English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Ok. Please help me!!!!

When Franklin D. Roosevelt was president, why did the United States enter World War 2 so late?

Does ANYONE know this? Please help me out.

2006-10-24 11:12:37 · 9 answers · asked by Brown Eyes 2 in Education & Reference Higher Education (University +)

9 answers

I agree with Drakeston - a large part of the public and congress leaned heavily toward isolationism.

Keep in mind that after WWI, congress did not approve Woodrow Wilsons plan for the League of Nations.

2006-10-24 11:22:36 · answer #1 · answered by a_blue_grey_mist 7 · 0 0

A lot of the answers tell you why the United States entered the war, and when, but hardly any of them deal with why it was so late.

There was no reason at all for it to enter the war before May 1940, because up till then it looked as though the European Allies could handle the Axis by themselves. However, its isolationist stance after Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain, and the London Blitz is still greatly resented by the oldest people in Britain, because it seemed that the USA would be happy for Hitler and his Axis to overrun Britain and the whole of Europe, as long as it could continue to enjoy its own prosperity after the recent end of the Depression.

When the USA started war supplies under Lease-Lend, this was seen in Britain as a virtual declaration of war, so Pearl Harbour is irrelevantly late, and your question should concentrate on USA home politics from September 1940 to March 1941.

2006-10-25 07:50:25 · answer #2 · answered by bh8153 7 · 0 0

The United States was hesitant to enter a European war, preferring to supply friendly nations with weapons. When the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, it was a direct act of war. The President and Congress could not simply sit and watch American lives be lost. Retaliation became necessary. A possible contributor to our entry was that the Japanese miscalculated their time frame and attacked Pearl Harbor before actually declaring war.

2006-10-24 18:23:18 · answer #3 · answered by Spekter 2 · 1 0

Because, initially it was a war between the European countries. The US did not want to get involved, but it would sooner or later. The US was unofficially involved in the war by sending supplies and weapons to the Allies. It officially joined the war when Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in 1941.

2006-10-24 18:29:47 · answer #4 · answered by Ren 3 · 1 0

Because large parts of the American population were not interested in getting involved in a strictly European War. The United States of that era was very isolationist.

2006-10-24 18:17:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

It depends on what you mean by "entered".

We had been basically giving the Russians equipment for several years prior to Pearl Harbor.

2006-10-24 18:18:21 · answer #6 · answered by open4one 7 · 0 0

In 1941 critics blamed Roosevelt for leaving Pearl Harbor unprepared. Extremists even claimed that he invited the Japanese attack in order to have a pretext for war. In 1942 liberals complained when he cooperated with Jean Darlan, the Vichy French admiral who until then had been collaborating with the Axis, in planning the Allied invasion of North Africa. In 1943, FDR's opponents grumbled that his policy of unconditional surrender for the enemy discouraged the anti-Hitler resistance within Germany. Other critics complained that he relied too heavily on strategic bombing. His own generals were angry because he postponed the "second front against Hitler until June 1944. Such delay, critics added later, infuriated the Soviet Union, which had to carry the brunt of the fighting against Hitler between 1941 and 1944, and sowed the seeds of the Cold War.

Some of these criticisms were partly justified. Poor communications between Washington and Hawaii helped the Japanese achieve surprise at Pearl Harbor. Dealing with Darlan was probably not necessary to ensure success in North Africa. Strategic bombing killed millions of civilians and was not nearly so effective as its advocates claimed. The delay in the second front greatly intensified Soviet suspicions of the West.

But it is easy to second-guess and to exaggerate Roosevelt's failings as a military leader. The president neither invited nor welcomed the Pearl Harbor attack, which was a brilliantly planned maneuver by Japan. He worked with Darlan in the hope of preventing unnecessary loss of Allied lives. Unconditional surrender, given American anger at the enemy, was a politically logical policy. It also proved reassuring to the Soviet Union, which had feared a separate German-American peace. Establishing the second front required control of the air and large supplies of landing craft, and these were not assured until 1944. In many of these decisions Roosevelt acted in characteristically pragmatic fashion--to win the war as effectively as possible and to keep the wartime alliance together. In these aims he was successful.

Wartime Diplomacy

Similar practical considerations dictated some of Roosevelt's diplomatic policies during the war. Cautious of provoking the British, he refrained from acting effectively against colonialism. Embarrassed by the delay in the second front--and anxious to secure Russian assistance against Japan--he acquiesced at the Teheran (1943) and Yalta (1945) summit conferences in some of Russia's aims in Asia and eastern Europe. In his dealings with Prime Minister Winston Churchill of Britain and Joseph Stalin of the Soviet Union, Roosevelt also showed an exaggerated faith in the power of his personal charm. The joviality and exuberance that had soothed ruffled congressmen and bureaucrats during the early New Deal days were not so well suited for international politics.

In the larger sense Roosevelt's diplomacy, like his military policies, was statesmanlike. Despite occasional strains, the awkward wartime coalition among Russia, Britain, and the United States held together. Roosevelt was also wise in recognizing the futility of trying to stop Russian penetration of eastern Europe, which Soviet armies had overrun by early 1944. Accordingly, he sought to avoid unnecessary bickering with Stalin. Had FDR lived into the postwar era, he could not have prevented divisions from developing between Russia and the United States. But he might have worked harder than did his successors in compromising them.

2006-10-24 18:28:34 · answer #7 · answered by Jan 2 · 0 1

They didn't want to be affiliated with what we thought of a strictly European matter. Plus, it was an era when we pretty much said, "Strike us, we'll strike back!".

2006-10-24 18:22:04 · answer #8 · answered by Lucifer Sam 5 · 0 0

Have you tried Google? I'm not THAT smart!

2006-10-24 18:20:32 · answer #9 · answered by ♪ Nightmare ♫ 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers