Bush and Yalta

I haven't commented on Bush's comments about the Yalta Conference over a month ago, and I don't really have much to say about it. This fellow, a history professor at Rutgers, says it quite well himself:

If a right-wing Republican like George W. Bush had defeated Franklin Roosevelt in November 1944 and had come to Yalta, what would he have probably done? Sign a separate peace with the remnants of the Nazi regime and try to make the defeated European fascist forces into an army to fight World War III against the Soviets? The peoples of Europe would have generally revolted against that, and the effects of World War II merging into World War III are incalculable. Perhaps a Bush administration might have used the atom bomb against Moscow. There were right-wing “preventive war” elements in the U.S. military in 1945 who dreamed of such a policy. However, the American people in 1945 would not have supported such a war.

Right on.

Fargus...

UPDATE: It appears that I was slightly unclear with this post. The professor was basing his comments on Bush's condemnation of Roosevelt and Churchill for their participation in the Yalta conference. The comment is not an extrapolation of current policy from Iraq applied to World War II. Rather, it is a question of what the options would have been had the U.S. and U.K. not participated in the Yalta conference.