- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: In hindsight; was removing Saddam Hussein a good idea?
Posted on 3/1/18 at 7:52 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
Posted on 3/1/18 at 7:52 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:
Not letting Patton take Berlin
Explain this one. The Battle of Berlin was savage, desperate fighting. It would have cost the United States tens of thousands of lives, perhaps more, for no appreciable gain. The allies had already agreed to split up Berlin by sector regardless of who took it. Allowing the Soviets to take Berlin was a no brainer.
This post was edited on 3/1/18 at 7:53 am
1
Posted on 3/1/18 at 8:16 am to ChewyDante
quote:
Explain this one
The reason the Battle of Berlin was the way it was is because it was the soviets; the Germans fought for every street corner and house from Poland through Berlin because they knew what would happen if the USSR won. However, I meant more taking Berlin as in Patton pushing the soviets back across Eastern Europe at the end of the war. We would likely have had the Germans fighting alongside us in that endeavor.
The smart move there was getting the Russians out of Europe. They were beaten near to death in almost every way, we could have cleaned house all the way to Moscow.
This post was edited on 3/1/18 at 8:17 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News