Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Did Slick Boink Monica? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Zoltan! who wrote (2420)	1/27/1998 5:34:00 PM
From: BlueCrab	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 20981

<<Churchill knew that Soviets could not resist Anglo-American demands>> HUH? Absolute BS, Duncan. The Soviet Army was by far the most powerful military force in Europe in 1945. The Anglo-Americans may have been able to stop them, but the questions were 1/ Where? and 2/ At what cost?. Rankin C, formulated before Potsdam, guaranteed the division of Europe in a manner that was considered equable at the time. Eastern Europe and a share of Germany were givens. We are fortunate that Austria and Greece were kept out of the mix.

To: Zoltan! who wrote (2420)	1/27/1998 5:35:00 PM
From: Diogeron	Respond to of 20981

It appears you are animated about this issue, so let me recommend a new book by John Keegan, called "The Second World War." Keegan is a British scholar, whom Tom Clancy calls "the best military historian of our generation." While only a small portion of the book deals with the issue of Yalta, it is a great read. Assuming you are open minded on this issue and interested in history, you should give it a try. As a "reformed academic" who thought I knew something about WWII, I certainly learned a lot from Keegan. It is also valuable to have a British perspective on the war. William F. Buckley once said, "The trouble with liberals is they only read liberal writers, and the trouble with conservatives is they don't read anything." While I think that has changed since he made that remark in the early 70s, he does have a point about our penchant for reading only things which reinforce our predispositions.