I apologize for the bad terminology, but I’ll stick with it to answer your question. Even in WW2, the Soviets were the “good guys” and the US only intervened when it was obvious the Soviets would win to stop a communist Europe.
Got it. In any war, communists are “good”, everyone else is “meh” or “bad”. It’s real telling that you’ll call the Soviets the “good guys” but not any other European nations.
If the U.S. really cared about stopping Nazis, shouldn’t they have joined the war back in 1939? You also can’t possibly defend the two nuclear bombs on Japan (who was already ready to surrender) was anything other than to intimidate the USSR.
You’re jumping all over the place and it’s funny. Let’s go back to your earlier claim: “The US has been the bad guys in every war it’s been in”. Were the US the “bad guys” in WW2? Yes or no?
No, I was providing additional support to the claim that even in WW2, the US aren’t the good guys.
Were the US the “bad guys” in WW2? Yes or no?
Yes, I would call the country responsible for the Nazis (the Nazis were inspired by the U.S. and actually thought it went too far with the one-drop rule) and the only country to use two nuclear bombs on civilians on a country that was already ready to surrender the bad guys.
Towards whom? To their indian subjects? They were worse than the nazis.
To the USSR after finally siding with them?
To the USSR when they were planning to bomb Baku and send troops to Finland?
To Czechslovakia when they sold them out to germany and poland?
To the USSR when they deliberately stalled the creation of what would become the allies and instead helped Germany?
I apologize for the bad terminology, but I’ll stick with it to answer your question. Even in WW2, the Soviets were the “good guys” and the US only intervened when it was obvious the Soviets would win to stop a communist Europe.
Got it. In any war, communists are “good”, everyone else is “meh” or “bad”. It’s real telling that you’ll call the Soviets the “good guys” but not any other European nations.
If the U.S. really cared about stopping Nazis, shouldn’t they have joined the war back in 1939? You also can’t possibly defend the two nuclear bombs on Japan (who was already ready to surrender) was anything other than to intimidate the USSR.
You’re jumping all over the place and it’s funny. Let’s go back to your earlier claim: “The US has been the bad guys in every war it’s been in”. Were the US the “bad guys” in WW2? Yes or no?
No, I was providing additional support to the claim that even in WW2, the US aren’t the good guys.
Yes, I would call the country responsible for the Nazis (the Nazis were inspired by the U.S. and actually thought it went too far with the one-drop rule) and the only country to use two nuclear bombs on civilians on a country that was already ready to surrender the bad guys.
Amazing. Let’s try another. England in WW2: good guys or bad guys?
I’ll follow Comrade Mao’s advice and shut up instead of speaking nonsense as I haven’t done enough research on England’s role in WW2.
Towards whom? To their indian subjects? They were worse than the nazis. To the USSR after finally siding with them? To the USSR when they were planning to bomb Baku and send troops to Finland? To Czechslovakia when they sold them out to germany and poland? To the USSR when they deliberately stalled the creation of what would become the allies and instead helped Germany?
Yes
In general, communists are good and everyone else is meh or bad, not just war.