Hi Hawkmoon; Re: "That's just not correct Carl.. The Korean conflict was a direct result of Stalin "blessing" an attack upon the south."
If Stalin had had a nuclear shield, the US would not have responded to the attack on South Korea. The simple, undeniable fact is that the US did respond. The simple, undeniable fact is that the Soviet Union did not use nuclear weapons to attack South Korea. The simple, undeniable fact is that nuclear weapons had absolutely nothing to do with the Korean war, which was fought with conventional weapons only.
Re: "... consolidating the TREMENDOUS territorial gains Russia had gained control over after the war (Poland, Czechoslovakia, 1/2 of Germany, Romania, Bulgaria, Hungary, the Baltic states, Azerbijian.. hmmm... did I forget any??)" None of these were obtained through the use of nuclear weapons. Not a single country.
Re: "He was only supposed to "occupy" those states temporarily until elections and stability could be restored. But once he had that "nuclear shield" in 1949 (after stealing it from us), there was no way he was going to give up those "buffer states" between the west and "mother russia"."
BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! LOL!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
Let me follow the consequences of your logic. If the Russians didn't have a nuclear shield between 1945 and 1949, then why didn't the US free those countries right after the war? We did have a nuclear shield, after all. Your own example demonstrates that there was no difference in the Soviet Union's behavior before and after they obtained that nuclear shield.
-- Carl |
