I split this off from the Trump thread because, well, it wasn't to that topic, but was a good discussion in its own right, so I gave it its own thread.

 

I had forgotten that as well.

Yeah, the entire point of the Russo-Japanese war was to stop the Russians from getting a foothold in the Pacific. They badly wanted to open that side of the world, as their country spans all of Asia but they've never been able to do much with the Pacific side of the nation.

 

And while that war happened under the Czarist regime, it's basically impossible to believe Stalin - possibly the biggest prick in a war full of legendary pricks - didn't want the same thing the Czars failed to achieve 40 years earlier.

For a county as gargantuan as Russia, it's interesting how few easily-accessible ports they have as a nation.

 

I mean, they have St. Petersburg and... can I count St Petersburg twice?

Crimea

 

Crimea

True.

 

But it's interesting that they have so few ports that open directly to an ocean.

 

The contiguous USA is much smaller than Russia and we have more major ports than I can count on three different sides of the nation.

 

The implied assumption is that this is as fast as the US could have moved. I'm suggesting it isn't, and that it was a strategic decision to move slower and let the Russians take the vast majority of the casualties while the US could fully mobilize.

 

I'm not saying it's wrong, but the tradeoff was Eastern Europe.

What evidence is there that the Allied invasion of Europe was purposely delayed?   

 

Yeah, the entire point of the Russo-Japanese war was to stop the Russians from getting a foothold in the Pacific. They badly wanted to open that side of the world, as their country spans all of Asia but they've never been able to do much with the Pacific side of the nation.

 

And while that war happened under the Czarist regime, it's basically impossible to believe Stalin - possibly the biggest prick in a war full of legendary pricks - didn't want the same thing the Czars failed to achieve 40 years earlier.

 

I wonder, if that had happened, how that would have changed China.  I have to imagine it would've been profoundly different. 

 

What evidence is there that the Allied invasion of Europe was purposely delayed?   

 

They had the men and capability to invade by 1942, they were in Africa and soon after Southern Italy. They didn't get into France until June, 1944.

 

It may not have been successful or led to larger casualties, but the capacity was there. I'm not saying it was wrong, to wait until success, but I also imagine they weren't going full go while Germany and Russia were slugging it out. It was strategically a good thing for the West.

77th anniversary of the Pearl Harbor attack today.