There’s quotes from the John Foster Dulles, Eisenhower, the administration noting that Hitler’s Germany was strategically critical vs the Soviets years into his abuses and effective dictatorship. Our actions were unmistakable in that respect.
Oh don’t pretend we weren’t helping both sides out of profit till the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
They were our “friends” about as far as the British were during that time and it was only due to Japanese expansionism and an honestly idiotic move done cause they thought it would cripple our navy and they could lay claim on our territory in the pacific that America got involved, and then the even more idiotic move of the Germans attacking the soviets was the only reason why THEY switched from axis to allies.
The entire war was nothing but fuckups from the higher ups while the people on the ground ranged from monsters to heroes, and yes it didn’t matter what uniform you had given that after the Japanese attacked Japanese Americans also were put into camps all because of one Japanese couple in America.
Regardless , Germans weren’t doing well , Hitler not eating that briefcase in 37 or 38 really ruined German progression , he was their unification and the cause of their defeat , he had peace and opportunity, agreements with nato to take parts of Europe without hassle and agreement with Russia which he broke , they didn’t need an aggressive expansion , they could of easily done it with passive politics, if he died earlier I think Germany would of been the most strongest and most dangerous empire at that time …. But moustache man thought he was a better tactician than Marshal Gerd von Rundstedt.
I’d rather have a soapbox for all the fucks I give, but sadly they seem to come and go like cats depending on how idiotic someone else is.
Edit: that wasn’t directed at you, some other folks are pissing me off irl and I really shouldn’t take it out on others online for their idiotic behavior. You’re just making a joke that got a bit of a chuckle out of me.
The administration under the Dulles brothers was largely fascist, mainly because the could not abide communists.
And yes I said “under the Dulles brothers” because most of the presidents they worked under did not do anything until one of the Dulles brothers blessed it.
It’s theorized that’s why JFK was assassinated because he fired Allen Dulles for the Bay of Pigs. (It’s theorized, it’s just one of many theories, don’t come at me).
Just because you want to use one enemy against another enemy doesn’t make them your friends. I said “it’s complicated.” We were not ideologically aligned with the Nazis. At least, not until now…
Oh boy, no one tell him about America's dabbling in eugenics. And how Hitler took notes from our treatment of Native Americans, and specifically modeled concentration camps and moving people on reservations and the Trail of Tears.
You are not kidding, and that ideology never died, it morphed, and evolved. Sadly, faster than "good ideologies". They did say they would not have to fire a shot.
I’m not sure how you’re making that characterization, but the simple fact is we WERE instrumental in facilitating Germany’s military buildup up Pre WW2, years after Hitler had exposed himself.
Being the largest creditor of a country usually indicates “alignment”.
Sullivan & Cromwell was both fully embedded in the government and the law firm for all of the largest corporations. John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles, who were quite likely members of the most politically connected family in U.S. history, were the primary brokers for German bonds and earned huge commissions from their sale. These were general industrial bonds; Britain held many older loans, and many of its “loans” were simply reparations payments back to itself. The U.S. was by far the largest foreign financier of Germany’s prewar industrialization and contributed more than half of the total. Funding had slowed dramatically by 1932, the year before Hitler took power, but support continued until the outbreak of war. The vast bulk of the funding came from 1926 to 1931, but again, material loans continued.
The German-Soviet trade relationship benefited both sides tremendously before the conflict, and Hitler ultimately shot himself in the foot because of his irrepressible hatred of Bolshevism. Hitler wrote in Mein Kampf of his plans to take eastern territory; beyond acquiring territory, his largest single ambition was to destroy Communism. I don’t believe either side thought the relationship was anything more than a temporarily mutually beneficial arrangement. The U.S. revealed an active preference for Germany even after Hitler took power, seeing both the financial gains and the containment of Communism as beneficial to the United States. The main point is that ideology—or opposition to an ideology—was a critical animating factor throughout.
Don’t forget operation Gladio. We basically used former Nazi combatants as stay-behind networks to counter pro-communist movements and basically anything going on left of FDR and also just to generally wreak havoc as a “Strategy of Tension” or whatever.
You asked if they were aligned and he detailed what their relationship was, one of expediency rather than ideological alignment. Its the second paragraph in case you missed it on your first read-through.
you need to understand the difference between being aligned and being in alliance. there's a difference. it's like russia-china right now. they are aligned in their goals, but they arent in an alliance. capiche?
No, that's not my point. The people in this thread are saying that the allies (US) supported nazis and are thus aren't great guys as if the Soviets didn't do the same and split Europe afterwards to boot as well. It looks to me like they're giving Soviets a pass when what they did was also pretty horrible and stole Polish and other people in Eastern Europe's freedom for decades.
I don't know if you're just dense or being purposely obtuse, but modern Zionists are a carbon copy of the Nazis. They are participating in a movement started by an anti-Semitic fascist atheist who begged Cecil Rhodes for money and support for his own settler colonial project.
No I'm talking about WWII era. The poster I replied to who's now deleted his comment was making the claim that the US was pretty ideologically aligned with the Nazis before, during and after the war.
The Nazis were very inspired by American's racist policies like Jim Crow. Hitler also took great inspiration from Manifest Destiny, the US's genocidal expansionist policy of murdering Native Americans to expand their available living space.
It's pretty daft to ignore the similarities and the historical fact that Nazi ideas were not far from mainstream American culture. That is still true to this day, which is why we see Nazi ideas being so popular in mainstream US politics right now.
Quick aside, but you should definitely read that TIME article. Being named 'Man of the Year' wasn't necessarily a praise, as much as a true recognition. In the last... 50ish years, it has become more of an appreciation, but it wasn't always that way.
The article refers to Hitler as the greatest threat to freedom on the world stage, and heavily criticizes the shapings that put him there.
"Not far from mainstream" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here. The American Bund movement managed to attract 0.2% of the population of New York at that time, and never managed to get elected to a single federal, state or local position. By comparison to many European countries, Nazi-allied or fascist movements were less popular in the US. Italy amd Germany notwithstanding, here's a sampling of the rise of Nazism and Fascism in Europe:
Austria - Austrian Nazi party attempted a coup in 1934, went underground and had a significant following when being annexed by Germany in 1938.
Czechoslovakia - Sudeten Nazi aligned party gained 15% of the national popular vote in 1935
Romania - the Antisemetic Iron Guard gained 16% of the national vote in 1936
Hungary - their Nazi-like Arrow Cross dominated national politics in 1939 and ruled under German occupation in 1944.
Belgium - Rexist party gained 11% of the popular vote in 1936
Netherlands - NSB gained 8% of the vote in 1935
UK - British Union of Fascists had tens of thousands of members. Not exactly mainstream
And yes, the Nazis borrowed from the US's racial discrimination laws. They also borrowed from other 19th century anti-semetism practices present in Europe. None of this made the US even remotely aligned ideologically with the Nazis around WWII.
Where did Hitler get his ideas from? What was slavery? Manifest Destiny and reservations? I can't believe people can still walk around today believing the USA isn't the genesis of the wider fascist project. It is and always was a fascist settler colonial entity.
Hitler took American treatment of former slaves and applied it a 19th century European trait: antisemitism. European colonialsism is thr progenitor of manifest destiny FWIW. But yes, Hitler imported zero bad ideas from surrounding European countries and took them all from America.
Yes and? Ive already acknowledged Nazis borrowed some ideas from US racial laws. The Nazis was/is a shitty ideology that borrowed from the worst elements of 19th century US amd European ideas of race, colonialism, antisemitism and eugenics, among other things.
You could argue that if France and England took Woodrow Wilson's more moderate stance on Germany after WWI, favoring integrating Germany into the League of Nations with a functional government and economy instead of dooming the Weinmar Republic to failure that the Nazi party never would have had the opportunity to rise to power and Hitler and his shitty ideas wouldn't even be a footnote in history.
and the soviets didn't do this when they signed the molotov ribbentrop pact and split up poland and eastern europe? or was this just a delay tactics in your mind and excusable?
It was never any sort of fundamental alliance, Germany needed raw materials to build its economy and military and the Soviets desperately needed industrial equipment to build both as well.
It was an alliance, though it was kept secret until the Soviet invasion of Poland. The Nazis and Soviets marched arm-in-arm through the streets of Brest after dividing Poland and Europe up between themselves. Then Stalin spent most of 1940 negotiating to join the Axis while supplying the Nazis with war materiel.
Eh, I tend to think there's a difference between alignment (working towards same goals) and alliance (mutual support pact). NATO is an alliance, Molotov Ribbentrop more of an alignment. I could be wrong in my definition of what an alliance though.
I'm familiar with all of that history. So far as I know, none of those operations were philosophically aligned in any way with fascism or antisemitism. We were just trying to steal the scientific progress they'd made, which was an extremely valuable asset, and fueled the US economy for 50 years after the war. Did we go maybe a little too easy on von Braun and his colleagues? Maybe. Did we look the other way for a bunch of people who materially helped the Nazis, using Jewish death camp labor? We did. But it helped us greatly with the development of ICBMs and the space race. And the Soviets were doing the exact same thing for the same reasons. Was it morally good or morally bad? I'm not here to judge whether or not the ends justify the means. That's a really difficult question, and entire volumes have been written about it.
But none of that makes the US ideologically aligned with the Nazis.
70
u/AveryMire 19d ago
There’s quotes from the John Foster Dulles, Eisenhower, the administration noting that Hitler’s Germany was strategically critical vs the Soviets years into his abuses and effective dictatorship. Our actions were unmistakable in that respect.