08-01-2002 10:11									#91
	Minor quibles Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 James Monroe tells old world to stay out of American politics, or it's war! (Monroe Doctrone)

It's easy to be that brave when you have a world wide naval power enforcing your doctrine for you.

quote: US forces tip balence of power in WWI, allowing allied victory.

Was this really such a good thing? What really would have changed from a US perspective had the US stayed out of what was until then largely a European conflict?

	08-01-2002 10:17									#92
	Re: Minor quibles Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc Was this really such a good thing [US involvement in WWI]? What really would have changed from a US perspective had the US stayed out of what was until then largely a European conflict?

Same goes for Canada's involvement. Thousands of Canadians died for nothing.

And I would change my previous statement about the worst of Canada's history. A close tie for the worst thing was the thousands of men killed in Boer War and WWI. These were wars that we had no reason to be involved in.

	08-01-2002 10:18									#93
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Interesting quote, Ramo, considering it was made BEFORE they even came up with the plan, so as to make it irrelivent.

Would you care to explain why?

What about something straight from the horse's mouth?
In 1948, a quote from Marshall: "It is idle to think that a Europe left to its own efforts [...] would remain open to American business in the same way that we have known it in the past."

quote: Nice try at taking a quote out of context to attack a postion, BTW, but no dice.

Is there some other less cynical context that that quote would work under?

Acheson, when the Plan was beginning, said, "These measures of relief and reconstruction have been only in part suggested by humanitarianism. Your Congress has authorized and your Government is carrying out, a policy of relief and reconstruction today chiefly as a matter of national self-interest."

Is that "out of context" too?

	08-01-2002 10:25									#94
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Chris,

"USA enables allies to again win, this time WWII, without US help Soviets would have collasped (before anyone shoots their mouth off, USA was providing 70% of all foodstuffs, 80% of all uniforms, 95% of motor transport, 30% of all armor, 40% of al aircraft, amonug other things to Soviets, and similar numbers to Britain)"

Do you have a source for this? I find it hard to believe these figures for the USSR for the war (perhaps for part of 1942?) as a whole, considering the fact that so few (crappy) allied tanks and planes show up in Russian TO & E s during WWII. Also consider that goods shipped to the USSR were limited to one decent port, and were forced to use a tiny rail spur to Archangel. This doesn't pass the smell test.

In Britain there were many available ports, and the rail traffic was dispersed, making the figures above more believable. Your statement about the possibility of Soviet collapse is impossible to prove either way (they did go on the offensive in 1942), but I certainly believe that the Soviets were heartened by U.S. entry into the war, especially as the timely Japanese attack freed them from worries in Siberia of Japanese attack.

I also think you underestimate Soviet military capabilities in 1945. While they were certainly war weary, they were also very experienced, and much of there equipment was as good as or better than anglo-allied stuff. They were also numerous, and still quite capable on the defensive. Dictating to them would not have been as easy as you make it out to be. Though I am no huge fan of Truman, he doesn't deserve the blame for upholding the agreements made by his predecessor, nor for not wielding power which it is doubtful he really had.

He does deserve plenty of blame for Korea though, for lazy intelligence and sloppy diplomacy before the conflict broke out, and for letting the military fall so low after the war ended, and allowing it to stay there right up til the invasion of South Korea. His defiance after the fact needn't have been such a 'profile in courage' if he had been better prepared in the first place. A lot of Americans died because of that, and a lot more Koreans died than Americans.

In another nit pick, while you may be no fan of Andrew Johnston personally, I can't agree with your analysis of this period of American History being a low for the same reasons that you do. For one thing, Congress undid a lot of the damage he did by passing both civil rights legislation and the 14th amendment. The real Jim Crow damage was done after the (second) withdrawl of U.S. troops by (Harrison?) a decade later.

	08-01-2002 10:28									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by ravagon btw Horsie that wasn't you sneaking down to Southern NSW for a quick smoke away from Mrs Horse by any chance? Gotta be more careful with those matches.

Tell me about it.

As a matter of fact I was one of a group of teenagers who started a small bushfire in my youth. We were standing above a railway cutting trying to make a molotov cocktail to throw, if my memory serves me correctly, at a passing passenger train but we used petrol so of course when someone tried to light the wick our hands caught fire and we dropped it in the bush.....................run away, run away

Better stop there

So you see, it was only an accident

God teenagers are stupid, especially 13 or 14 year old boys.

	08-01-2002 14:10									#96
	Inflate your Upload Space

About Wilson:

"Showing some backbone would have been nice, and considering how much Britain and France owed the USA in war debts, in real politik, Wilson had tremendous leverage, but was far to timid and a dreamer to use it."

Britain's LLoyd George was best at representing Germany's interests among the big 4, simply as part of a continental balance, and considering the contrast between the Vienna Peace of 1815 (not much revenge against France there, for those who like to think of all history as bloodthirsty and revenge-driven) vs the 1871 Frankfurt treaty. Wilson was either clueless or suffering from some religion-infested punishment fantasies, or both.

About ERP:

Why is it so difficult to see this coming from several motivations, economic self interest, containment of communism and humanitarian ideals ?

	08-01-2002 15:18									#97
	Tired of ads?

There's been a distinct lack of British contributions. I'll redress the balance.

Best-

The Battle of Brunnanburh/The reign of Athelstan- Athelstan's Wessex and Mercian army takes on the invading forces of Constantine's Scots, Olaf Gothfrithson's Irish Danes, the Northumbrian Danes and a motley bunch of Icelanders and Norwegians. He utterly kicks the crap out of them. England would not exist without this- we'd be subjects of Scotland, Ireland or Denmark. It also helps that Athelstan was a remarkably enlightened man as kings go, and that his Anglo-Saxon England was amazingly democratic and humane considering it was the Dark Ages.

The defeat of the Spanish Armada- Chosen because it was such a typically English victory. The English Admirals weren't heroes- they were pirates (Drake actually broke off the pursuit at a crucial moment so that he could nip off and raid the Spanish payship) and the defeat owes more to good luck and the notoriously evil British weather than any degree of military brilliance. I like battles like that- they reaffirm my belief in human nature.

The abolition of slavery- William Wilberforce was a great man. What's more, the presence of the powerful and highly belligerant British Navy harassing slaveships didn't do the slave trade in other nations much good either.

Rourke's Drift- How couldn't this go on? The Zulu wars were evil acts of colonial aggression, but the legacy of a bunch of Welsh troopers standing up to odds exceeding 50 to 1 and surviving is nothing short of incredible.

The Battle of Cable Street- Moseley's British Union of Fascists was ominously gaining strength in the 1930's, but when they tried to march through the Jewish streets, the locals took sides with the socialists, the Trades Unionists and just about everyone else who disliked the goose-stepping clowns and kicked them clear out of London. Chaos theory dictates that small events are the determining factors in global events, and this one was a significant factor in the final outcome of WW2.+

The Battle of Britain- Too obvious, but it had Spitfires in it. Spitfires kick arse. It had Hurricanes too, but they're a bit dumpy and ugly.



Worst-

The Battle of Hastings- William The Bastard (unsurprisngly renamed by his historians as William "the Conqueror") took a motley rabble of disinherited bastards (note how many of his Earls had surnames starting with "Fitz.."), psychopaths, murderers and rapists to England. Only the truly desperate or insane would have followed him- he was attempting to invade arguably the most powerful state in Western Europe with prcatically no local support). Through a series of flukes, bad timing and plain bad luck (such as a simultaneous invasion by Harold Hardrade) Harold II (a promising king) was defeated and the Anglo-Saxon state abolished. Instead we were left with a murderous tyranny that set our culture back by centuries. Every monarch England has had since 1066 has been crap. I have proof.

Repression of the Scots and Irish from 1600 to very recently- You name it, we did it. Particular lowpoints include the Glencoe massacre, Cumberland's atrocities following Cullodden and Irish internment in the 1970's.

Random and widespread colonial brutality in the Americas, Africa, Middle East, India and South East Asia 1600 to about 1966- Do you see a trend emerging? Most world leaders throughout history have been absolute scum, but I can't think of any other nation that glories in such a legacy of wholescale theft. Can you?
Actually the warning signs were first shown in 939 AD when Athelstan sent an army to assist Louis IV d'Outremer against Otto of the Germans (the first example of English involvement in overseas wars). Rather than join the battle, his forces just sailed up and down the English channel raiding the neutral and allied cities they found before sauntering back with ships full of loot. It's where those English football fans take their legacy from.

Having a tradition of holding out against overwhelming odds but getting embarrassingly defeated by relatively puny states, like the fledgeling USA.- Yes, that's quite poor.

The Opium Wars- Mmmmm..... I'm trying to think how these might have any justification at all. Nope, I'm beaten.

Introducing commercial slavery on a scale unmatched by just about anyone else- Oh dear.... Bristol and Liverpool were founded on slavery.

Following up the slavery by switching to alcohol and tobacco, probably leading to the premature deaths of countless millions in the process- Oh dearie me....

Spreading numerous diseases by our rampaging hordes of pirates, slavers and random thieving gits- Look, we're sorry. OK?

Maintaining a pious and scolding manner to murderous and repressive 3rd world regimnes whilst simultaneously supplying them with the weapons to carry out their muders and repressions- Yes, we're shooting ourselves in the foot there, aren't we?

This is England. If you want to know about the bad stuff, the challenge is knowing where to stop.

	08-01-2002 15:25									#98
	Increase Your PM Length

Just curious. Is there anyone in Europe who still appreciates Operation Overlord?

	08-01-2002 15:27									#99
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Transcend That's right. Firebombing Dresden should be another proud moment of our history.

I wish you were just a troll, but I know you're low enough to actually believe what you say

	08-01-2002 15:33									#100
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by Libertarian Just curious. Is there anyone in Europe who still appreciates Operation Overlord?

Did anyone say he didn't? Must have missed it. A really great episode in world history. Have you ever been to Normandy? Really awesome. Just remember that the British and Canadians had just as much a part of Overlord as the Americans.

Why do you ask?

	08-01-2002 15:35									#101
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Libertarian Just curious. Is there anyone in Europe who still appreciates Operation Overlord?

Yeah, cool, we fucked your guys into pieces when they arrived from their nice swimming trip

	08-01-2002 15:37									#102
	Tired of ads?

Laz: All your good historical things are about battles aside from the slavery thing.

I'd put in stuff like introduction of the welfare state, about a billion inventions, including stuff like most major international team sports. Science, probably the best of which is Newton revolutionising physics and inventing calculus along the way to help him out.

You are right about the worst of British history though, it's a long and shameful past unfortunately.

	08-01-2002 15:39									#103
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

New Zealand:

Best:
A few: Treaty of Waitangi - despite its flaws, I believe it has actually enabled the Maori to achieve a higher status in NZ than most other indigenous peoples in former colonies. (Of course as a Pakeha, er, White male, I could just have the establishment pulling authentic NZ wool over my eyes) More recently the 1981 South Africa rugby tour - when the rest of the world was condmning SA for Apartheid, controversially the Govt at least gave them a chance; and the prominent role in the East Timor peace process.

Worst: By us - The Maori Land Wars (don't know much about them, but they're not all that bad compared with other land wars).

Against us - Gallipoli, or maybe the French secret agent bombing of the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior in harbour in Auckland. Sounds minor but still rises blood pressure here.

We're not that interesting, are we? But I bet you all learned something, eh?

Oh, I left out Tiger Woods and Anna Kournikova playing major sports events in li'l ole Aotearoa within a few weeks of the start of '02 (well NZ Open hasn't started yet, but it will!). I am serious, sports are big here. Imagine the first 12 mins of the nightly news devoted to Tiger!

And ravagon, was that incident the underarm bowling one? I don't know cricketers from before my time.

	08-01-2002 15:44									#104
	Inflate your Upload Space

As for Britain, what about British civilization and its influence? It may not be The world power anymore (well, some think so), but English civilization has given rise to most of what we in Western countries enjoy. What would the world be without the US, and what would the US be without England?

	08-01-2002 15:49									#105
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Libertarian Just curious. Is there anyone in Europe who still appreciates Operation Overlord?

Aber naturlich, ohne amerikanische Hilfe würden wir alle Deutsch sprechen.

	08-01-2002 15:54									#106
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Klar! Wie konnt' ich das nur vergessen ?

Bugs has some good points in there. Need to dig into the chunky pieces of austrian history when I have the time....

	08-01-2002 16:08									#107
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Roland Klar! Wie konnt' ich das nur vergessen ?

Weil die Amerikaner halten, Ihnen zu erklären?

	08-01-2002 16:13									#108
	Remove this text

Halten ? Was halten ? Wen halten ? Wo halten ? Wie halten ?

	08-01-2002 16:14									#109
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Et l'objet de toute cette foutaise?
Kinda difficult for those of us who don't know German.

	08-01-2002 16:20									#110
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

Ich glaube er meint "Weil sie es nicht für nötig halten, euch das zu erklären. Sie betonen nur immer und immer wieder dass es ganz einfach mal so wäre und bauen darauf die Rechtfertigung ihrer Außenpolitik als eigentliche Fortsetzung der Britischen Kolonialpolitik im 19. Jahrhundert im Sinne Chomskys auf."

	08-01-2002 16:25									#111
	Tired of ads?

Surely AH's "Liberation of East Timor" is one of his nicest trolls so far. The fact that Australia helped maintain the occupation for decades, both through training indonesian forces and through signing agreements to turn a blind eye to atrocities for economic gain seems to have escaped him. East Timor is Australia's Haiti, as someone said.

	08-01-2002 16:27									#112
	Anyone interested in a translation? Remove this text

What happened in Haiti? US colony? one of the places they invaded during the 80s and 90s?

	08-01-2002 16:53									#113
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Yeah, and invaded in the 1910's as well.
You know the US govt - condemns imperialism and colonialism, yet does the next best thing -"preventative measures", "police action" and in some cases, "peacekeeping".

	08-01-2002 19:30									#114
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Sikander Do you have a source for this?

The source for this is the historical section, US Army, West point, where I was attached for six months before I retired.
The actual numbers are staggering, and are not widely known to historians, as much of this is not codified or availible to the general public.

quote: I find it hard to believe these figures for the USSR for the war (perhaps for part of 1942?) as a whole, considering the fact that so few (crappy) allied tanks and planes show up in Russian TO & E s during WWII. Also consider that goods shipped to the USSR were limited to one decent port, and were forced to use a tiny rail spur to Archangel. This doesn't pass the smell test.

It seems that 80% of the goods were passed through Iran (where there were Rails built by USA and Britain) and Vladivostok (Russian frieghters throughout the Pacific war were visiting the US west coast, Japan allowed this in the hopes of keeping Russia neutral).
Our Soviet Friends had numerous Churchill and Sherman brigades in action, that they "neglect" to mention, probaly part of Stalin's anti-west mania.
It is also not widely understood that many Soviel designed Aircraft had western (British and US) designed and manufactured engines, so we are not just talking about a few Airacobras and Hurricanes here, but standard soviet designs, so I'm affraid it does past the test, depending on whether you believe US Army sources, which I do, mainly because they aern't publicized, and they explain the fantastic numbers the Soviets had in the field by 45. It is also true that the soviet training organization used almost all western equipment from 43 foward.
Also, it is two ports in the Artic, not one, Murmansk and Archanglesk, and after 43 the German ability to interdict this route is extremly limited, so most convoys were delivering 90% or more of the goods sent.

quote: In Britain there were many available ports, and the rail traffic was dispersed, making the figures above more believable. Your statement about the possibility of Soviet collapse is impossible to prove either way (they did go on the offensive in 1942), but I certainly believe that the Soviets were heartened by U.S. entry into the war, especially as the timely Japanese attack freed them from worries in Siberia of Japanese attack.

I was talking about the whole war, not seperate parts, but by 44 the USA and Britain had taken on the task of feeding and clothing the entire Soviet military, you don't seriously believe the Soviets found an alternate food source in country to replace Ukrane, do you?

quote: I also think you underestimate Soviet military capabilities in 1945. While they were certainly war weary, they were also very experienced, and much of there equipment was as good as or better than anglo-allied stuff. They were also numerous, and still quite capable on the defensive. Dictating to them would not have been as easy as you make it out to be. Though I am no huge fan of Truman, he doesn't deserve the blame for upholding the agreements made by his predecessor, nor for not wielding power which it is doubtful he really had.

This is a bone on contention, but the fact remains the Soviets needed to move the bulk of their armor east to attack Japan shows their weakness.
Having better tanks is meaningless if their crews can't eat, aern't getting fuel, are being shelled constantly and have no air cover (make no mistake here, the Soviet Yak and Lavochkins were no match for Mustangs and Tempests, several times over the balkans US air mixed it up with the Soviets, and shot down several Soviet machines without loss, and shot up Soviet colums as well. Also, the US had begun to deliver the Pershing, which was more then a match for the IS-2, and Britain was preparing to deploy the excellent Centurion, so the quality gap was rapidily closing. Add to it, the US would be fighting the same kind of war, against an enemy with better tactical equipment, feeling the logistical pinch (all those B-17s, B-24s, and the new B-29s would be put to good use, as would Lancasters and Halifaxis, add to it that the allied bread line would be cut, plus the USA had nukes and the will to us them), and it becomes clear that the parity you claim is not so apparent, if fact, the western allies had advantages in 45 that they would never see again, advantages that kept Stalin in check a few years later, during the Berlin airlift, where Stalin realized that if he attacked the transports the allied airforce would rip his forces up, so he backed off.
I stand by what I said, the Soviets got away with murder in 45, and Truman was the #1 man reponsible for it.

quote: In another nit pick, while you may be no fan of Andrew Johnston personally, I can't agree with your analysis of this period of American History being a low for the same reasons that you do. For one thing, Congress undid a lot of the damage he did by passing both civil rights legislation and the 14th amendment. The real Jim Crow damage was done after the (second) withdrawl of U.S. troops by (Harrison?) a decade later.

Well, it's interesting to look at Johnson, a rabid supporter of Lincoln, when he became president, was easily the victim of of flattery and was easily manipulated. The ground work was layed by his administration, without them allowing our southern friends back in power, all of that would never have gotten off the ground.
No, the blame most directly falls on the head of this feckless man.
This seems to be a horrid era for US presidents, soon US Grant, who had the most corrupt government in US history will arrive on the scence.
Of course, this is all one man's opinion, it is interesting to note how few other critical assesments of US history have been made by others so far.
The fact is, I wasn't there for all of this and could be completly wrong, or 100% right, there will never be a way to say for certain.

	08-01-2002 19:37									#115
	Re: Minor quibles Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc It's easy to be that brave when you have a world wide naval power enforcing your doctrine for you.

For shame, Dino, the USN was a tiny navy when Monroe put forth the doctrone, it doesn't reach great power status untill 1898, and world class untill 1917.

quote: Was this really such a good thing? What really would have changed from a US perspective had the US stayed out of what was until then largely a European conflict?

I said I was proud of our effort, not whither or not it was justifed. In fact, the euros were back at it withen 20 years.

	08-01-2002 19:41									#116
	Re: Re: Minor quibles Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Chris 62 For shame, Dino, the USN was a tiny navy when Monroe put forth the doctrone, it doesn't reach great power status untill 1898, and world class untill 1917.

I was refering to the English navy not the USN, Chris. IIRC, they had approached Monroe about issuing a joint declaration on that very same point.

quote: I said I was proud of our effort, not whither or not it was justifed.

My mistake.

	08-01-2002 23:25									#117
	Put an end to popups!

*points to own post in page 3*

	08-01-2002 23:38									#118
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Actually Imran, several New England MERCHANTS refused, and if you knew what you were talking about, you would understand that invading canada from New England in 1812 was geograpically almost impossible. You can take that foot from your mouth any time, and keep in mind the serious effort was made on the NY front, where NY Militia under Renselaar refused to cross the border, only regular US forces crossed.

No need to act all arrogant. It wasn't simply several New England Merchants, it was a majority of the population. The militias of Massachusettes, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut were not raised for war and did not want it!

Ever hear of the Hartford Convention? That is where the big wigs of the North East came together to discuss succession because of the declaration of war on England against their wishes. This is because the North East was always pro-British since the end of the war (Federalist dominated area).

And yes, you've basically almost backed my point with the Renselaar comment, the NY militia REFUSED to cross.

The foot can be removed from your mouth now.

--

Furthermore, I'm with Sikander in that invading in '45 would have been a massive mistake. Let madmen like Patton dream of marching into Moscow, because the US forces would have been turned back not far over the Oder. Remember it was the Soviets who broke the backs of Nazi Germany, not us.

And, yes, China would have been a major problem if we backed Chiang. I seem to remember a similar situation, where we did prop up a dictator... he was the Shah of Iran. No one 'lost' China, the Chinese took it back for themselves.

	09-01-2002 00:10									#119
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui No need to act all arrogant. It wasn't simply several New England Merchants, it was a majority of the population. The militias of Massachusettes, Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut were not raised for war and did not want it!

Who said anything about militia? NE wanted no war for maritime concerns, but did want Canada for domestic security concerns.

quote: Ever hear of the Hartford Convention? That is where the big wigs of the North East came together to discuss succession because of the declaration of war on England against their wishes. This is because the North East was always pro-British since the end of the war (Federalist dominated area).

Doesn't change anything I posted.
NE was far from proBritish, it was the Merchants who wanted uninteruped trade that were against the war, not the people.

quote: And yes, you've basically almost backed my point with the Renselaar comment, the NY militia REFUSED to cross.

New York ISN'T a part of New England.

quote: The foot can be removed from your mouth now.

Never was there, and with you, never will be.

quote: Furthermore, I'm with Sikander in that invading in '45 would have been a massive mistake. Let madmen like Patton dream of marching into Moscow, because the US forces would have been turned back not far over the Oder. Remember it was the Soviets who broke the backs of Nazi Germany, not us.

I love myth taking, I guess the USA wasn't even involved.
And it has nothing to do with "marching on Moscow"
If you had paid attention to my last post (and it's obvious you didn't), US military doctrone is based on firepower, then and now, something our Soviet friends couldn't match on their best day.
As for combat effectivness, US forces took on, in Normandy, the cream of the SS and ripped it up, through firepower.
When the Soviets fought the same formations, they would suffer massive losses and succeed only through numbers, and the fact that they controlled the air.
That wasn't happening in the west.
I'm amazed that you, like so many others, failed to see just how effective the allied armies and airforces were.
Without the west, Russia was doomed, but the inverse only meant prolonging the war.
When you finally understand this, you will accept the truth, that revisionist histories dimminishing the west's contributions in WW II are useless tripe and should be dismissed out of hand.
By their own admission, the Soviets were on their last legs in 45, the west, especially the US, was still mobilizing forces.
Calling Patton a madman is assinine, he recognized the Soviets for what they were, and had the courage to say so, unlike many more political generals.
44 years of oppresion in the east would prove him dead right.

quote: And, yes, China would have been a major problem if we backed Chiang. I seem to remember a similar situation, where we did prop up a dictator... he was the Shah of Iran. No one 'lost' China, the Chinese took it back for themselves.

The Shah equates to China?

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Are you serious with that statement?!!?

Are you claiming that Mao wasn't a dictator?
Is it your postion that a tiny communist Army would smash a larger force in the face of massive airpower? (tread carefully here, Mao's popularity came through battlefield victory, not through ideology)
Took it from whom?
Last time I checked, Chang was Chinese.

	09-01-2002 00:48									#120
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Without the west, Russia was doomed, but the inverse only meant prolonging the war.


That does make an interesting what if. Say Germany does not attack the Soviet Union, but still stupidly declares war on the US.

Germany would be able to clear the Brits from North Africa and the Mid East and solve some of it's resource woes.

Their avation advances were impressive considering all the resources they blew in Russia. With all the East Front planes, crew and flak available I don't see the west clearing the skies. Especially considering the additional resources that wouldn't need to be spent on transport through Russia and thousands of tanks and artillery lost there.

How long do you think the west would want to continue the fight?

As for Patton and the Soviets, from a realpolitik standpoint it probably would have made sense to attack. But from a military honor standpoint I expect the west was cutting the Soviets some slack considering the appalling losses and devastation they suffered. It would be dishonorable to support an ally one day, and turn on them and attack the next.