posted on Feb, 24 2006 @ 09:04 AM
Russia was the nation that suffered the most casualties in WWII:
Military: 8,668,000
Civilian: 16,900,000
Total: 25,568,000
USA,
Military: 295,000
Civilian: None
Total: 295,000
Aside the population, the industralizations, economy, and social infrastructuers that the Soviets had built up before the war was so devastated that
by a time Russia had virtually no trades and GDP.
On the other hand, WWII gave the US a god-sent opportunity for its capitalist to sell arms and military equipments that were so desperate in need in
Europe. From the first Lend Lease shipment alone, US already earned $11 Billion dollars worth of supplies to Britain. Note that over the years of
inflation, the $11 billion would be worth more than three times its current worth today. Furthermore, not a single mortor shell or bullet was ever
dropped on American soil, US had none cilivian death.
Unlike Russia, Total War was an non-exisiting term in US during WWII. Back in home front most Americans did not even smell the air of war or feel its
least prescence aside newspapers. In fact, during the 40s, and 50s were some of the most properous times for the Americans.
Listing all these facts, it is either ridiculous or extremely foolish to claim the Russians were capable of a Communism spread of the world.
Roosevelt isolationism emerged from the wide and prevalent domestic desire to remain neutral in any international conflicts. It commonly widely
believed that Americans entered the first World War simply in order to save industry capitalist investments in Europe. Whether this is the case or
not, Roosevelt was forced to work with an inherently isolationist Congress, only expanding its horizons after the bombing of Pearl Harbour. He
signed the Neutrality Act of 1935, making it illegal for the United States to ship arms to the belligerents of any conflict. The act also stated that
belligerents could buy only non-armaments from the US, and even these were only to be ought with cash.
In contrast, Stalin was by necessity interested in European affairs, but only to the point of concern to the USSR. Russian foreign policy was
fundamentally Leninist in its concern to keep the USSR out of war. Stalin wanted to consolidate Communist power and modernise the country's industry.
The Soviet Union was committed to collective action for peace, as long as that commitment did not mean that the Soviet Union would take a brunt of a
Nazi attack as a result. Examples of this can be seen in the Soviet Unions attempts to achieve a mutual assistance treaty with Britain and France.
In the later years of 1950s 60s Peaceful Co-existence was also introduced by Kruscshev. However the hope for an end to Cold War was over as the US
broke its promise of espionage and intelligence gathering in USSR as a U2 spy plane was detected and shot down.
The 20 million deaths were responsible by Chekka, and they were in no means involved with the USSR foreign policies.
Korea did not ask China for help. In fact, Kim Il Sung's intention of invading South Korea was never consulted to Mao. The Chinese were forced to
intervene when the Coalition forces pushed NK up to Chongchon river, just a river away from borders of China. Eventual American takeover of North
Korea would be a threat to the newly established Communist China, actions must be taken against it.
I failed to see Stalin as the catalyst of Cold War, nor have you given any justifiable concrete evidence.
[edit on 24-2-2006 by EarthUnificationFrontier]
[edit on 24-2-2006 by EarthUnificationFrontier]