Well, I was going to give DL another history lesson, but everyone raced in and did it before I could.

I will only add that America wasn't the only country taking exception to German and Japanese aggression leading up to December 7, 1941.

And surely you understand; neither Japan or Germany were just looking at Europe and Asia; their goal was nothing less than world domination under rule of the "master race".

War was unavoidable as long as Hitler and Hirohito were in power.

 

(sigh)
Remember when I documented that South Vietnam did not in any way want to be merged with North Vietnam?
Remember how I showed that the South Vietnamese government wanted nothing to do with the Geneva pact? Regardless of anything the US or anyone else thought about it?

North Vietnam wanted to bring the South back into the "family" fold. The South had been happy for 400 years to be independent from the North. They wanted nothing to do with a merger.

War in Vietnam was inevitable as long as North Vietnam wanted South Vietnam under their control.

 

Genuinely a great thread.

 

Since we are walking down Memory Lane, do you remember this passage I quoted by President Eisenhower?

"I have never talked or corresponded with a person knowledgeable in Indochinese affairs who did not agree that had elections been held as of the time of the fighting, possibly 80 per cent of the population would have voted for the Communist Ho Chi Minh as their leader."

Source: Dwight D. Eisenhower, Mandate for Change, 1953-56 (Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Compnay, Inc., 1963), p. 372
https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/vietnam/ddeho.htm

When you say "South Vietnam" you mean the dictatorship of Ngo Dinh Diem.

The reason Ngo Dinh Diem did not want the election to be held that was scheduled by the Geneva Agreement of 1954 was because he knew he could not win it.

 

Of course "war was unavoidable," but the United States could have avoided it. Great Britain could have avoided it too. I am glad we did not, but we could have. Germany and Japan knew they could not conquer and occupy the United States.

 

I am glad that Roosevelt provoked the Japanese into hitting us first, but that is what he did.

 

I concur. Partly joined on the strength of the debate and wit contained in this thread.

 

Except DL somehow dragged it back to FDR and WWII....

 

What else is to be expected?

 

America's entry into World War II is relevant to the following comment posted in this thread by the OP:

Japan did not attack Pearl Harbor because Japanese leaders thought the United States was weak, but because Japanese leaders thought the United States was powerful enough to threaten a Japanese invasion of the Dutch East Indies, and needed to be weakened by a preemptive air strike.

In saying this I am not expressing sympathy for Japan. Nor am I criticizing President Roosevelt, who I of course admire.

 

Oh I have trouble with questioning the theory that Pearl Harbor was unprovoked. It was. And no serious Historian questions it either; it is only the degree.

Here is an excellent precis of the debate:How U.S. Economic Warfare Provoked Japan's Attack on Pearl Harbor *not_secure_link*mises.org/daily/6312/

The USS Reuben James was sunk well before Germany declared war on the US. The US Navy was escorting convoys almost to the middle of the Atlantic prior to Germany declaring war. Also the US Navy and Coastguard were involved in the sinking of the Bismark on May 27th 1941.

*not_secure_link*www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq118-1.htm

History is often not simple: there are wheels within wheels and lots of smoke and mirrors.

I have little doubt the Roosevelt Administration set in motion the events that led to the US entry into WW2. And the cost of that entry? 2,403 American lives. Now, as to whether anyone knew of the actual date - I guess we will have to wait for more records to become available.

 

:? What are you trying to do? Encourage him?

We are veering off topic here, but I will respond, because I can argue that the two of you are making my point (with respect to the viability of demilitarization and weakness as a means of achieving peace).

I will grant you that some form of military response from Japan was inevitable, given that we were putting the screws to them in an effort to thwart their regional ambitions.

But, the gunboat skirmishes would have gone on for years if Pearl Harbor were not a weak target, easy pickings. FDR did not provoke the Pearl Harbor attack. The Japanese took an opportunity, because the base was ripe for the taking, and the hardware that was busy collecting barnacles there constituted the bulk of our West Pacific projection capacity.

And look at the mileage that the Japanese got out of that adventure! With one sucker punch, they knocked out virtually all of our Pacific projection! Then they had two and a half years of clear sailing to capture islands with impunity up and down the West Pacific and intensify their reign of terror over the flat-footed Chinese (who also, by the way, paid a heavy price for their isolationism and pacifism).

How long did it take the United States to rebuild its projection capacity, with full mobilization of the entire populace, before it could mount a serious two-front offensive against the Axis powers (inconsequential PR campaigns like the Doolittle raid over Tokyo aside)? Two and a half years.

We had the luxury of two and a half years to rebuild, for one reason and one reason only: World War II transpired in the pre-nuclear age.

Next time we face an existential threat, we will not have two and a half years.

We will have two and a half hours. If we are lucky.

 

In 2013 the United States spent 39.0% of what the world spends on the military. Russia spent 5.2%.

How much more do you want the United States to spend? How do you intend to pay for it?

 

wrong...find the stats...

The US spend 39% of its revenue

on military...

we spend over 50% of ALL major countries

*not_secure_link*www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/01/4A8078449E794DFB8CC33ADD00A6F1AF.gif

 

Bread-and-circuses have put us $17 trillion in the hole; we are debating existential threat, and you're concerned about your rum money.

 

A nuclear war will not be fought by boots on the ground...

it will be fought by what is in place now and is not going away....

You trying to spread fear does not become your debating..

 

Household net worth in the USA is 87 trillion....

 

The Federal Government’s $128 Trillion Stockpile: The Answer to Our Debt Problems?

More than 900,000 separate real assets covering more than 3 billion sq. ft.
Mineral rights, on and offshore, covering 2.515 billion acres of land, more than the total surface land in Canada
45,190 underutilized buildings, the operating costs of which are $1.66 billion annually
Oil and gas resources on and offshore worth $128 trillion, roughly eight times the national debt of the country


Read more: Can the U.S. Government's $128 Trillion Stockpile Ease Debt Problems? | TIME.com *not_secure_link*business.time.com/...he-answer-to-our-debt-problems/#ixzz2vQ14aKgt

 

Nuclear war cannot be won. If it is our only recourse, our choices in an existential war are to be conquered or to be annihilated.

 

Yes? Tell DL! He's the idget claiming we are too poor to activate the draft.