• freagle@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Anti-communism was already a major component of what the US and Western Europe were doing before WW2. To ignore it and attempt to artificially divide motivations between WW2 motivations and cold war motivations is to be idealistically ahistorical

      • Dolores [love/loves]@hexbear.net
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        the problem is not ignoring anti-communist motivations from 1917, it’s you not understanding that those interests got contradicted and disrupted by ww2.

        the US arming, assisting, and requesting the Soviet entry against Japan makes no sense when you’re trying to analyze this through the lense of future Korean war. why the fuck would they do that? why did the US give the Soviets any resources at any point if the goal of them fighting the nazis was entirely because they were losing to the Soviets? if these stated motivations exist, why would these events have taken place?

        • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Because the US was not willing to lose hegemony over Europe nor was it ready to declare its in-theater ally as its enemy. The US would have been pushed out of Europe if they had. They needed to manage the end of the conflict in a way that resulted in containment of the USSR which is exactly what they did and what the result of their actions were.