Yalta, When Stalin Split the World - a WW2 Special

Indy and Sparty take you through the negotiations at Yalta as The Big Three thrash out the shape of the postwar world. As the splits between East and West continue to deepen, who will come out on top?
Join us on Patreon: / timeghosthistory
Or join the TimeGhost Army directly at: timeghost.tv/signup/
Check out our TimeGhost History KZbin channel: / timeghost
Between 2 Wars: • Between 2 Wars
Follow WW2 Day by Day on Instagram: @ww2_day_by_day
Follow TimeGhost History on Instagram: @timeghosthistory
Like us on Facebook: / timeghosthistory
Hosted by: Indy Neidell & Spartacus Olsson
Director: Astrid Deinhard
Producers: Astrid Deinhard and Spartacus Olsson
Executive Producers: Astrid Deinhard, Indy Neidell, Spartacus Olsson
Creative Producer: Marek Kamiński
Community Management: Ian Sowden
Written by: Indy Neidell & Spartacus Olsson
Research by: Indy Neidell & Spartacus Olsson
Map animations by: Simon J. James
Edited and color grading by: Simon J. James
Artwork by: Mikołaj Uchman
Sound design by: Marek Kamiński
Colorizations by: Mikołaj Uchman
Source literature list: bit.ly/SourcesWW2
Archive footage: Screenocean/Reuters - www.screenocean.com
Image sources:
Source - Image Name/Number
Soundtracks from Epidemic Sound:
Cold Conclusion 2
Conquered Territory
Convinced
Enigma
Night Shift
The Red Line
A TimeGhost chronological documentary produced by OnLion Entertainment GmbH.

[@WorldWarTwo]

Stalin was a one of a kind political poker player, constantly increasing the stakes, calling the opponents hand whenever they were bluffing, bluffing the bluff, and relentlessly raking in the chips. Imagine what he could have achieved as a force for good instead of the murderous despot he was, or is that hoping for the impossible? Can you do good while being this dishonest at the negotiating table?

[@leandro9311]

Stalin was too sick mentaly by the time of Yalta, he had been for some time already, it was impossible to hope for anything good from Stalin

[@noahwiener2491]

arguably, you're describing Lyndon Johnson, though whether the good of civil rights and the great society outweighs the bad of the Vietnam war is of course debatable

[@dryciderz]

Western powers should have never allied with such an evil dictator

[@deshaun9473]

Hi!! Question for you guys. Didn't the creation of the UN Security Council's Permanent Five, including three of the primary Western powers (USA, Britain and later France) but without a broader inclusion of members from Latin America, Asia and Africa mean that it established a de facto hierarchy among the UN member states, and resulted in maintaining the existing colonial power structure that existed prior to the war? How then, could this be reconciled with the goal of a democratic UN with equality between the members?

[@francisdec1615]

The bastard Churchill accepted what Stalin was doing. Churchill was no hero or freedom fighter. He wasn't even against most of Hitler's ideas either, since he was a misogynist, a racist, a chauvinist and hated the working class. He just hated Germany because it challenged the hegemony of the British Empire. Disgusting.

[@tallest4eva]

Stalin had such a strong position to negotiate from because he had the Red Army occupying Poland already. It wasnt that he outsmarted the West, its that they really were powerless to oppose the USSR in Eastern Europe without triggering another massive war. A war that it would have been seen that they started.

[@Warszawski_Modernizm]

the "argument of force"....we the Poles got the stick in Yalta.

[@ocudagledam]

That is fair point, though it's worth noting that Stalin got most of what he wanted on matters outside of Poland and Eastern Europe as well.

[@-htl-]

Accept when Stalin was on his knees at Leningrad (St Petersburg) and Moscow he had all the help in convoys full of equipment, supplies, food which can not be ignored.

[@nate13012]

​@@vlad_47Why specify just 1941? The siege of Leningrad lasted till early 1944 and the threat to Moscow lasted till end of 1942. Even afterwards, its populations desperately needed food, clothings etc. and likely averted widespread famine like the soviet famine of 1946 to 1947. You are picking certain stats to twist historical facts.

[@nate13012]

@@vlad_47 Does the war production include millions of clothings, boots, trucks, food, and other goods? I don't understand why you are only selecting certain stats

[@DSS-jj2cw]

I love Indys nonverbal gestures when Sparty is talking.

[@agactual2]

Indy is big on non-verbal communication.

[@tsardean7438]

It’s his idle animation

[@felipeseguraiv2578]

Shits epic😂

[@tmhood]

and vice versa

[@blackhathacker82]

It's Natural born acting I can tell I know a few tricks about it though its a secret

[@posadistpixy6741]

Anthony Eden and the Suez canal, I'm sure that won't become an issue later...

[@n7gamer270]

hahahahahaha

[@BarringtonDrive]

Coughs in French Indochina

[@pnutz_2]

*insert meme about eisenhower living to the 20th millennium here*

[@horusfalcon]

Um... you mean the Suez Crisis? Yeah...

[@kearki]

During their first meeting on January 22 1943, Roosevelt told de Gaulle that he could not recognize him as the sole political leader of France, because he had not been elected by the French people. To which de Gaulle replied that Joan of Arc had derived her legitimacy only from her action, when she had taken up arms against the invader. On the morning of January 24, when Macmillan reported to Roosevelt that de Gaulle had proposed to Giraud to be Foch, while he, de Gaulle, would be Clémenceau, the President exclaimed: “Yesterday he wanted to be Joan of Arc, and now he wants to be Clémenceau…!” Roosevelt then told Hull that de Gaulle had told him: “I am Joan of Arc, I am Clémenceau!”; then he will entrust to the ambassador Bullitt that he said to de Gaulle: “General, you told me the other day that you were Joan of Arc and now you say that you are Clémenceau. Which of the two are you?” To which de Gaulle would have replied: “I am both.” Then, the President will tell that he retorted to de Gaulle: “We must choose; you still can’t be both.” When this story reaches the ears of Vice-Consul Kenneth Glow, it was further amplified: “President Roosevelt confided to de Gaulle that France was in such a critical military situation that it needed a general of Napoleon’s caliber.” But I’m that man," de Gaulle replied. “Financially,” the President continues, “France is in such a state that it would also need a Colbert” - “But I am that man,” de Gaulle said modestly. Finally, the President, concealing his astonishment, declares that France is so politically devastated that it would need a Clémenceau. De Gaulle stands up with dignity and says: ‘But I am that man!’". When the press seized on the story, de Gaulle also became Louis XIV, Foch, Bayard, etc. Before leaving Anfa, General de Gaulle will hear some of the first versions. They won’t make him laugh at all… De Gaulle and Churchill - The Cordial Disagreement” - François KERSAUDY

[@jakubb9498]

That De Gaulle guy looks like a humble and down to earth leader 😅

[@chaptermasterpedrokantor1623]

@@jakubb9498 He was neither humble or down to earth, but love him or hate him, he managed to get France to no longer be a defeated nation but one of the 5 Allied powers that got a seat at the UN table. Not a bad accomplishment for a man who basically started with next to nothing in 1940.

[@waltertaljaard1488]

He wasn't any of them. He turned out to be Charlemagne. Laying the foundations for the European Union. Together with Adenauer.

[@umjackd]

@@waltertaljaard1488 A history series on the establishment of the EU would actually be fascinating.

[@Bruno-ec8ft]

@@jakubb9498 He is dramatically full of himself. It's hard to read his biography because of that, but it def worked for him.

[@khornateberzerker5439]

I think Stalin's 'manouvering' on the subject of Poland might be a tad... overstated. The fact of the matter was not that Stalin put himself in such a negotiating position as to be immovable by his oratory skill or arguments, but by the simple fact that Poland had, at the time, the full brunt of 2 or 3 Soviet Fronts operating within or near its borders, with over 2 million active Soviet personell. That is without counting any and all garisons, reserves, replacements and so on. I doubt it was the Churchill ran out of arguments. He simply understood that Poland's fate was sealed when the Red Army pushed beyond its borders, leaving it far out of reach of the Western allies and any hope of help.

[@SpecialGoat]

Just like Greece, you mean?

[@khornateberzerker5439]

@@SpecialGoat The situation is rather similar to the one in Greece, yes. The fact was that, at the time, there were Western boots on Greek soil and the fate of Greece was, de facto, in the hands of the Allies and it was up to them to decide what they would do with it. Despite that, however, the Soviets still did take advantage of the presense of armed bands of partisans and assisted them in the Greek Civil War in order to disrupt Allied influence in the region. The point remains, the fate of Nations in the Yalta Conference was not dictated by ideology or legal arguments, but by the situation on the ground.

[@patrickstephenson1264]

What's so funny is Poland's post-war territory is basically the exact same as it was since 950ad. Poland started as a nobody, became a huge commonwealth, took on Russia, and went back to a small country all within 1000 years.

[@JohnSmith-nl4zh]

Possession is nine-tenths of the law. Add some infantry and armored divisions and it becomes one hundred percent.

[@penultimateh766]

Hey when does a dialect become a language? When it has an army to back it up....

[@brucetucker4847]

@@fortpark-wd9sx Technically Westminster regime.

[@Butterratbee]

Except it isn’t, that saying is hundreds of years old and hasn’t been a thing for hundreds of years Also if anything possession is just proof that you stool something

[@Sierra026]

Stalin and Molotov's tactics during the conference reminded me of a quote from Thomas Jackson: "Always mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy, if possible; and when you strike and overcome him, never let up in the pursuit" Both of them were masters of misleading, of veiling, and stalling (pun intended) in order to achieve their goals.

[@josephstewart516]

Well the British empire did it for hundreds of years 😂

[@trizvanov]

That's Geopolitics 101, mastered even before the Romans.

[@-htl-]

Bottom line, Stalin could never be trusted. I am surprised about the agreeing transportations by Churchill and Roosevelt was very naive because they could have known that Stalin was going to that extensively. With one of them echoing today the removal of most Crimean Tartars and the claim of Vlad on Crimea being as false as in each translation of the words.

[@tommycochran2838]

Sparty's closeing statment is chilling. The words and banter of these three men left effects on our world that we are still coming to terms with to this day.

[@justinrobertson5493]

This is the story of history after any major conflict. Conflicts from even a millennia ago still inform today's conflicts.

[@jacquolen1952]

@@justinrobertson5493-Well put!

[@frankiefierro7129]

Kind of reminds me of the final peace after Napoleons defeat didn't bring peace to Europe.

[@BleedingUranium]

@@justinrobertson5493 The Battle of Actium comes to mind.

[@arti8719]

This reminds me of one Polish comedy sketch on Jalta conference and why Poland became part of Soviet influence sphere. In short - no one wanted to have Poles on their side, so Churchill and Roosevelt outvoted Stalin 2:1 and made him to take Poland. This group (Kabaret Moralnego Niepokoju) in fact made a whole series of sketches on history of the world and history of Poland.

[@Zolnierzu]

"It's better for us if Poles destroy Soviet communism than if they were to do that to our capitalism" ~Roosevelt(according to the aforementioned sketch)

[@deeznoots6241]

@@Zolnierzu30 years after Poland adopts capitalism and now the USA is led by senile men and suffering from endemic corruption, just like the USSR. Guess the sketch was right lol

[@konstantinriumin2657]

@@ZolnierzuGame of hot poletato

[@livethefuture2492]

Churchill fought hard for Poland, guranteeing Polands Independence was the reason Britain declared war in the first place. But there was little that could be done so long as the Red Army occupied Poland. Churchill knew what was going on, he foresaw the iron curtain and the fate of the eastern european nations, even till the end of the war had some whacky ideas like Operation unthinkable to somehow prevent the soviets from claiming hegemony over all of eastern Europe and as he put it 'to get a square deal for Poland'. But ultimately of course this was unrealistic. short of full scale war there was nothing they could realistically do.

[@BleedingUranium]

@@livethefuture2492 It's the natural end result of "enemy of my enemy is my friend", unfortunately.

[@AndrewStobb]

During the negotiations in Vienna following the Napoleonic wars in 1814 and 1815, discussions about the fate of Poland also dominated the whole conference. It's so fascinating that Poland occupies so much import in history.

[@josefabio5809]

Damn poor de Gaulle, everytime his name was mentioned everyone decided to collectively talk shit about him

[@Talyrion]

If it's any consolation, pretty sure he got the last laugh by getting pretty much everything he wanted in the end, having a 12-year long presidential mandate ahead of him (albeit he had to wait for that one) and outliving every had of state present at Yalta.

[@pedrocallegari2719]

the gaulle as john of arc gives me life 😂😂😂

[@siljeff2708]

Really cool seeing Indy and Sparty on screen together

[@WorldWarTwo]

If you like them hosting side by side, check out the recent War Goals special if you haven't already! kzbin.info/www/bejne/kIWXlIWPgZmEgac

[@itinerantpatriot1196]

Maybe it's myth but I seem to recall Churchill making a crack about the comparison de Gaulle made between himself and Joan of Arc that went something like: "Yes, but unfortunately I can't have him burned at the stake." I don't recall exactly what he was supposed to have said but it was something along those lines. Like I say, it may be urban legend, but it would b a very Churchillian comment.

[@troystaunton254]

I’ve never heard it. But I’d have more trouble disbelieving it than believing it.

[@Warszawski_Modernizm]

His style definetely

[@Warszawski_Modernizm]

His style definetely

[@kearki]

@itinerantpatriot1196 After the Anfa conference, Churchill and Roosevelt went to Marrakech. That evening, during the dinner, the American vice-consul Kenneth Pendar inquired about General de Gaulle. "Churchill seemed upset, wrote Pendar, and gave me a typical Churchillian answer: "Oh, let’s not talk about this one. We call her Joan of Arc, and we seek bishops to burn her."

[@itinerantpatriot1196]

@@kearki Thanks. I knew he made some sort of reference to burning him at the stake but I couldn't recall the exact situation or quote.

[@jliller]

Veto power for permanent members in the UN is saying "All countries are equal in the UN, but some are more equal than others." A very Soviet solution.

[@knudvoecking]

I can only repeat time after time how thankful I am for all your efforts to make us 'never forget' about WW2 and all that went on before and after. Will you also do a special episode about the UN itself and the conceptualisation of the post-war economic system (Bretton Woods conference)?

[@chaptermasterpedrokantor1623]

I don't think we are in danger of forgetting WW2 soon. People are either fascinated by that war, or they constantly call people they disagree politically with the BAD PEOPLE FROM GERMANY.

[@rosgill6]

Indy's supportive gesturing and pointing is on point 🤌

[@gilwhitmore9682]

Spartacus comes off the top rope with the full Sparty slam to finish this episode.

[@briceoka5623]

Many biographies of Stalin describe him as lacking charisma and intelligence but he appears to be very witty and a great tough negotiator. The Soviet eastern territorial gains for just a few months of war against Japan is an insane return.

[@27josh01]

It did wind up being a good return but keep in mind that the original projections for war with Japan was that it was going to be a fight that would take multiple more years. It just so happened that the combination of the Soviet invasion and atomic bombs sealed the deal for them, but that was not a guarantee.

[@1987retroman]

The Sovient's didn't really "gain" any territoty per se. They reclaimed Russian territories pre-war and regained conquered land during the war.

[@briceoka5623]

The USSR did not own southern sakhalin and the kuril islands at the start of WW2. Therefore, it's a gain.@@1987retroman

[@1987retroman]

@@briceoka5623 They regain Sakhalin, which the Japanese had taken half of i 1905.

[@user-hg1qy9yy3d]

Oh, Stalin had charisma alright; striking terror in the hearts of freedom loving people was quite effective. I am unaware of any biography that states Stalin lacked intelligence. Bloodthirsty, evil, genocidal killer and psychopath, yes; but quite brilliant.

[@galaxyomega2839]

Could you guys do a special on Vyacheslav Molotov, he is a very important person in the USSR and we barely know anything about him, unlike Zhukov and Stalin.

[@ivanpticar8007]

Say what you will about Stalin, and righfully so given we know today what his reign was like. But having now watched this episode and all others before it....the man was a master diplomat and negotiator. Love the content Indy and crew 😁

[@bwarre2884]

Having a large army and occupying a large parts of Europe gave him plenty leverage.

[@leaveme3559]

​@@bwarre2884compare this to us pulling out of Afghanistan and getting absolutely nothing in return

[@jkdking12]

People forget that this was STALIN! The person that did the Great Purge! So, I don't blame Churchill & Roosevelt for walking on eggshells around him. WW2 had already gone on long enough.

[@Warszawski_Modernizm]

Its easy to negotiate fate of Poland with 2+ mln troops across her territory along with NKVD....

[@Warszawski_Modernizm]

xD "If only Poles"...Poles had shitload of guns in 1945@@davidw.2791

[@jamesford3648]

What a FABULOUS Channel I found Here. When I was Stationed at Nuremberg in W.Germany From 1980-1984, I had to do a Thesis on WW2 for my PLC Class & The E-5 Board. You are so SPOT on. I still have my Thesis from that time. I was Offered by the VII Corp at the time to be part of the Military’s Historic Project but I wanted to stay in my Field unit at the Time, (210th FA BDE, Herzo base). Thank you for a GREAT JOB.

[@s182924]

Greets from Poland !

[@Warszawski_Modernizm]

Pozdrowienia z Warszawy

[@denistyy]

The Yalta Conference was one of the first events in WW2 that I learned about and y’all KILLED IT. As always such an amazing job by the WW2 team 🙌🏽

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching! -TimeGhost Ambassador

[@royalmason1539]

It's odd to say that "Stalin split the world,"when the world was already split between capitalists and communists long before WW2. So split, Hitler thought the west would approve of his invasion of Russia and would negotiate a peace at Russia's expense. Stalin simply understood that this animosity would continue after WW2 and he wasn't going to leave Eastern Europe in capitalist's hands. A perfectly reasonable position for him to take at the time.

[@RandomNamejagddjxuossn]

Fuck communism

[@stoffls]

Stalin surely knew how to play his counterparts. He outsmarted the Western Allies. Yes, Roosevelt was sick but Churchill was a brilliant tactician himself. And whenever you think this channel cannot get better - it does.

[@deeznoots6241]

Was Churchill a brilliant tactician though? I mean if you look at what he actually did he was kinda just crap

[@TheSciuzzo]

Churchill just had good PR, he criticized the brilliant retreat from Somaliland, he made the Bengali famine worse, left the troops in Africa in disarray soon before Rommel arrived and treated Athens as an enemy city.

[@andrewlm5677]

The Soviets gave the explanation that “having a government in Poland conducive to supporting Soviet occupation of Poland was essential for dealing with Germany”. This goes down smoother than (but largely boils down to): “the Soviets own Poland now but we’ll pretend we value your opinion and care to give you a reasonable explanation you can accept” - deep down, I expect US/UK knew they had no real influence over the fate of the countries ‘liberated’ by the soviets

[@ReichLife]

@@deeznoots6241 When compared with those two? He might as well have been. Stalin was brilliant enough to cooperate with Nazis in 1939-1941 period and gave his state and people Operation Barbarossa. Roosevelt? His naive approach towards Stalin and USSR was book example of being delusional. Churchill biggest weakness here was fact he was representing by far weakest party in form of fading away British Empire.

[@deeznoots6241]

@@ReichLife Churchill played a big part in Britain getting weaker, his disastrous Gallipoli idea led to the formation of a truly independent Anzac identity, his stupidity in creating force Z led directly to the loss of 2 capital ships for zero gain to the Japanese, his brutal treatment of the Greeks led to the Greek civil war and the complete loss of British influence in the Mediterranean post-war, his hostility to Indians and other native peoples of the empire helped fuel anti-British sentiment globally, etc, etc. To be quite frank he only looks good because of the existence of the English channel preventing the Germans from conquering Britain.

[@hannahskipper2764]

Man, what a great sequel to the first Yalta episode. Thank you again for such fantastic work!

[@robertortiz-wilson1588]

Extremely valuable episode, and presented so well! Thank you for taking the time to make these specials and going over the intimate details of negotiations and decisions. Incredible work!

[@gunman47]

Thank you for another great Special video as always. This will be very interesting where all these will lead to postwar...

What a fascinating and far reaching conference. Thank you for the Video

[@mikemoore4033]

This is a strictly tongue in cheek comparison, but Indy’s gestures while Sparty is talking kind of remind me of Steve McQueen’s antics at the beginning of “The Magnificent Seven” when Yul Brynner was saying his lines.

[@criso6164]

Another excellent episode, and with the complementary episode on War Goals these are two of the best videos I've watched for somewhile. As ever thanks to the whole team.

[@WorldWarTwo]

Glad you enjoyed, cheers for watching.

[@shawngilliland243]

Sparty's and Indy's sartorial splendor is simply smashing! Thank you for your superbly vivid team presentation of the conference at Yalta.

[@Celtopia]

Thank you both ,yet again a brilliant and extremely interesting explanation, ...... As per usual.

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

It was an informative and amazing introduction..

[@WorldWarTwo]

Glad you enjoyed, thank you for watching.

[@Onthejazz247]

Great episode

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you, and thanks for watching!

[@NigelDeForrest-Pearce-cv6ek]

Brilliant!!!!

[@brianjonker510]

I need to watch this again

[@borismatesin]

Shame, missed a perfect chance to open with a sentence "Flying from Malta to Yalta".

[@shawngilliland243]

That's wonderful; so glad that you shared it with us!

[@blackhathacker82]

Very well spoken pretty nice video

[@spudskie3907]

I always laugh at those who say the Western Allies could have fought Germany by bombing without the need for ground forces. I always reply with “So the only Allied ground forces on the European continent would be Stalin’s Red Army”. Those Air Power advocates are usually silent afterwards.

[@user-ue4fz2lj7c]

Was at the Livadia Palace last year

[@ralphturner3798]

I like how Indy gestulates.

[@shawngilliland243]

Love the footage of Churchill wearing that Astrakhan hat!

[@welcometonebalia]

Thank you.

[@WorldWarTwo]

And thank you for watching.

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thanks for watching.

[@damiencaillault2039]

i wish we had a way of knowing what would have come out of the conference if Roosevelt was in better physical shape or if the conference had taken place somewhere that didn't require him to travel so far. At the time of the conference, he is only 2 months away from the coffin. Also i wonder how talented he was at international negotiation. America just came out of 2 decades of isolationism, one can wonder how good his diplomatic army was, and how good was their leader in this field.

[@pianowhizz]

Funniest quote from Yalta after Roosevelt and Stalin agree to split Korea in half: ‘Don’t tell Churchill… he’ll kill us!’ 35:34 ‘…brink of war to this day’ - I thought Korea is still at war, just in a state of ceasefire since 1953? I.e. technically the in-progress Korean War is still a continuation of WW2 - as it was literally started at Yalta.

[@jukebox5600]

I cannot beleive how hectic yalls production schedule must be, keep uo tthe good work folks!! Yall are truly an inspiration to a lowly graduate student.❤❤

[@WorldWarTwo]

Much appreciated by the whole team, thank you for watching!

[@greggashgarian8360]

Excellent work. Well done!

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you for watching.

[@jamesbodnarchuk3322]

When is the man of steel not suspicious?

[@grevberg]

Turned out it's a medical condition that cost hundreds of thousands Russian their life.

[@AK-ep6ik]

Indy's hand signal gestures are distracting, yet amusing!

[@jayyo2089]

Hi indy and Spartacus i really love your show (show's)!!

[@Swedishmafia101MemeCorporation]

I always appreciate the immaculate drip you guys wear

[@indianajones4321]

Indy looking sharp again with the sleeves

[@Elongated_Muskrat]

Stalin: The Man of Steel, or Man of Steal depending where you are from.

[@mindbomb9341]

You two are so impressive. Thanks for all of your hard work. And your "invisible team" too!

[@naveenraj2008eee]

Hi Indy and Sparty Great explanation. Now I can understand this yalta conference . Stalin got everything he want. And the cold war started. Thanks for the video.

[@igorwoek502]

To quote great Jacek Kaczmarski on Yalta: "So the delegations flew away, In Crimea the tsar's castle fell silent. And when the guns thundered in the West, Transports of people went to the East. The free world celebrated its triumph, The fronts suddenly laid deserted - The president's grave is already covered in flowers, And there are transports after transports. The night turns into red dawn - By the will of the voters, Churchill left! And there are transports of living people, And there are camps of the the long death."

[@cedricbaccay633]

I love indy and sparticus’ suits ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

[@WorldWarTwo]

Both are very dapper chaps! Thanks for watching.

[@oneshotme]

I very much enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up

[@WorldWarTwo]

Thank you, really means a lot to us! -TimeGhost Ambassador

[@douglasfur3808]

Last night I watched the Canadian National Film Board production Paris 1919. It's sad to hear so many of the issues passed over at Versailles; Poland, Indo-China, Korea, still lingering. It's as if WW2 could be more clearly seen as WW1-2.0.

[@bfcmik]

There is an serious argument that both WW1 and WW2 were the same war with 20 years of truce between parts. The War of 1793-1815 is considered a single war despite the interlude following the Treaty of Amiens and a 2nd interlude following Napoleon's exile to Elba in 1814.

[@Puch300G]

​@@bfcmikwe will get better picture in 50-100 years from now

[@NathanDudani]

sErIoUs​@@bfcmik

[@jacobbrown6250]

Both Yalta 1945 and Congress of Vienna 1814 both had long talks over Poland, which Russia/USSR won on.

[@markmierzejewski9534]

It was 90 days after the surrender of Germany that the Soviet Union declared war on Japan. By then events have changed also The U.S has successfully tested “ Trinity “ On August 6th the bomb was dropped to show the world the atomic age. It’s no coincidence that on August 9th the same day the Soviet Union declared war on Japan that the United States dropped their second atomic bomb. The second bomb was also a warning to Stalin. That the west had the ability to destroy cities let alone armies with a single bomb. That this was the means to an end.

[@hildenburg5]

Awe man I won't get my assignments done on time

[@P_RO_]

Even now, us 'westerners' do not understand Russian political norms which reach far back in history. Much of what is seen as acceptable there is seen as the opposite here. I doubt the Roosevelt or Churchill had a deep understanding of this either, but Stalin understood how things work in the 'west' and took advantage of that. Stalin was something of a 'Hitler' in another form but took (successful) pains to ensure that facet remained hidden to his 'allies'. Once he got what he wanted from us and rebuilt Russia's strength he forgot his previous words and simply did as he wanted to do. We're seeing something similar now.

[@cobalt2672]

It's interesting that this meeting will (to a greater or lesser degree) influence the dropping of the first atomic bomb, even though that weapon hasn't been finished - to say nothing of its influence on the world even now. "The strong must rule the weak", indeed...

[@criscabrera9098]

That’s sad but I don’t expect better from the USSR especially Stalin

[@td23asus]

Yalta, When Stalin Split The World reads a lot like a line from the TNG episode Darmok. (Darmok and Jalad, at Tanagra)

[@kantemirovskaya1lightninga30]

wow-this all comes back to haunt us..

[@robertoler3795]

well done. wow suits

[@franciszeklatinik889]

We are surely in the war's endgame now

[@robertvelo3550]

excellent

[@WorldWarTwo]

Much appreciated!

[@alexanderstoyanov7464]

One of the conferences cementing Stalin's legacy as a top 3 politician of the 20th century imo

[@MegaHello202]

It’s crazy that in this conference you can see signs of what becomes the Korean and Vietnam wars

[@unbindingfloyd]

It’s interesting how similar the USSR leader was compared to the Russian Empire after the Napoleonic Wars over Poland. In the end Troops on the ground are the final truth. Just look at where the Iron curtain came down and look where the eastern and western fronts ended up. Almost identical. The paperwork after war tends to me formally legalizing those front lines in terms of geopolitics.

[@zacharymartin8951]

Shaka, when the walls fell Stalin, when the world split

[@ShawnHumphrey]

I'm glad someone else called that out. Brilliant title!

[@BleedingUranium]

This was my first thought too. :D

[@fearofmusic1312]

Stalin and Truman at Lorenzkirch. The River Elbe in Winter.

[@quedtion_marks_kirby_modding]

I am always surprised by how supportive fdr was of Stalin.

[@brucetucker4847]

He was old and sick and he was probably fed a lot of misleading information by all of the Communist sympathizers and out-and-out agents of the Soviets who were part of his administration. A lot of the left still suffered from the delusion that only right-wingers could be a threat to democracy. A lot of them still do today.

[@user-nr5tp2jo3u]

I was great!

[@dabfan6924]

In fact there are no formal meeting notes or agendas for any of these meetings. Each side took its own notes. After the fall of the USSR their internal notes became available for the first time. According to Harvard Professor Plokhi there are differences in the notes. You have covered the agenda and meetings extremely well. It is interesting that Stalin was unaware that Alger Hiss was a Soviet agent even though he was sitting there in the room with the Big Three. Hiss worked in GRU intelligence, and only KGB was involved in setting up the Conference. This is clear from the Soviet notes according to Plokhi

[@dabfan6924]

@@vlad_47 Because the USSR had two foreign spy groups (NKVD/KGB and GRU) who each held their cards close, the KGB who ran Yalta didn’t know they had a GRU agent in the room with the Big Three. Mr. Hiss returned home from Yalta through Moscow, traveling back with the Embassy people. In Moscow, the GRU gave him a medal for his work. Hiss was kind of a free lancer, so there was no gain to the USSR having him in FDR’s delegation, especially as he argued for the US vs the USSR positions on the membership of various States in the UN. This is documented in the work “Venona: Decoding Soviet Espionage in America” (John Earl Haynes & Harvey Klerk, Yale Nota Bene, 2000). An analysis of Hiss’s role at Yale is included in “Yalta: The Price of Peace” (S.M. Plokhy, Penguin Books, 2011) He was obviously aware of the Cambridge Five since they delivered to him the conference position papers of the US & UK before the Yalta Conference. You might enjoy Plokhy’s book as it really brings Stalin into a complex light. At Tehran, Stalin told FDR and Churchill that “The best friendships are those founded on misunderstandings.” [quoted in S.M. Plokhy]

[@dabfan6924]

@@vlad_47 The Alger Hiss story is very strange. He was a staunch New Dealer & a communist spy. Had his presence at Yalta been more widely known in the US, the Red Scare would have taken on more color. If the KGB had known he was a GRU agent, they might have tried to exploit that at Yalta -although how? Hiss was about to become the first head of the United Nations, and one might suspect that this would go to his already large head. The sympathetic portrait of Hiss painted by Whittaker Chambers in “Witness” is worth reviewing. After all, Alger Hiss was hardly the only dupe of mid-20th century totalitarian dreams. In fact the sad Hollywood story of the “victimization” of poor Alger Hiss is as close to reality as is the “persecution” of poor Donald Trump

[@dabfan6924]

Thank you

[@WorldWarTwo]

And thank you for watching.

[@dabfan6924]

@@WorldWarTwo Yalta is where the Great Powers found a path out of total war and towards a modus vivendi which was in fact sustained for fifty years. Stalin did not split the Allies. Franklin Roosevelt made a decision before Malta not to coordinate positions with Churchill against Stalin because he wanted to be an honest broker “Judge Roosevelt” (his favorite persona). Stalin had everything bugged, and received transcripts each night. His Cambridge spies delivered the US & UK position papers for the Conference to Stalin. Stalin’s big blunder at Yalta was thinking that the UK was still a great power. His Leninist dogma re: imperialism misled him to believe that the US & UK would ”inevitably” go to war against each other. Bizonia was a rude awakening for Koba, the web-toed monster. He blockaded Berlin, conceding defeat in the initial Cold War maneuvers, realizing that the West would indeed stay united.

[@dabfan6924]

So, Yes, Stalin’s strategy at Yalta was to play the allies off against each other. He schmoozed FDR and denigrated Churchill, who clearly felt ganged-up upon. Where you go wrong is concluding that Stalin succeeded in splitting the West. There is no evidence of an Anglo-American political split. The inclusion of a French occupation zone in Germany (at Britain’s insistence) is proof of this. Stalin was opposed but was won over as soon as FDR stated that the US public would not accept troops in Europe longer than 18 months. Returning France to Great Power status was one of Churchill’s goals (which Stalin knew), and FDR helped him win this. On the question of Security Council and veto, Churchill pulled FDR’s chestnuts from the fire. Stalin found his sole moment as an admired member of humanity at Yalta. I credit the influence of FDR for that good moment. It was Stalin’s finest hour, on that we agree. Thank you

[@mgway4661]

We’re in the end game. Begun the Cold War has

[@bobandvirginiaravera4775]

Stalin ate Churchill's and Roosevelt's lunch at Yalta. He had boots on the ground by liberating Poland and there was nothing that could change that fact and we insanely tried to do that. In the meantime, Japan was defeated almost entirely by the efforts of the USA, only Japan would not yet accept it, Why in the world would Roosevelt be willing to provide concessions to the USSR to enter the war against Japan? INSANITY!!! The concessions offered by FDR to have the USSR enter the war against Japan later created issues in Manchuria , Korea, China, Sakhalin Kurile Islands, and Indochina after the war. The USA had the boots on the ground, the aircraft in the air and the boats on the sea in the Pacific in 1944. and it did not need any help from the USSR. Yalta was a major strategic defeat for the USA.

[@yux.tn.3641]

good point here, it created North Korea, and helped the CCP win the civil war against the KMT, and it led to the division in Vietnam i do seem to remember that Stalin was less interested in spreading communism worldwide/ the comintern though? compared to Trotsky?

[@sacWeapons]

Trotsky was far more communist by definition. Stalin wanted a centralized communist nation rather than world revolution. @@yux.tn.3641

[@brucetucker4847]

Ignoring the contributions of America's allies, especially Australia, against Japan is almost as bad as ignoring the role of the Western Allies in defeating Hitler. The pivotal campaigns of 1942 in the Solomons and New Guinea would never have been possible without the Australians, who dealt Japan its first defeat on land in the Pacific fighting in horrific conditions on the Kokoda Track. And don't forget that the Royal New Zealand Air Force had a fighter squadron flying out of Henderson Field when the Allies were hanging on to Guadalcanal by the skin of their teeth and the US Navy's carrier force in the entire Pacific was down to just one operational carrier. A single squadron might not seem like much until you consider how razor-thin the margin of Allied superiority was in that campaign.

[@bobandvirginiaravera4775]

You are absolutely correct. Sorry for the oversight. @@brucetucker4847

[@IanBerg]

FDR talks about executing 50,000 random German officers but also authorizes Operation Paperclip…

[@davidjernigan8161]

FDR was just as bad as Woodrow Wilson. Don't forget FDR issued the executive order that interred thousands of his own citizens

[@mgway4661]

Not quite random

[@modest_spice6083]

FDR died in April 1945 before Paperclip even began with Operation Overcast in July.

[@criscabrera9098]

Yea that sound so unlike FDR we were always shown like gentle and caring president who never wanted bloodshed and was the morale high ground but here he is asking for 50,000 random officers to be killed that caught me so off guard then again after seeing all the death and destruction I can see why he would want that

[@modest_spice6083]

​@@criscabrera9098You mean SS and Wehrmacht officers who undoubtedly have a hand in the atrocities?

[@TheAwnman]

I know it’s a very minor thing but a trusteeship over Indochina wouldn’t kick the French out of Asia as they would still possess Pondicherry, the status of which alongside Goa is at this point still up in the air as while the INC claims them as part of any independent India, Britain will not define the borders of any independent India not only regarding the European outposts but also regarding the Princely States and a theoretical Muslim nation.

[@CARL_093]

At the Yalta Conference, the Allies decided to provide safeguards against a potential military revival of Germany, to eradicate German militarism and the Nazi general staff, to bring about the denazification of Germany, to punish the war criminals and to disarm and demilitarise Germany.

[@andrewnagel6322]

Indy, I didn't know nations had a view port.

[@criscabrera9098]

This is so weird I have never heard of this again we are always told that big three and France had close relationship but FDK is like super super against France and is trying to stick it to them every chance he gets I can’t imagine that Churchill of all people is fighting for France wow thank you this is so incredibly interesting and important to know cheers and greetings from Kuwait

[@criscabrera9098]

@@fortpark-wd9sx I mean I get it but after the history between the countries and blood shed I can’t imagine how cold he’s being towards hem and how the French are suffering being occupied

[@aorum3589]

​@@fortpark-wd9sx France was the first major power to oppose Germany in the war. What's more the french mostly fought alone against the Germans in 1939-1940. At that time the USSR was on Germany's side, the US (under FDR presidency) was clinging to its neutrality, and Great Britain barely got involved. FDR and Staline easily forgot that.

[@shawngilliland243]

Truman didn't have a very high opinion of the French, either. There were some serious incidents of Free French troops trying to disarm Americans in France. Truman was furious, and said that if that nonsense didn't stop immediately, the US would cease to arm or supply the French.

[@MsZeeZed]

Well at least they’re talking …

[@HEKVT]

Such a shame that a select few can decide the future of people living in nations for generations, they not need even set foot in those place, just decide it over some tea in a resort town in Crimea.

[@brucetucker4847]

That's how the world has worked for 3,000 years or more.

[@patrickstephenson1264]

Imagine centuries from now: Mars: And so our government is entitled to 90% of Earth, while the remaining 10% goes to you, Venus. Venus: Wait a minute, why do I only get 10 percent?! Earth: ...

[@HoopTY303]

…[exhales deeply] wow… it’s gonna take a minute to unwrap my brain from this. Go ahead and talk amongst yourselves .

[@cornbread8246]

No discussion on Stalin’s spying on Rosevelt and Churchill during the conference? Really no surprise you didn’t.

[@secretsfullofsaucers]

Churchill being so worried about democratic rights of Eastern Europe while ruling over the largest land empire the world has ever seen seems on the face of it rank hypocricy. But I think it was more a reflection of British foreign policy for about the last 500 years about keeping the balance of power in Europe so they could have their free hand elsewhere when they were strong and not be invaded when they were weak, and out of the war the Soviets had definitely shifted the balance of power in their favour.

[@andrewlm5677]

Hindsight is 20-20 of course but the pretensions that US/UK believed they were negotiating the Poland situation with anything close to powerful enough to counter the Soviet’s occupation of Poland seems very silly. Seems this was a vain attempt to avoid the embarrassment of making promises to the Polish government in exile which they were inevitably going to be powerless to keep.

[@geneticon]

Joan de Gaulle is *chef's kiss* !

[@michigangeezer3950]

Did Pogue Admiral Leahy ever make a tactical decision of any kind, or was he just clinging to the President's coattails? (He may be a distant relative and I've just never heard of him doing "admiral stuff" that hurts enemies on the high seas).

[@brucetucker4847]

Pogue Admiral? That's a rank I'm not familiar with. Leahy had a long career of active service before WW2, including combat in the Spanish-American War. He had sea duty many times after that and was Chief of Naval Operations in the 1930s, and it was after that that his role became more political, as was often the case for ex-service chiefs.

[@SomeBigFatGuy]

​@@brucetucker4847 the only source I've seen mentioning his combat experience was seeing one shell land in the water a mile away. I got shot at with more vigor as a taxicab driver. It sounds like he was a "climber" and not a warrior. I wonder what Halsey thought of him?

[@NontonSejarah-drg.naufal]

Indy should grow glorious beard

[@WorldWarTwo]

He'd look a bit like a philosopher I think! Thanks for watching.

[@danicalifornia505]

5:35 how many of the world leaders knew enough of secondary languages to converse in the other leaders languages?

[@brucetucker4847]

Neither Churchill nor Roosevelt spoke Russian (or Georgian) and Stalin's English was rudimentary at best, so they spoke through translators (except conversations between FDR and Churchill only, of course). FDR and Churchill also spoke fluent French, and FDR and Stalin also spoke German but Churchill did not. Stalin and Churchill had also both studied Latin and ancient Greek in school but I'm not sure how well they could converse in those languages. French was still the main language of diplomacy at that time but there's no evidence Stalin spoke it at all. And Stalin pretended to speak even less English than he actually did (he did this so the other two wouldn't know how much of their conversations he could understand without an interpreter). So AFAIK there was no language that all three of them knew well enough to converse in. De Gaulle also spoke fluent German, btw.

[@conceptalfa]

👍👍👍!

[@WorldWarTwo]

✌✌

[@waheisel]

What was internationalized (at 28:12)? Diurin?

[@pattygman4675]

Veto power, what could possibly go wrong with that?

[@brucetucker4847]

That was a reflection of political reality rather than idealism. The # 1 priority of the UN was to prevent another world war even worse than the one the League of Nations failed to prevent. Despite all its failings, it succeeded in that goal. It is vital to keep that in mind.