E. Barry Bruyea wrote in message . ..
On 22 Oct 2003 02:44:52 -0700, (Stuart Wilkes)
wrote:

"John Mullen" wrote in message ...

snip

We did not badly to win the air and sea battles with Nazi Germany. Neither
was easy and both had costs attached. Of course we couldn't have won
overall without the support of the USA and the USSR, both of which in
their own ways hedged their bets until the decision to enter the war was
forced upon them.

Not by their choice. The Soviets had alliances with Czechoslovakia
and France since 1935, and offered Great Britain and France a full-up
Triple Alliance with all the trimmings on 17 April 1939. Too bad
Chamberlain refused to take it seriously, preferring to pursue
Anglo-German agreement.

The only way that an treaty with the USSR could have been signed is to
accede to Stalin's demand for a free rein in the Baltic,

Yes, it is much better, from the point of view of an appeasing Western
Conservative, for Nazi Germany to have free rein in the Baltic.

an agreement not likely to have gone well with any of the Western powers.

Indeed, the Western powers were concerned to keep the Baltic States
out of Soviet hands. However, in the Anglo-German negotiations of the
summer of 1939, the British offered to recognize Eastern Europe as a
German sphere of influence. Last time I checked, the Baltic States
are in Eastern Europe. So the Western powers were indeed resolved to
keep the Baltic States out of Soviet hands, in order to preserve them
for the Nazi variety.

Stalin finally got it from Hitler, which is what he was after.

Indeed. After all, the prospects of Operation Barbarossa are much
improved if it is launched against the 1938 Soviet borders.

Stuart Wilkes