This week marks the 73rd anniversary of the British and American firebombing of Dresden.
American Betrayal makes the case that it was Stalin's sophisticated campaigns of deception against his allies (his enemies, too), led in the US by his agents of influence inside the Roosevelt administration, that prolonged the fighting in WWII for the express purpose of allowing the Soviet Union and its communist allies in Europe and Asia to reach and seize much of Europe and Asia, exactly as they did.
A brief excerpt to mark the barbarous carnage and destruction, which conventional wisdom extols for saving civilization.
... In human terms, a shorter war would have meant millions fewer casualties, from the Nazi death houses to the battlefields; indeed, a shorter war would also have spared Central Europe’s urban centers, which were flattened by Allied firebombing campaigns mainly in that final year of war, and particularly in those final months of fighting. The ultimate firebombing attack came at Dresden, where roughly one thousand British and U.S. heavy bombers dropped roughly four thousand tons of explosives and incendiary devices on the city center between February 13 and 15, 1945, less than three months before V-E Day on May 8, 1945. It is said, as the late historian John Keegan wrote, that this atrocious act was taken at the behest of Stalin. In the past, I’ve defended the firebombing of Dresden on the basis of the mission’s stated objectives and the Nazis’ refusal to surrender, but it is with a heavy heart that I now believe it was “necessary” only to facilitate Soviet territorial gain. On an extremely low level, defending Dresden makes me just another dupe of the great Communist con. Was obliterating Dresden and some thirty thousand of its residents to expedite the Soviet march on Berlin in America’s best interest? Of course not. It wasn’t in humanity’s best interest, either. Ironically, it was in the best interest of Dresden residents Victor and Eva Klemperer, who, having received Nazi orders to re- port for labor duty on the day before the firebombing campaign would begin, were able to escape near-certain death by the light of these raging flames of destruction.11 Then again, if the war had been shorter, it all would have been unnecessary.
The duration and outcome of the war itself, then, become a potential case against Harry Hopkins as the bayonet point of Soviet influence penetrating the White House. With a shorter war, it seems unlikely the Soviet Union would have emerged as a superpower; certainly not a territorial behemoth with a new empire. This hypothesis makes Hopkins the most overlooked catalyst of the twentieth century. History may remember him as a bit player, but it’s time to refocus posterity’s attention. ...
To be cont'd.