From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"a425couple" wrote in message news:qgits906qi@news3.newsguy.com...

from https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/07/how-oss-tried-defeat-hitler-world-war-ii/593455/

(Regards,,, been mentioned around here,,,)

The Bizarre Ways AmericarCOs First Spy Agency Tried to Overthrow Hitler

Stalin's secret police also wanted to off der Fuhrer, but Uncle Joe stopped them, fearing that Adolf's successors would make a separate peace with the U.S., Britain, and France, thus leaving the Soviet Union wide open to the
full force of the Wehrmacht...

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:08:08 -0500, Byker wrote:

"a425couple" wrote in message news:qgits906qi@news3.newsguy.com...

from
https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2019/07/how-oss-tried-defeat-hitler-world-war-ii/593455/

(Regards,,, been mentioned around here,,,)

The Bizarre Ways Americaos First Spy Agency Tried to Overthrow Hitler

Stalin's secret police also wanted to off der Fuhrer, but Uncle Joe stopped them, fearing that Adolf's successors would make a separate peace with the U.S., Britain, and France, thus leaving the Soviet Union wide open to the full force of the Wehrmacht...

Explain more please
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"SolomonW" wrote in message
news:1c4nbwbmgtcki.1pauf32rqk0jc.dlg@40tude.net...

On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:08:08 -0500, Byker wrote:

Stalin's secret police also wanted to off der Fuhrer, but Uncle Joe
stopped them, fearing that Adolf's successors would make a separate peace
with the U.S., Britain, and France, thus leaving the Soviet Union wide
open to the full force of the Wehrmacht...

Explain more please

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-hitler/stalin-blocked-attempts-to-kill-hitler-general-idUSTRE64O5QX20100525

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/7765731/Stalin-blocked-two-attempts-to-kill-Hitler-Russian-general-says.html

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Wed, 17 Jul 2019 19:46:38 -0500, Byker wrote:

"SolomonW" wrote in message news:1c4nbwbmgtcki.1pauf32rqk0jc.dlg@40tude.net...

On Mon, 15 Jul 2019 18:08:08 -0500, Byker wrote:

Stalin's secret police also wanted to off der Fuhrer, but Uncle Joe
stopped them, fearing that Adolf's successors would make a separate peace >>> with the U.S., Britain, and France, thus leaving the Soviet Union wide
open to the full force of the Wehrmacht...

Explain more please

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-hitler/stalin-blocked-attempts-to-kill-hitler-general-idUSTRE64O5QX20100525

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/7765731/Stalin-blocked-two-attempts-to-kill-Hitler-Russian-general-says.html

It is possible, let me make two observations.

General Anatoly Sergeyevich Kulikov was born in 1946, so if this
observation it is second hand.

Hitler only went to live in the bunker in 1945 so the first attempt stated
is unlikely in the bunker.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"SolomonW" wrote in message
news:1ioiq84l2r8jm$.grz3q4ul9dcw.dlg@40tude.net...

General Anatoly Sergeyevich Kulikov was born in 1946, so if this
observation it is second hand.

Any firsthand observer who went public with this info prior to 1991 would
have been shot or sent to the nearest gulag...

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Thu, 18 Jul 2019 12:45:44 -0500, Byker wrote:

"SolomonW" wrote in message news:1ioiq84l2r8jm$.grz3q4ul9dcw.dlg@40tude.net...

General Anatoly Sergeyevich Kulikov was born in 1946, so if this
observation it is second hand.

Any firsthand observer who went public with this info prior to 1991 would have been shot or sent to the nearest gulag...

I would doubt it, Russia after Stalin was not that sort of a place.

I am not saying the story is not valid, I just saying that it does not have
a ring of truth to it as it stands.

Note it is quite possible and very plausible about your original comment
that Stalin would not Hitler removed after 1943 because as you said he
would be "fearing that Adolf's successors would make a separate peace with
the U.S., Britain, and France, thus leaving the Soviet Union wide open to
the full force of the Wehrmacht... ". After all, that is what the generals
were planning who tried to kill Hitler a separate peace with the allies.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"SolomonW" wrote in message
news:xb3kjb4wqf8t$.1xvihvr15kgz$.dlg@40tude.net...

Note it is quite possible and very plausible about your original comment
that Stalin would not Hitler removed after 1943 because as you said he
would be "fearing that Adolf's successors would make a separate peace with the U.S., Britain, and France, thus leaving the Soviet Union wide open to
the full force of the Wehrmacht... ". After all, that is what the generals were planning who tried to kill Hitler a separate peace with the allies.

Had they knocked him off after the disastrous defeat at Stalingrad, 18
months before Klaus von Stauffenberg's attempt, and worked out a deal with
the Western Allies, I wonder if if FDR and Churchill would've abandoned the Soviet Union to its fate while the Wehrmacht was still a substantial force
to be reckoned with. Knowing that the alliance with the USSR was a deal with the devil, the Allies would've welcomed the notion of the Nazis and
Communists obliterating each other...

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 13:35:33 -0500, Byker wrote:

"SolomonW" wrote in message news:xb3kjb4wqf8t$.1xvihvr15kgz$.dlg@40tude.net...

Note it is quite possible and very plausible about your original comment
that Stalin would not Hitler removed after 1943 because as you said he
would be "fearing that Adolf's successors would make a separate peace with >> the U.S., Britain, and France, thus leaving the Soviet Union wide open to
the full force of the Wehrmacht... ". After all, that is what the generals >> were planning who tried to kill Hitler a separate peace with the allies.

Had they knocked him off after the disastrous defeat at Stalingrad, 18
months before Klaus von Stauffenberg's attempt, and worked out a deal with the Western Allies, I wonder if if FDR and Churchill would've abandoned the Soviet Union to its fate while the Wehrmacht was still a substantial force
to be reckoned with. Knowing that the alliance with the USSR was a deal with the devil, the Allies would've welcomed the notion of the Nazis and Communists obliterating each other...

If Hitler is killed and the generals take over, then the NAZIs are
finished. The Allies would make a deal with German goes back to pre-ww2 borders. Western Europe goes to the Allies supported Government in Exile
and most Eastern Europe probably soon goes under moderate right-wing
military rule. Now what would scare Stalin is what happens to the Russian
areas under German rule?





Eastern Europe goes under some moderate right wing
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"SolomonW" wrote in message news:16ba2y9bw2074$.ola863wyrbr6.dlg@40tude.net...

If Hitler is killed and the generals take over, then the NAZIs are
finished. The Allies would make a deal with German goes back to pre-ww2 borders. Western Europe goes to the Allies supported Government in Exile
and most Eastern Europe probably soon goes under moderate right-wing military rule. Now what would scare Stalin is what happens to the Russian areas under German rule?

They'd still try to take it all back, casualties be damned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqZKWZKFUJw

The end justifies the means.

"Russia has endured revolution and war on a scale that can be difficult to comprehend. A former commandant of the Army War College in the United
States, Major General Robert Scales, once recalled giving a Russian general
a tour of Gettysburg. The Russian asked the American how many casualties the battle had produced. Told that 51,000 soldiers had been killed, wounded or
left missing, the Russian swept his hand dismissively.

"'Skirmish,' he said.

"But Ganapolsky, the radio host, said history alone did not explain Russia
of today. Russians care, he said in an interview, but they stay home and express their anger or sorrow in private.

"'Why do Italians come out into the streets?' he said. 'Because they know
they can change their government. Why don't Russians come out in the street? Because they know they will meet the riot police.'"

Good article: https://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/25/world/europe/25iht-russia.4.5017801.html


--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> wrote:

After all, that is what the generals were planning
who tried to kill Hitler a separate peace with the allies.

They wanted to make peace period. There were
some who suggested approaching Stalin first.
--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdos.
--- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:

Had they knocked him off after the disastrous defeat at Stalingrad, 18
months before Klaus von Stauffenberg's attempt...

Operation FLASH, the time bomb on Hitler's plane, was in March 1943,
16 months earlier.

and worked out a deal with
the Western Allies, I wonder if if FDR and Churchill would've abandoned the Soviet Union to its fate while the Wehrmacht was still a substantial force
to be reckoned with.

FDR had already committed the Allies to "unconditional surrender"
and no separate peace at the Casablanca Conference in January 1943,
with Churchill's immediate concurrence.

It should be noted that there was general agreement among US and
British leaders that "the real enemy" was not just Nazism, but
an entrenched clique of militarists in Germany, and the militaristic
culture of "Prussianism", which had to be completely rooted out.
It was believed that the terms of Versailles, which allowed a cadre
of the German army and especially the General Staff to remain in
being, had been a colossal mistake.
--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdos.
--- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"Byker" <byker@do~rag.net> wrote:

Knowing that the alliance with the USSR was a deal with
the devil, the Allies would've welcomed the notion of the Nazis and Communists obliterating each other...

Also, the US leadership was profoundly naive about the USSR.
Harry Hopkins wrote in his diary that peace between the West
and the USSR, and democracy in the USSR, were dependent on
Stalin surviving. Harry Dexter White, one of the top economic
policymakers, became a Soviet agent even though he was not a
Communist, to promote good relations by giving the Soviets
inside information.

Churchill was not so deluded, but even he had no real
understanding of how the USSR was actually ruled. The Labour
Party, which shared power, and would win the next election,
was riddled with fellow-travelers. (To be fair, once in
power, Labour PM Atlee signed up for NATO, committed the RAF
to the Berlin Airlift, and send British troops to fight in
Korea.)

Publicly, the US had embraced the USSR as "good guys" in its
wartime propaganda. Britain too, I think. For the governments
to turn and repudiate the USSR, and leave its peaple at the
mercy of the Germans, would have been Orwellian. ("We have
never been allied with Eastasia.")
--
Nous sommes dans une pot de chambre, et nous y serons emmerdos.
--- General Auguste-Alexandre Ducrot at Sedan, 1870.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"Rich Rostrom" wrote in message news:rrostrom-ECCE92.11271321072019@reader01.eternal-september.org...

Publicly, the US had embraced the USSR as "good guys" in its wartime propaganda.

Much to the later embarrassment of those who co-operated with Frank Capra in the production of certain "Why We Fight" episodes. Nowadays the series
borders on "camp": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WrKDBFJoo2w

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

"Rich Rostrom" wrote in message news:rrostrom-01D5D9.11154721072019@reader01.eternal-september.org...

It was believed that the terms of Versailles, which allowed a cadre of the German army and especially the General Staff to remain in being, had been
a colossal mistake.

The greatest thing that Germany lost after World War I was its dignity, as
it was totally humiliated with the Treaty of Versailles whose 440 Articles demobilized and reduced the military forces of Germany, reduced its lands by 14%, and left 12.5% of the German people living outside German borders. The thirst to "get even" was too tempting for firebrands like Hitler to ignore
and capitalize on.

At the end of the WWII, U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Morgenthau Jr.
demanded that Germany be stripped of all its science and industry and be reduced to a nation of farmers, something that would have all but guaranteed the rise of another tyrant. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan

Morgenthau peddled his plan throughout Washington. He visited FDR on the day before the president died, and again badgered him to adopt the plan. On the
day the war ended, May 8, 1945, Morgenthau would resume what amounted to campaign for the starvation of central Europe, this time with Harry S.
Truman. He called Secretary of War Henry Stimson at home and complained that the Coordinating Committee was not carrying out his "scorched earth" policy
as hard as he wanted, particularly as related to the destruction of all oil
and gasoline and the refineries for making them in Germany, and Directive
1067 that ordained this:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan#JCS_1067

Except for the purpose of facilitating the occupation, JCS.1067 defined,
"You [Eisenhower] will take no steps looking toward the economic
rehabilitation of Germany nor designed to maintain or strengthen the German economy."

The U.S. Army protested this senseless order, but Morgenthau wanted his will performed. Stimson privately dictated, "I foresee hideous results from his influence in the near future." In a memorandum to Mr. Truman dated May 16, Stimson outlined the probable consequences of such "pestilence and famine"
in central Europe's "political revolution and Communistic infiltration." And
he added a warning against the emotional plans to punish every German by starvation: "The eighty million Germans and Austrians in central Europe
today necessarily swing the balance of that continent."

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:06:33 -0500, Rich Rostrom wrote:

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> wrote:

After all, that is what the generals were planning
who tried to kill Hitler a separate peace with the allies.

They wanted to make peace period. There were
some who suggested approaching Stalin first.

Indeed they did. The problem I see is that the German army was occupying
with the help of local governments most of Europe. Do you think the Allies would let Stalin control Eastern Europe in such circumstances? Do you think
the locals would allow it without some fight?




--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 22:14:01 -0500, Byker wrote:

"SolomonW" wrote in message news:16ba2y9bw2074$.ola863wyrbr6.dlg@40tude.net...

If Hitler is killed and the generals take over, then the NAZIs are
finished. The Allies would make a deal with German goes back to pre-ww2
borders. Western Europe goes to the Allies supported Government in Exile
and most Eastern Europe probably soon goes under moderate right-wing
military rule. Now what would scare Stalin is what happens to the Russian >> areas under German rule?

They'd still try to take it all back, casualties be damned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqZKWZKFUJw

The end justifies the means.

"Russia has endured revolution and war on a scale that can be difficult to comprehend. A former commandant of the Army War College in the United
States, Major General Robert Scales, once recalled giving a Russian general
a tour of Gettysburg. The Russian asked the American how many casualties the battle had produced. Told that 51,000 soldiers had been killed, wounded or left missing, the Russian swept his hand dismissively.

Such losses would be comparable to Russian battles of the time, eg the
Battle of Borodino
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> on Mon, 22 Jul 2019 17:19:44 +1000 typed
in alt.history.what-if the following:

On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:06:33 -0500, Rich Rostrom wrote:

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> wrote:

After all, that is what the generals were planning
who tried to kill Hitler a separate peace with the allies.

They wanted to make peace period. There were
some who suggested approaching Stalin first.

Indeed they did. The problem I see is that the German army was occupying
with the help of local governments most of Europe. Do you think the Allies >would let Stalin control Eastern Europe in such circumstances? Do you think >the locals would allow it without some fight?

A) how could the Democracies stop Stalin?
B) who would support the locals?
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> on Tue, 23 Jul 2019 20:39:46 +1000 typed
in alt.history.what-if the following:

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 22:14:01 -0500, Byker wrote:

"SolomonW" wrote in message
news:16ba2y9bw2074$.ola863wyrbr6.dlg@40tude.net...

If Hitler is killed and the generals take over, then the NAZIs are
finished. The Allies would make a deal with German goes back to pre-ww2 >>> borders. Western Europe goes to the Allies supported Government in Exile >>> and most Eastern Europe probably soon goes under moderate right-wing
military rule. Now what would scare Stalin is what happens to the Russian >>> areas under German rule?

They'd still try to take it all back, casualties be damned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqZKWZKFUJw

The end justifies the means.

"Russia has endured revolution and war on a scale that can be difficult to >> comprehend. A former commandant of the Army War College in the United
States, Major General Robert Scales, once recalled giving a Russian general >> a tour of Gettysburg. The Russian asked the American how many casualties the >> battle had produced. Told that 51,000 soldiers had been killed, wounded or >> left missing, the Russian swept his hand dismissively.

Such losses would be comparable to Russian battles of the time, eg the
Battle of Borodino

It is a problem with any cross time comparison. Fifty thousand
men were killed in battle, out of how many involved, out of a nation's population? Six hundred thousand out of a population of thirty one
million is 2%.
Likewise, the American Revolution battle at Lexington/Concord
inflicted 273 casualties out of the British force of 700.
(Colonialists suffered 95 out of ~ 400 plus).
OTOH, Paraguay suffered "only" 300,000 total deaths in it's war
with the Triple Alliance. Out of a population estimated at half a
million. "oops".
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 08:28:36 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> on Mon, 22 Jul 2019 17:19:44 +1000 typed
in alt.history.what-if the following:

On Sun, 21 Jul 2019 11:06:33 -0500, Rich Rostrom wrote:

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> wrote:

After all, that is what the generals were planning
who tried to kill Hitler a separate peace with the allies.

They wanted to make peace period. There were
some who suggested approaching Stalin first.

Indeed they did. The problem I see is that the German army was occupying >>with the help of local governments most of Europe. Do you think the Allies >>would let Stalin control Eastern Europe in such circumstances? Do you think >>the locals would allow it without some fight?

A) how could the Democracies stop Stalin?

They have a powerful army

B) who would support the locals?

The West, Stalin would have to invade these areas to take over. He would be seen as the aggressor.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 08:46:54 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> on Tue, 23 Jul 2019 20:39:46 +1000 typed
in alt.history.what-if the following:

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 22:14:01 -0500, Byker wrote:

"SolomonW" wrote in message
news:16ba2y9bw2074$.ola863wyrbr6.dlg@40tude.net...

If Hitler is killed and the generals take over, then the NAZIs are
finished. The Allies would make a deal with German goes back to pre-ww2 >>>> borders. Western Europe goes to the Allies supported Government in Exile >>>> and most Eastern Europe probably soon goes under moderate right-wing
military rule. Now what would scare Stalin is what happens to the Russian >>>> areas under German rule?

They'd still try to take it all back, casualties be damned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqZKWZKFUJw

The end justifies the means.

"Russia has endured revolution and war on a scale that can be difficult to >>> comprehend. A former commandant of the Army War College in the United
States, Major General Robert Scales, once recalled giving a Russian general >>> a tour of Gettysburg. The Russian asked the American how many casualties the
battle had produced. Told that 51,000 soldiers had been killed, wounded or >>> left missing, the Russian swept his hand dismissively.

Such losses would be comparable to Russian battles of the time, eg the >>Battle of Borodino

It is a problem with any cross time comparison. Fifty thousand
men were killed in battle, out of how many involved, out of a nation's population? Six hundred thousand out of a population of thirty one
million is 2%.
Likewise, the American Revolution battle at Lexington/Concord
inflicted 273 casualties out of the British force of 700.
(Colonialists suffered 95 out of ~ 400 plus).
OTOH, Paraguay suffered "only" 300,000 total deaths in it's war
with the Triple Alliance. Out of a population estimated at half a
million. "oops".

If you go too China and India, you will see the same effect. I was in India
and was told that this town was small. I asked how many people live in this town, about a million, I was told.

--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: soc.history.what-if

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> on Wed, 24 Jul 2019 23:22:53 +1000 typed
in alt.history.what-if the following:

On Tue, 23 Jul 2019 08:46:54 -0700, pyotr filipivich wrote:

SolomonW <SolomonW@citi.com> on Tue, 23 Jul 2019 20:39:46 +1000 typed
in alt.history.what-if the following:

On Sat, 20 Jul 2019 22:14:01 -0500, Byker wrote:

"SolomonW" wrote in message
news:16ba2y9bw2074$.ola863wyrbr6.dlg@40tude.net...

If Hitler is killed and the generals take over, then the NAZIs are
finished. The Allies would make a deal with German goes back to pre-ww2 >>>>> borders. Western Europe goes to the Allies supported Government in Exile >>>>> and most Eastern Europe probably soon goes under moderate right-wing >>>>> military rule. Now what would scare Stalin is what happens to the Russian
areas under German rule?

They'd still try to take it all back, casualties be damned:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqZKWZKFUJw

The end justifies the means.

"Russia has endured revolution and war on a scale that can be difficult to >>>> comprehend. A former commandant of the Army War College in the United
States, Major General Robert Scales, once recalled giving a Russian general
a tour of Gettysburg. The Russian asked the American how many casualties the
battle had produced. Told that 51,000 soldiers had been killed, wounded or >>>> left missing, the Russian swept his hand dismissively.

Such losses would be comparable to Russian battles of the time, eg the >>>Battle of Borodino

It is a problem with any cross time comparison. Fifty thousand
men were killed in battle, out of how many involved, out of a nation's
population? Six hundred thousand out of a population of thirty one
million is 2%.
Likewise, the American Revolution battle at Lexington/Concord
inflicted 273 casualties out of the British force of 700.
(Colonialists suffered 95 out of ~ 400 plus).
OTOH, Paraguay suffered "only" 300,000 total deaths in it's war
with the Triple Alliance. Out of a population estimated at half a
million. "oops".

If you go too China and India, you will see the same effect. I was in India >and was told that this town was small. I asked how many people live in this >town, about a million, I was told.

Was helping a friend edit a paper on the Partition of India in
1948. She had trouble wrapping her mind around half a million dead in
the rioting which accompanied it. Being from Alaska, where the
largest city is a quarter million strong, it sounded like "too many to
be believable." Believe me, the population of the subcontinent would
consider a half million dead a blip in the reporting.
--
pyotr filipivich
Next month's Panel: Graft - Boon or blessing?
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2