Comments by "Ralph Bernhard" (@ralphbernhard1757) on "How Stalin Shaped The Struggle Between Germany and Russia | Man Of Steel | Timeline" video.

  1. It "started" quite innocently, way before WW2. With a London policy. I'm sure the British population and the inhabitants of Empire would have been happy if their toffs hadn't made Germany the enemy as a default setting. The best way to avoid going to war altogether, is to have leaders who don't make others "the enemy" as a default setting... [britannica(com)com/topic/balance-of-power] According to London's own policy: "Within the European balance of power, Great Britain played the role of the “balancer,” or “holder of the balance.” It was not permanently identified with the policies of any European nation, and it would throw its weight at one time on one side, at another time on another side, guided largely by one consideration—the maintenance of the balance itself." The Germans, became "the enemy" because of where they lived and what they had (economy/power). They took over this "role" from France, after 1871. They dared unite, and industrialize, and raise their own standard of living away from a purely agrarian society. Note: nothing personal. The policy didn't mention any names. It was simply "policy". A few London lords made entire nations the "enemies" as a matter of policy. It came first before all other considerations. It practically dictated how London acted (commissions as well as omissions) regarding 1) alliances 2) treaties (or no treaties) 3) non-aggression pacts (or no non-aggression per accord) 4) neutrality in a dispute (or when to jump in and meddle) 5) whose "side" to chose in crises (irrelevant of "right" or "wrong" from an objective standpoint) 6) when to engage in arms races 7) whom to "diss" and whom to "snuggle up" to at international conferences/peace conferences Go over your history, and see its handwriting all around... Enjoy.
    1
  2. OK, the big picture then. Unfortunately, although declared wisely, WW2 was implemented unwisely... Churchill or the other lords were still "fighting the last war", as that saying goes. In their effort to hang on to their Empire, they made the wrong "friends"... One their one side, there was the USA. But Washington DC followed the principle of "America first", even if not propagating this aloud... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Century If London or Paris thought there'd be "another Versailles" after WW2, with the British and French empires "drawing lines on the map" and "carving up people/territory/powers" to protect their own interests, they were to be disappointed... https://www.britannica.com/topic/balance-of-power The attempt by Churchill to use the USA to throw Stalin out of Eastern Europe, and remain "the balancer" of power, too transparent. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Unthinkable There would be no US support to start Unthinkable. The "poor Poles have to be liberated"-argument, wasn't swinging... After being dragged into another European (World) War, Washington decided to become the "balancer of powers" herself, and Europe was divided in "East" and "West"... And the other "friends"? On the other side of Europe, there was the other "friend": Stalin. Stalin however, figured out that the Washington DC wouldn't sacrifice US soldiers just so that London could have a few "percentages" of influence in Central Europe... https://military.wikia.org/wiki/Percentages_agreement Stalin: "I'll tear this up this scrap of paper now. What are you going to do about it?"
    1