A few weeks ago, your gentle World War II historian here
was compelled to take the noble and esteemed Dr. Paul Craig Roberts to the proverbial 'woodshed' for a well-deserved beating.
His inadvertent, yet careless misrepresentation of the German lyric, "Deutschland uber alles" could not go unpunished. (Here)
Like all loving disciplinarians, I closed the epic spank-job with a cyber-hug and a
stern warning to be more careful before making definitive statements regarding historical events. Evidently, Roberts
does not frequent TomatoBubble because he has again misbehaved. In his otherwise solid piece, 'Hell Unleashed' (May 13,
2015), Roberts recklessly repeats the myth that the Soviets defeated "the Nazis" (argh! It's "National
Socialists, Paul!) in World War II. And according to Roberts, the Red Army pretty much did it single-handedly. Roberts: "The
German Wehrmacht, which in a few days overran France and drove the British off the continent, was destroyed in Russia by the
Red Army. The allied invasion of Normandy encountered only a few under-strength German units deprived of fuel. The German
army and all available resources were on the Russian front. Americans
played a small role in the war against Hitler. Eisenhower cleverly waited until the Red Army had defeated Hitler, and then
invaded long after the tide had turned against Germany. Today Washington claims credit for winning a war in which Washington’s
role was small." Face, meet palm. Paul Craig Roberts! Come here. Papa Mike wants
to have another word with you.  
Dr. Roberts, you're still my
boy; but didn't I tell you to do your homework before you go off spouting nonsense about World War II? Now I'm really
going to have give you an ass-whoopin'! Let's begin with: "The German Wehrmacht, which in a few days overran France and drove the British off the continent,
was destroyed in Russia by the Red Army." When the Germans launched the preemptive Operation Barbarossa in June,1941, the Wehrmacht overran the Red Army just
as easily and just as thoroughly as they had routed the British and French. The numbers of Soviet prisoners taken and the
sheer amount of war material destroyed or confiscated were staggering. It was only the onset of the Russian winter that stalled
- not reversed - the rapid German advance into Russia. If the German-Soviet War were a boxing match, Round 1 (1941) was clearly dominated by Germany.
Round 2 (1942) could be considered a draw. It wasn't until Round 3 (1943) that the Soviets could begin to
claim that they had won a round (and even 1943 was a very close round). As for 1944 & 1945, those years
clearly belonged to Stalin. But there are two little details that Roberts seems to have forgotten: 1: FDR's massive, and I mean massive, infusion of Lend-Lease armaments and
other essential supplies to the depleted Soviet war machine 2: The diversion of German troops to Africa, Italy, France, the Low Countries, Scandinavia, Greece and Yugoslavia
- all necessary to block the Anglo-American Alliance from advancing from fronts throughout Europe Just how massive was the free arsenal of state-of-the art goodies which FDR shipped
to "Uncle Joe" via never-ending Arctic convoys? Chew on these numbers, Dr. Roberts: Trucks: 427,284 Tanks
and Combat Vehicles: 13,303 Aircraft:
11,000 Bombers: 3,000 Anti-Aircraft Cannons: 8,000 Motorcycles: 35,170 Ordnance Service Vehicles: 2,328 Radar Systems: 400 Petroleum
Products (gasoline and oil): 2,670,371 tons Explosives: 300,000 tons Field Radios:
40,000 Foodstuffs (canned meats,
sugar, flour, salt, etc.): 4,478,116 tons Locomotives & Railway cars: 13,000. Tommy Guns (fully automatic machine guns): 135,000 Metal Cutting Machine Tools: 400,000
An entire tire plant was actually lifted bodily from the Ford Company's River Rouge Plant and transferred to
the USSR. There were also secondary Lend-Lease deliveries from the UK to the USSR, most of which were just re-transfers of
US aid given to the UK. More essential goodies: aircraft engines, battleships,
destroyers, submarines, mine sweepers, sonar sets, anti-submarine batteries, naval guns, rocket
batteries, gear-cutting machines, drilling machines, cast-iron pipes, X-ray
tubes, electric furnaces and even essential items such as socks, boots, razors, clothes. The complete list of Lend-Lease aid, both for the Soviet military and
the besieged home-front population, was published by Major George Racey Jordan in 1952. It is indeed a jaw-dropper (here). As conceded even by Russian military historians, the augmentation of
Soviet fire-power due to Lend Lease was as much as 30%. That's akin to a 150 pound street-fighter packing
on 50 more pounds of muscle - American muscle! And it wasn't only about numbers; the state-of-the-art quality of
items such as radar systems, fighter aircraft and tommy-guns was beyond what the Soviets could produce at the time.
Just a minor detail, eh Dr. Roberts? A German reader from Canada informs us: "I remember when a few years after World War II,
an older friend of mine who was a Panzer guy at the east front told me a story: When they got hold of stuff that the Russian
Soldiers who had fled left behind , they discovered US canned corned beef and other American food stuffs. The Germans
looked at each other and agreed: "This is the beginning of the end!"    Russia's Lifeline, by Albert Weeks, expands upon
Major Jordan's revelations of the significance of US Lend Lease to the USSR. The next blunder by Roberts: "The allied invasion of Normandy encountered only a few under-strength German
units deprived of fuel." Only "a
few under-strength German units"? Over 425,000 Allied and German troops were killed,
wounded or went missing during the Battle of Normandy. The Allied casualties (killed or wounded) for D-Day
alone (June 6, 1944) amounted to 10,000 killed or wounded - a number that would have been many times
higher were it not for the massive pre-invasion bombing of Normandy. For the entire Battle of Normandy: 83,000
killed or wounded from 21st Army Group (UK & Canada), 126,000 from the US ground forces. The losses of the German
forces during the Battle of Normandy are estimated at 200,000 killed or wounded. We'll talk about that bit of bull-sugar regarding "a few" German units again,
momentarily, but as for the fuel shortages that the Germans had to overcome, Roberts' obvious insinuation that the eastern
front was depriving the Germans of fuel in the west is only half-true. Since 1940, the British Royal Air Force had been attacking facilities supplying Germany with petroleum, oil, and lubrication products. The Americans later joined the "Oil Campaign"
by bombing the Ploesti Oil fields of Romania - Germany's main supplier. Refineries in Norway were also attacked. Though unable
to cripple Germany's supply to the extent they had hoped for, the damage was certainly enough to contribute to the shortage
that Roberts seems to think was all due to the Soviet campaign. He is wrong.  
1- The US / UK Bombing of the Ploesti Oil Fields
(1943) 2- From Scandinavia to the Mediterranean Sea, the "Bomber
Boys" of the US & UK wreaked havoc and devastation. The errors continue: The German army and all available resources were on the Russian front. Americans
played a small role in the war against Hitler" Dr. Roberts, you cannot be serious!
Again, the Germans sustained MASSIVE casualties on the various fronts in which they were compelled to
engage the Americans. You see, there was this fellow named General George Patton - you may have heard of
him - whose genius and aggressive tactics gave the German high command many nightmares. Not only did the Germans have to contend
with Patton, but America's presence meant that Germany's own greatest General, Erwin Rommel, and millions
of his tenacious fighting forces were tied up in Africa and later Italy and France. Had it not been for Roosevelt's treasonous
entry into the war, Britain would have been out of the picture as well. Rommel's armies would thus have been fighting
- and tipping
the balance - against what would have been an under-supplied Red Army on the eastern front. Though not nearly as bloody and as large as the Eastern front,
to suggest that the Western and Southern theatres were undefended American cake-walks displays an ignorance
about a subject which Roberts should refrain from commenting upon any further. Again, the numbers don't lie: German Casualties sustained fighting US / UK: North Africa / Italy: 50,000 Dead and 194,000 MIA or POW,
160,000 Wounded France / Belgium: 107,000
Dead and 410,000 MIA or POW, 400,000 Wounded Write off most of the MIA's as dead, add in the numbers of German airmen and sailors killed
by the US & UK Air Force and Navy; plus those killed by US-trained and US-equipped guerrilla Partisans (the "Resistance");
and German casualties in the West approach numbers comparable to those killed in America's Civil War, which
Roberts correctly refers to as "The War of Northern Aggression". Yet Roberts makes it seem
like there was only token opposition in Western Europe. Nuts! Oh, and by the way, Dr. Roberts, need we remind you of the utter devastation wreaked upon German industry and German
civilians by the "Bomber Boys" of the US & UK Air Forces? Wave upon wave upon wave of Allied heavy bombers
mercilessly banged Germany throughout 1943 and 1944. 'Ya think' all of that urban destruction, railroad-bombing, refinery
bombing, factory bombing, deliberate dam-busting and straight-up mass genocide might have hindered the German
war effort, just a tad? Maybe? Eh Paul?  
"A small role?" Vicious and dirty Anglo-American
attacks such as the infamous fire-bombing of industrial Hamburg (which killed 40,000 Germans in one night) and the busting
of the Eder Dam took a very heavy toll on Germany.
Oh, and "one more ting Dr. Roberts', as Lt. Colombo used to say. In case you're curious, what you
describe as "a small role" in undefended Western Europe cost the lives of 250,000 Americans and about an equal number
of badly wounded. That equates to about FIVE Vietnam wars. For their part, the British also lost about 250,000 military personnel in the
European theatre of World War II. That's a total of about a half-million dead Allied fighting men and at least as many POW's;
not a bad take for "a few under-strength German units" which you claim were "without resources".
 
Roberts: "The
German army and all available resources were on the Russian front."
Really??? Then
how the heck did all of those MILLIONS of soldiers end up in Eisenhower's notorious "death camps" (above)? Not to
mention the Germans which Patton, to Eisenhower's dismay, set free. Did they not get the memo saying that the war was only
in Russia?  
America's "small role" in Europe? THREE NFL football stadiums full of dead
Americans, and many more stadiums full of injured and POW's. Was it German housewives armed with broomsticks that inflicted
such heavy casualties?  The British also lost about three soccer stadiums
full of young fighting men in the war that Roberts believes the USSR won all by itself.
Roberts'
errors continue: "Eisenhower cleverly waited
until the Red Army had defeated Hitler, and then invaded long after the tide had turned against Germany." Again, Roberts ignores, or is oblivious to, the reason that
"the tide had turned", can be attributed to FDR's Lend-Lease lifeline to the Soviets, the dispersion
of German forces required to defend multiple fronts, the vicious Partisan warfare being waged under the guidance of the US
secret services, and the merciless terror bombing of German cities. And as for this business of Eisenhower "cleverly waiting"; the delay had NOTHING to do with
'Ike's' desire to spare American lives. The reason for delaying the invasion of Normandy until June 6, 1944, as
well as for Ike's subsequent fuel restrictions and halt orders which prevented Patton from taking Eastern Europe, was that
FDR and the gang of Communist Stalin-lovers around him were intending to gift Berlin and Eastern Europe to Stalin all along.
Had Eisenhower invaded in 1943, it would have been politically impossible to gift Berlin and the east to "Uncle Joe"
- who FDR believed he could work with at the time to build a "New World Order". Yes, Uncle Joe wanted Berlin
and he wanted it bad. And FDR and Ike were only too happy to hand it too him. hence, the the "clever" delay. Here it is, Dr. Roberts, from the then influential and well-connected
Time Magazine, 1942 - the Stalin 'Man of the Year' issue:
"There is also a story
in high places that, in keeping with the 'tough-guy' tradition, credits Stalin with one other desire: permission from
his allies to raze Berlin, as a lesson in psychology to the Germans and as a burnt offering to his own heroic people." You see, contrary to Robert's delusion,
Eisenhower's calculated "delay" was not for the purpose of minimizing US casualties
by letting the Soviets do the heavy lifting. Not at all! It was Stalin, with FDR's blessing, who wanted
and who benefited from the cunning stalling tactics. Even so, the great Patton with his lightning advances was still
on track to take Berlin; until Eisenhower cut off his fuel supply in 1944, and finally ordered Patton to halt at the Elbe
River (near Berlin) in 1945. Have a look at line # 3 of the New York Times headline from 'Roosevelt Is Dead' issue
of April 13, 1945, accompanied by an actual quote from General Patton.   1- 3rd Line: "9th Crosses Elbe, Nears
Berlin" - Why did Eisenhower issue a stop order? 2-
The soon-to-be assassinated Patton - in letter to his wife:
"Berlin gave me the blues. ... It's said that for the first
week after they took it (Berlin), all women who ran were shot and those who did not were raped. I could have taken
it (instead of the Soviets) had I been allowed." Though it cost them the lives of many
troops and civilians (but no where near the ridiculous "20,000,000" claimed), the Soviets actually appreciated
Eisenhower's delaying tactics so much that they invited Ike to party atop Lenin's tomb, with General Zhukov and Stalin himself! In gratitude for handing all of Eastern Europe to Stalin,
"Ike" was awarded the "Order of Victory" from the Soviets. . Roberts again: "Today Washington claims credit for winning a war in which Washington’s
role was small." (emphasis added)
Dr. Roberts, I hate to agree with the scum of Washington DC; and I also hate to rain on the new and greatly improved
Russia's Victory Parade; but facts are facts. Though it is unlikely that the US and UK could have won the war in
Europe absent the diversion of 60-65% of Germany's might in the east; the same holds true the other way. You see, without
the massive Lend Lease Lifeline; without the bloody southern front (Africa, Italy, Yugoslavia, Greece); without
the bloody western front; (Normandy, Battle of the Bulge); without the OSS (pre CIA) terrorist Partisans
(in France, Holland, Greece, Italy, Yugoslavia); without the US propping up of the UK; without the relentless US
/ UK bombings and fire-bombings of German cities, railways, factories, and oil refineries; and without the great Patton;
Stalin's Evil Empire would have been wiped out by the end of 1942, or 1943 at the latest - easily! To put it in terms of a wrestling analogy; Imagine three cheating
wrestlers ganging-up on a single honorable wrestler. After a full hour in which the out-numbered grappler gives "The
Big 3" all they can handle, the lone fighter finally succumbs. Don't you think it would be ridiculous, Mr. Roberts,
for any one of the "winning" wrestlers to claim credit for the victory? Russian President Putin has no
choice but to go along with the deeply entrenched mythology of the great Soviet victory; but for you, Dr. Roberts, there is
simply no excuse for such a distortion of the historical record.
Now, pull your pants back up, give me a hug, and go order yourself a copy
of 'The Bad War'.   World War II in Europe was a 3
Super-Powers Against 1 fight, with the 3 fighting very dirty while using non-uniformed terrorist Partisans
as a deadly "4th man" against the Germany. *Italy
should not be considered a factor in the West because Mussolini's blunders created nothing but problems for Germany. COMMENTS / FEEDBACK (fixed)
greattomatobubble2@gmail.com
|
+ 
