Stalin can also play the long game very well. For example, look at his support for Chiang against Mao.
This. Support the Frogs nicely and you get tons more than what you'd get occupying them. In terms of cultural influence, both internal and external, a French ally would be extremely beneficial for the USSR, becoming a stabilizing element reinforcing the Soviet influence all around the world, especially if the decolonization can be done under a Soviet leadership. This would mean "brother countries" all across Africa and Asia, possibly under explicit Soviet protection. Furthermore, Soviet leadership is inevitably going to see this ally as economical testing grounds where a mixed socialist-capitalist economy can be established without being a direct threat to their internal power. Way too much to win with a cooperative population that is legitimately thankful for the support than with a resentful one under expensive de facto occupation: after all, if there is a real level of independence, you don't get blamed for the local failures while you can still reap the benefits of the successes.Stalin can also play the long game very well. For example, look at his support for Chiang against Mao.
Unless some crazy flying Renault Espace came back from the future, I think we can rule out the possibility of a nuclear device, and de Gaulle wouldn't really have any WMD at his disposal, unless he somehow managed to get tons of Tabun delivered by the Soviets from German factories, but even then, that'd be completely ASB.
Hmm. There is the Algeria problem, but I do not see the Soviet-French socialist congruence ATL being too outre' in possibility as described above. The problem, I see, is again, de Gaulle. HE might have an ego and an opinion that France can spurn everybody. RTL I believe he was right and so acted. As an American I find him to be remarkable. He sort of equated France with his own personal "honeur" and "that honeur" could and did move mountains.
You don’t mean... Corsican overripe cheese, sent to London raw? You monster!It's not a WMD. On the surface, it's totally innocuous. But the "package" may change history.
My problem with DeGaulle getting in bed with the Soviets is that it goes against his basic personality. Ignore, for the moment, that he was anticommunist. Le Grand Charles was not so stupid as to think that once he got in bed with Stalin that he would able to get out, or who would be on top. An alliance with the USSR, especially a close one, is going to energize and enable the French communist party and DeGaulle will have to watch his back as there might be a coup (think Czechoslovakia) and for sure they will have more representation from free elections.
He is making the popcorn presently.This assumes that Stalin would want to make an alliance with France. IMO, he won't. As I noted before, Stalin is expecting the capitalists to have WW3 with each-other. No way does he want to be part of that. But I can totally see him being willing to stir the pot.
fasquardon
Rang a bell. He was one of those who deserved a cute, little, white jacket, and a small rubber cell.Have you heard of the Mad Bomber?
Rang a bell. He was one of those who deserved a cute, little, white jacket, and a small rubber cell.
However, considering Stalin's patience and paranoia, don't you think that he would just sit back and watch, doading them from the sidelines and metaphorically eating popcorn?
If the democracies duke it out with each other, they can't turn on him, after all.
Not only that, but there are problems with compartmentation, the stern design, the shaft alleys, etc.
The USN's monitors were not exactly Ships of Theseus as they were mud.kissers.
No. ASB all the way. Roosevelt hated de Gaulle so much that it is lucky that the two men could meet in the same room at all.
This is far more likely.
Truman was a power politician. If it had his state's name on it, she was sliding down the weighs first.
Let me write again; Roosevelt hated de Gaulle. And anyway, if there was going to be a "conversion", it would be more likely that the Americans would steal Normandie and turn her into a flattop.
It would be a similarly shitty carrier but way bigger.
That is true. Then again, that is internal politics, not foreign politics.Perhaps... but then again, the Russians thought Stalin was a danger to them, too.
I, for one, still need a lot more convincing that they offed him when he was obviously losing his own marbles, but it is intriguing. It sure would explain why Beria had to go, PDQ.