this post was submitted on 11 Jun 2025
874 points (98.3% liked)

Memes

50890 readers
866 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 110 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (6 children)

The US praised the Nazis for killing the communists. They supported their "cause" riiiiight up until they started attacking western Europe AKA the countries that actually matter.

The US also hired tons of Nazi "scientists," including granting them immunity for their roles in the Holocaust. They also granted the head of Unit 731 immunity (specifically from the USSR who rightly wanted him executed) in exchange for the human experimentation data. NATO coincidentally also has a ton of Nazis in its leadership.

The US went as far as installing prominent Nazi figures back into West Germany in the same way they let confederates go back to their lives after the civil war. Whereas the Soviets executed Nazi leaders in East Germany because that's what they fucking deserve. The US then claimed that the executed Nazis were victims of communism and included them in their "communism death toll" numbers.

This isn't an error. The US has always been sympathetic to Nazis, before, during, and after the war. They only begrudgingly pitched in against them because they viewed western Europe as slightly more important.

Finally, the US didn't even fucking do that much. Certainly nowhere near enough to justify their claim that they "saved the world" in WWII. The USSR and UK each did far more yet the US seems to think the USSR was fighting for the Nazis and the UK was a scared poodle hiding in their island until the heroic Americans came to save them, when in reality, the tide had already turned against the Nazis by the time the US joined. They also nuked Japan just because they could, it had nothing to do with the war because they already had intelligence that Japan was about to surrender.

[–] lautre@jlai.lu 13 points 1 day ago

The Nazi eugenics program was also strongly inspired by what the US was doing at the time.

It's just that the Nazi went a bit too far, too obvious (and mainly they lost the war). It was one of the arguments of the defense in the Nuremberg trial that the German eugenics differed little from what was practiced in the US.

[–] ArchmageAzor@lemmy.world 37 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The only Nazi rally held outside of Nazi Germany (in the 20th century) was held in the US.

[–] Denjin@lemmings.world 13 points 2 days ago (1 children)

While technically true, there were plenty of affiliated fascist organisations around the world who openly paraded their nazi sympathies in public. Oswald Mosely and his British Union of Fascists spring to mind.

[–] Sylvartas@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

They also granted the head of Unit 731 immunity (specifically from the USSR who rightly wanted him executed) in exchange for the human experimentation data.

"Experimentation" data that was entirely useless, if I remember correctly.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 22 points 2 days ago (36 children)

Minor correction: the US nuked Japan so the Soviets couldn't be credited for Japan's surrender as well as Nazi Germany. It was a calculated move by the US to murder hundreds of thousands of civilians just so that Socialism wouldn't spread as much as it could have after the war due to the Soviets saving the world. The US paid the price of hundreds of thousands of Japanese civilian lives in order to benefit its own standing after the war.

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Oh, it wasn't because of the fanatical dedication of the Japanese armed forces that were so dug in it would have taken years and cost thousands of American lives to defeat them, island by island? It was because they didn't want the Russians to hog all the glory? Never heard that one before

[–] ZeroHora@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

the first bomb was dropped on 6 August, the Soviet Union declared war on the 8th. But contrary to American expectations and post-war claims, the author’s diligent research in the Japanese sources demonstrates conclusively that it was the Soviet declaration of war, not the atomic bombs, that forced the Japanese to surrender unconditionally.

Geoffrey Jukes review Racing the enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the surrender of Japan by Tsuyoshi Hasegawa

[–] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Thanks for this!

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 day ago

That justification was made after the fact. The truth is that Japan was already going to surrender. This isn't a conspiracy theory either, it's modern historical consensus, even the US Navy's museum admits so. The USSR had just taken Berlin and the Nazis surrendered on May 8, and declared war on Imperial Japan on August 8 after both Japan and the US had seen the Red Army pivoting to their East, towards Manchuria.

On August 9th, the Soviets invaded Japanese-controlled Manchuria, and Japan announced surrender on August 15th. The nukes were launched on the 6th and 9th of August, because the US didn't want Japan to go Soviet, the US had plans of reforming Imperial Japan as a subsidiary Empire, maintaining Japan's colonization of Korea and other Asian countries while profiting off of Japan, in a form of double Imperialism, and a Soviet Japan wouldn't let that work. Their plan was thrown to dust with the Korean War that followed.

While publicly stating their intent to fight on to the bitter end, Japan's leaders (the Supreme Council for the Direction of the War, also known as the "Big Six") were privately making entreaties to the publicly neutral Soviet Union to mediate peace on terms more favorable to the Japanese. While maintaining a sufficient level of diplomatic engagement with the Japanese to give them the impression they might be willing to mediate, the Soviets were covertly preparing to attack Japanese forces in Manchuria and Korea (in addition to South Sakhalin and the Kuril Islands) in fulfillment of promises they had secretly made to the US and the UK at the Tehran and Yalta Conferences.

Right on Wikipedia.

load more comments (35 replies)
[–] Zerush@lemmy.ml 6 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I know, see Operation Paperclip and I also know that the end of the nazi Germany is mainly thanks to Rusia and allies, US entered when the main task was already done. Without the French and British resistance, USA couldn't even have managed to enter Germany.

[–] callouscomic@lemm.ee -1 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Explain the US love affair with Israel then.

[–] Cowbee@lemmy.ml 14 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Zionism is anti-semetic, ironically. The Zionists were anti-Yiddish and collaborated with the Nazis (yes, you're reading this right). Further, the Zionist mythos depends on fostering anti-semetism abroad, so that there seems to be legitimacy in having a "safe country for Jewish peoples," even if that country is a genocidal settler-colony.

I recommend reading To Stop Marx, They Made Zion.

[–] squaresinger@lemmy.world 10 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Zionism is the one thing where anti-semites and Jews (at least zionist Jews) agree.

Zionist Jews want it because it gives them their own country where they are not persecuted.

Anti-semites want it, because it means that the Jews are not in their country.

That's why even the literal Nazis supported zionism. Every Jew in Israel was one less Jew in Germany.

You get the same thing still today with the most right-wing politicians supporting Zionism/Israel. On the one hand because it's a way to keep Jews far away and on the other hand because it can be used as a "I'm supporting Israel, so surely I can't be a Nazi. Anyway, let's go shoot some Muslims."-kind of excuse.

[–] HiddenLayer555@lemmy.ml 5 points 1 day ago

Zionist is a subset of Nazi