we would have negiaoted for peace with japan.. as many Marines killed during the island hopping compaign they would have lost desire to fight and pulled them all out. I am talking of today's Democrats though not the ones from 50 years ago they were a different breed, they actually used to be pro America back then
2007-05-02 12:07:35
·
answer #1
·
answered by lethander_99 4
·
2⤊
4⤋
Would be fine since this war has lasted longer than WWII. BTW, a Democrat was President during WWII.
In addition, one would expect that "today's Democrats" would have a specific criteria for what constitutes victory that was realistic and did not ignore diplomatic solutions to the problem. "Today's Democrats" would listen to their allies before fighting a war effectively alone. "Today's Democrats" would not invade another country without provocation.
So, I think that "today's Democrats" would have done just fine in WWII. But, I, also, think that if Bush had been President during WWII, the Germans and the Japanese would have defeated the US.
2007-05-02 12:11:12
·
answer #2
·
answered by Your Best Fiend 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Dems were in charge of House of Representatives 1940-1942, 1944-1945. The Senate was also in Democrats hands 1940-1945
We were in fine shape then. BTW FDR was a Democrat
2007-05-02 12:25:06
·
answer #3
·
answered by thequeenreigns 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
There is absolutely no comparison to Iraq and Afghanistan Wars to WWII. In WWII, we had defined countries against us and the rest of the world. The current wars are against extremist like Al-Qadea and Hezbollah. Democrat or Republican would agree with this. In Afghanistan, We did fight the Taliban ran govt but 9/11 was ran by Osama bin Laden not a part of Afghanistan or the Iraqi governments. We are fighting a tougher war than our grandparents fought. The battle lines are blurred and undefined. We had a Democrat in Office during WWII by the name FDR and he did alright. I believe with today's democrats, we would be alright too.
2007-05-02 12:20:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by sbaker326 1
·
3⤊
1⤋
I expect what the Bible teaches us to expect. And that is what I get. Sometimes not as bad but other times, worse. It is what it is. I do not have the corporate world to deal with anymore; at least not on the same scale; and I do not have school environment either, but I have exposed myself to wacky people who are very demanding and know not what they do. Seriously. But I do think having an atheist background has helped me in this endeavour. Just because I am Christian does not mean you can take advantage of me. That is a delicate dance. But because I can recognize it, I take pre-emptive measures. Always with the Lord in mind.
2016-05-19 01:31:59
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The shape we're in.
FDR was about as left as left gets. He got along just fine with Stalin.
FDR's belief in evolution saw eye to eye with Hitler's. He refused the Jews who Hitler offered to ship here because he thought they were inferior too. FDR believed in genocide, but It didn't take a genius to realize that Hitler's genocide would have included him! He saw the light! (so to speak)
If a democrat gets into office, radical islam isn't just going to go away. They don't want to talk and they don't want our money . . . THEY ALREADY GET IT BY SELLING US OIL!
They want to rule the planet! Even the dumbest dumbocrat will finally figure it out. Probably about the same time FDR did, when a full-scale war is necessary to cut the cancer out.
.
2007-05-02 12:07:51
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
the same we are now...democrats were in charge back then and did just fine. The country was united against a known enemy. today we were told hijackers attacked America so we are going to invade Iraq...what kind of logic is that?
2007-05-02 12:24:34
·
answer #7
·
answered by emt_dragon339 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
We would be in fine shape. If the Nazis were marching across Europe, or anywhere else, all able bodied Americans would answer the DRAFT and FIGHT for FREEDOM.
2007-05-02 12:08:34
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
F.D.R. was a Democrat but the difference is that both parties worked to-gather to win the war.
2007-05-02 12:17:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by hdean45 6
·
4⤊
0⤋
The Chicago newspaper would be the Rising Sun and not the Sun Times.
2007-05-02 12:16:54
·
answer #10
·
answered by Barry auh2o 7
·
1⤊
1⤋