Both had different ways of dealing with Stalin, but who had the more realistic approach in their dealings with the Soviet Union, particularily at the Tehran and Yalta conferences. Any opinions would be greatly appreciated.
2006-11-19 15:52:39 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ History
Churchill had a much greater knowledge about the long run aims of Russia.
In this sense nonetheless the great foresight of Delano Roosevelt he was a bit naive about the cloak and dagger politics of Stalin, it was thanks to Churchill that Russia was not able to advance into central Europe more than he did.
2006-11-19 16:56:14 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Patton did, he wanted to rearm the Germany Army, and lead the three allies against the Soviets. If he did it fast enough then their is a good chance he would have caught the cream of the Soviet War Machine and crippled them, before they knew what happened.
2006-11-20 00:10:18 · answer #2 · answered by Dan S 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure about Churchill, but I think that Roosevelt sold out the Ukranian Cossacks who resisted the Communists. He shouldn't have let Stalin have them. I think over 800,000 were executed in cold blood.
2006-11-19 23:55:25 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you kidding? Neither!! They were both insanely power hungry and arrogant! Charistmatic, gotta hand them that. If I had to choose however, I'd have to say Churchill. He seemed more realistic.
2006-11-20 01:16:58 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Churchill-FDR was a bit naive when it came to Stalin IMHO
2006-11-20 00:09:45 · answer #5 · answered by michinoku2001 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Churchill did Rosavelt was a henpecked bulldyke lover
2006-11-20 00:01:03 · answer #6 · answered by sirhonkylot 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋