Yalta Conference

Discussion in 'General' started by kentpaul_65102, Sep 30, 2005.

  1. kentpaul_65102

    kentpaul_65102 Junior Member

    Please Discuss Major Outcomes, Roosevelt's and Stalin's Objectives. What is your opinion concerning the idea that Roosevelt "gave away Europe"? Be able to support your opinions.
     
  2. morse1001

    morse1001 Very Senior Member

    sounds like a set question from schoool or college?

    To answer that question would take a hellva lot of time and and it would help to know at what level e.g GCSE, A Level, 6th year or whatever the question was asked. When is you essay due? That way our posters can know what info to include.
     
  3. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER Patron

    Originally posted by morse1001@Sep 30 2005, 01:54 PM
    sounds like a set question  from schoool or college?

    To answer that question would take a hellva lot of time and and it would help to know at what level e.g GCSE, A Level, 6th year or whatever the question was asked. When is you essay due? That way our posters can know what info to include.
    [post=39553]Quoted post[/post]


    Sure does/Sure is. Glad to see the question is being asked.
     
  4. angie999

    angie999 Very Senior Member

    A quicky answer: what makes you think it was Roosevelt's to give away? Whereas the Red Army already occupied a good deal of Eastern Europe, the western Allies had yet to cross the Rhine.

    I know this is simplistic, but the Red Army were in the commanding position on this question.
     
  5. spidge

    spidge RAAF RESEARCHER Patron

    Originally posted by angie999@Oct 1 2005, 09:42 PM
    A quicky answer: what makes you think it was Roosevelt's to give away? Whereas the Red Army already occupied a good deal of Eastern Europe, the western Allies had yet to cross the Rhine.

    I know this is simplistic, but the Red Army were in the commanding position on this question.
    [post=39588]Quoted post[/post]


    Yes.

    Patton was the only one who thought he could influence/alter what was to be the "Iron Curtain" line that everyone else knew to be a "Fait Accompli".
     
  6. morse1001

    morse1001 Very Senior Member

    A quicky answer: what makes you think it was Roosevelt's to give away?

    Because FDR was ill but would not allow himself to be troubled by it. The problem was that it affected his judgement and at a time when if he stood up to Stalin, then STalin, would not have stood up to him.

    AS for Churchill, the story goes, he was fed brandy while Stalin drank water and the rest is history!!!
     
  7. angie999

    angie999 Very Senior Member

    Originally posted by morse1001@Oct 1 2005, 02:02 PM
    AS for Churchill, the story goes, he was fed brandy while Stalin drank water and the rest is history!!!
    [post=39598]Quoted post[/post]

    But do not forget that a deal was done, so that although there were revolutionary or near revolutionary movements in Greece, France and Italy, for instance, they were not supported by the Soviet Union.
     
  8. Kiwiwriter

    Kiwiwriter Very Senior Member

    Don't forget that the Soviets misled the Allies at that point...Stalin was good at making Roosevelt and Churchill (to a lesser extent) believe he'd keep his promises of free elections. It was the height of Allied goodwill to the Soviets. It crumbled pretty quickly.
     
  9. jimbotosome

    jimbotosome Discharged

    What I have read about the situation in the "The Valiant Years" was that Churchill was caught between a rock and a hard place. He wanted to stand up to Stalin and keep the Russians out of Germany but he needed agreement with FDR or else he would have been left with a war that the US might not (politically) want to fight as well as lose support in Britain. But if there was agreement with the coalition, then they could bargain from a position of strength. But FDR was extremely sick and as we know now, right at death's door. FDR was not really even involved in the talks other than present in body. It would have been better for him to have stepped down and let Truman carry out the talks, but FDR would have felt that he was “abandoning” the American people. I do not believe he understood the relevance of the Yalta agreement. I am not sure Churchill understood it to the degree we know it in retrospect, but he was certainly more astute than FDR in his then current condition.

    Churchill was in a position not so unlike what US leaders are in today. Britain is our staunchest ally (though sometimes it’s hard to realize that on this forum…just kidding!) and has more influence on American policy than the combined influence of the other EU nations (especially since they went socialist and have become hostile politically toward capitalist nations). The US uses Britain (and to some degree the common wealth of Britain) as sort of a foreign policy check and balance because we are like minded cultures. If the US undertook a policy where they had significant disagreement with Britain (or other Commonwealth nations as you folks call them) then the support for the policy would be diminished politically here in the States. The only exception to this is the way the US treats Israel which in my opinion has been a flawed policy of un-evenhandedness and exacerbates the problems in the Middle East, though Bush is the first US president to try to resolve the US’s bias. (but, I digress)

    It was similar with Churchill in Yalta. The Allied nations may have all been sovereign but when you are dealing with such fundamental foreign policy, the strength lies in the coalition far more so than an individual nation’s sovereignty. Churchill simply could not make a decision for the Allies by himself (neither could FDR). For Stalin, in a serendipitous way, Yalta was a situational manifestation of “Divide et impera”.


    Angie,

    I don’t doubt that Stalin made sure that Churchill was abundantly stocked with his favorite sauce, but I have never heard of a situation where Churchill’s judgment was compromised by it. Churchill was “royally” screwed at Yalta. He was just not in a position to bargain. East Germany was donated to the Russians by fate. I am sorely convinced that if Roosevelt had been healthy and could have been reasoned with by Churchill, that the talks would have been a stalemate or a conciliation of the Russians.
     
  10. angie999

    angie999 Very Senior Member

    One factor which should not be ignored is Japan. The western allies were very keen for the Soviet Union to join in and in fact they gave an undertaking to do so three months after the war in Europe. They stuck to this undertaking and, of course, invaded Manchuria.

    Therefore, it was in the interests of the US and UK at Yalta to keep Stalin "sweet".
     
  11. jimbotosome

    jimbotosome Discharged

    (angie999 @ Oct 24 2005, 04:20 AM) [post=40547]One factor which should not be ignored is Japan. The western allies were very keen for the Soviet Union to join in and in fact they gave an undertaking to do so three months after the war in Europe.
    [/b]
    Can you explain this Angie? It makes no sense to me.

    From my understanding the US "DID NOT" want Russia to have "their finger in the pie" of Japan. In fact it came close to a war between the US and Russia when the Soviets insisted that they get a part of the post war rule of Japan. MacArthur not only “laughed in their faces” but basically told the ambassador if the Soviets attempted to put troops ashore on Japan that he would attack and destroy them and then sent him home to Stalin. The Japanese soldiers in Manchuria were of no consequence to the outcome or even the schedule of the remainder of the war in Japan. They might have been a threat to Russia or Russia might have perceived them as so, but they were of no consequence whatsoever to the "true" Allies and they were merely more men to have bombed to death if they chose to return to Japan to defend an island under severe air attack.

    Attacking the Japanese was Russia's idea and a bane to the US. It was Russia's way of trying to get more rule in the world without having to pay for it. The threats of their embraceries made MacArthur’s day. The only ones I can figure had an interest in Russia "helping" in the last week of Japan, was MacArthur because he wanted a war with Russia very badly.

    What western nations are you referring to wanting Russia’s help in anything after the fall of Germany?
     

Share This Page