of the Yalta accords, that great bugaboo of the old right.

Bush stopped short of accusing Franklin D. Roosevelt and Winston Churchill of outright perfidy, but his words recalled those of hardcore FDR- and Truman-haters circa 1945. "The agreement at Yalta followed in the unjust tradition of Munich and the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. Once again, when powerful governments negotiated, the freedom of small nations was somehow expendable. Yet this attempt to sacrifice freedom for the sake of stability left a continent divided and unstable. The captivity of millions in Central and Eastern Europe will be remembered as one of the greatest wrongs of history."

Bush's cavalier invocations of history for political purposes are not surprising. But for an American president to dredge up ugly old canards about Yalta stretches the boundaries of decency and should draw reprimands (and not only from Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.).

<...>

[The_Casual_Observer]

1. His mistakes are amusing, in light of the fact that his "Russian

Specialist", Stanford provost con-ny rice is at his side. I suspect that rice doesn't know shit about Russia or anything else for that matter.

[nadinbrzezinski]

2. Au contraire mon ami

she does, but is longing for the good ol' days of the cold war, she hates the ruskies... in this case guess who is holding the strings?

You guessed it, condy....

The insults are very calculated to cool down relations...

Not that george would understand, but she does... understand...

[The_Casual_Observer]

4. A while ago I would have agreed with you, however

I can no longer attribute any cunning and subtle strategy to these nit wits. It is apparent that their " foreign policy" falls under two catagories: either ham fisted, or it's intrigue so transparent that it rivals the keystone cops.

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

7. I think you're right - it's out of the PNAC playbook - divide and conquer

That has been an ongoing strategy. They have tried to isolate "old Europe" (France and Germany) from eastern Europe. Bush has given sweetheart deals to countries like Poland, such as the sale of about 40 fighter jets with loans on such favorable terms it's almost a gift. What it did guarantee was the end of the impending deals with Saab and Dassault (who make the Mirage). Now the PNAC-led administration is trying to divide eastern Europe from Russia. The PNAC-led administration has also had this divide and conquer strategy in the Middle East, isolating the Sunnis in Iraq and favoring the Kurds. In Afghanistan it worked with the Northern Alliance and the favoring of minority tribes. If you keep people divided by dredging up old sores, you weaken your adversaries and have the opportunity to expand your world influence. This has worked for the British in their colonial adventures.

[Daphne08]

10. Isn't the extreme disdain for the former U.S.S.R.

(and now, of course, Russia) one of the main tenets of the Neoconservative Movement?

I don't understand why they are attempting to destroy the amity between the U.S. and Russia unless it is to escalate the tension and bring about another Cold War.

Perhaps I've answered my own question? If so, then this policy of their making definitely is not in the best interests of our country. I would call it treasonous.

[cestpaspossible]

3. Did you hear she was busted on Russian TV?

She supposedly 'speaks fluent Russian' but when she tried some simple phrases she made an idiot of herself.

Next we'll find out it's a player piano.

[The_Casual_Observer]

5. Da Da ....I mean Neyt Neyt !!!! What a stupid shit!

[Historic NY]

6. Its about time they got called in on the attempt to revise history.......

the moron needs to pickup a book once in a while before he opens his pie hole. God is he that stupid to believe that the American Army and its allies would have been able to defeat the Soviet Union at that time. We would have had to re-arm the Germans and then some. Stalin who neither FDR or Churchill trusted reneged on his word at Yalta.

[Abelman]

8. Wow

Kind of makes you wonder. The Bushes have hated the liberals since that long ago, no doubt. Almost as if nazis were trying to get revenge on us all...

I kid of course. But only half.

[moondust]

9. It's too bad

that Scrub Boy wasn't around then to tell old Joe Stalin to pick up his 50 (or whatever) divisions and get out of Eastern Europe. Bwahahahahahahahaha!!!! :rofl:


(Gee, I wonder why Ike didn't do that when he was President?)

[opihimoimoi]

11. Bush knows nothing of History ...he don't read and he doesn't listen very

well.

In fact, he don listen at all. In 2001, They tried to tell him the Terror guys were coming, but all he said was, "Watch my Drive".

Worse, you judge peeps by the questions they ask??? Bush don ask shit other than..."is it beer 30 yet?

[applegrove]

12. I think they are trashing FDR & the Soviets because of what

Saddam will say about the neocons (the very same ones we have in power now) used to do in the 1980s. There will be a trial remember? And they have to use the Soviet Union as an excuse for their anti-democratic tactics that messed up the Middle East (why even Africa was in its first 20 years of some democracies in 1980). Remember Kirkpatrick came out and said" ME countries can not do democracy" and all the neocons followed.

And of course the elites grew and if they didn't do genocide like Saddam they funded Islamism fundies all over the ME and North Africa. So it didn't work out too well that anti-democratic policy of the neocons. Also in Afghanistan too.

No - the neocons know Saddam's telling tales our of school is coming up and they need to blame the whole Cold War for their actions.. which we now know is all FDR's fault.

They need us to be back in those 'cold war eyes'. So that they don't have to take responsibility for the horrors that right wing extremists always cause.

P.S. Neocons also think that Hitler was because of Woodrow Wilson's punishment of the Germans after WWII. Without Woodrow.. Hitler would never have come to power.

And the Turks people are responsible for the insurgency Rumsfield faces.

It is always the Liberal's fault. The right wing never makes mistakes.

Idiots!

I'm not sure if this is why the Soviet Evil Empire is being re-born and history rewritten on FDR's role. But I think it has to do with Saddam trial. And the fact that neocons are always claiming to clean up other's mistakes.. because they never make any. Their path is shinny and pure and clean. All white light..just like their leader.