How would history judge FDR if after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor he attacked Brazil?

Question

Isn’t that kind of what Bush did? A Saudi guy (bin Laden) who was hiding out in Afghanistan ordered an attack on us and we attacked Iraq.

Attacking Germany is different. They were in the process fo taking over Europe. Iraq was not taking over anyone.

Answer 1

Yup, you're entirely right.
He attacked Germany.
Then, if you believe the morons who make up conspiracy theories, Hitler faked his suicide and fled to... Brazil.
Hmm... maybe FDR SHOULD have attacked Brazil!

(you know, this "Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11" argument is tired, boring, and nothing more than a talking point to fool the uneducated. want to try something new? oh, I thought not)

Answer 2

i think we all know the answer to that - crazy is the word that we would now use to describe fdr.

and that will be the word that is used to describe bush in the years to come.

because the other thing that fdr did that bush hasn't, is that in his attacks and resolve and full involvement of the nation in the war (no tax cuts for the rich during WWII and more was asked of people than to go out and shop) - he fought our enemy.

bush, in wasting all of our efforts, money and lives in iraq, hasn't even started to fight the war on terror that will need to be fought.

it was a bunch of saudis, who were funded by saudis, led by saudis and inspired by saudis who attacked the usa on 9/11.

this proxy war in iraq for the benefit of some offshore (not even american based) corporations will go down as one of the single biggest mistakes in our history.

but i absolutely love the answer from the guy above who thinks that attacking brazil might have been a better idea than fighting our real enemies, because hitler really didn't kill himself, but rather fled to brazil - and of course his entire statement has everything you might read in a fictional novel - and no basis in the reality based community.

i only hope that the nation has the fortitude to make more informed and intelligent decisions when voting for our leaders and asking a great deal more of them once elected.

Answer 3

Considering we needed Brazil's help to maintain a hemispheric coastal presence (and provided them infrastructure for their steel industry in exchange for basing), I think your comparison doesn't really apply.
The exercise I try to imagine is if 15 Americans participated in a terrible act of terror in another country, would we accept an infringement (military) on our sovereignty? It would have been handled through judicial channels.
But, geopolitics is never about "fair" or "moral", it is about interest. The US is the preeminent power and that affords us a sort of "super-sovereignty". It's not right or wrong, it's simply the current reality.
As regards the question of history's view- that depends on the time, place and the viewer. History is not simply voted on, cataloged and shelved at some time in the future. It is a dynamic discipline that is almost as contingent upon the time of the studying as it is on the event(s) itself.

Answer 4

Its a dumb question because I've always thought the first real reason we went into Iraq was because of WMDs, not bin Laden. That one came later on AFTER the US was involved in Iraq.

Answer 5

No, it's not really at all what Bush did. It's more like how we went after Germany when Japan attacked the US.

*In response to your additional details: Iraq had already shown they had no problem invading other countries which is why we had the 1st gulf war. In all honesty, I don't think Iraq and Germany compare well in this scenario but I do believe it's better than Iraq and Brazil.

Answer 6

That is a fascinating analogy, I wonder how history would judge him if after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor he attacked Germany. Oh, wait . . . . . .

Edit: “Attacking Germany is different. They were in the process fo taking over Europe. Iraq was not taking over anyone.”

The entire war was different which is my point. The link below debunks 8 Anti-War Myths.

Answer 7

He knew a jap attack became drawing near, yet not the place and while precisely. it would desire to be Pearl Harbor or the Philippines. It became important that Japan struck the 1st blow interior the conflict, yet that would not ability Roosevelt became prepared to sacrifice the Pacific Fleet merely for that. So sure, he became maximum truthfully conscious with reference to the potential of a jap attack. yet not the place. and not while. Had the U. S. extreme command well-known for particular it may be Pearl, of direction they could have placed it on extreme alert.

Answer 8

As another asked, "Is there a thought process here." Please so some research on FDR and Japan. Look at the history from Japanese point of view ---

Japan in 1904 won the rights to build ships -- but the US limited it on tonnage. Japan has zero raw materials. They are forced to import --- FDR forbade the sale of scrap iron. It stopped all shipments of oil to the country.

Imagine this nation having its oil imports totally cut off by another nations? Japan was ruthless in its war and it did terrible things --- but FDR was not so blameless --- We had broken the Japanese codes 18 months prior to 7 Dec. We had forced Japan to seek raw materials elsewhere --- FDR did not notify Adm Kimmel (sp) in HI.
Magically, all the carriers were moved from HI prior to that Sunday!

As too IRAQ --- Sadaam was the most destablizing dictator in the last 25 years of the 20th century --- He ruthlessly took over Iraq. He sought arms. He funded terriorism against Israel, Jordon, Lebanon, Egypt, he encourage distablization of Turkey, a NATO member. He force a war with IRAN. He invaded Kuwait --- He played games with chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons systems. Disinformation is part of warfare. He terrorized his citizens. He killed his kin.
He played off Europeans against each other via money.

There were forces aligned with binLaden in Iraq --- he was providing binLaden with intelligence and material. He clearly was in violation of the UN sanctions.

I also suggest the your read about the history of Iraq --- how it got to be after 1921 --- .

Answer 9

Don't insult FDR by comparing him to Bush. FDR was a progressive, fought a warranted war, and helped fix the economy. Bush did the opposite. Roosevelt was one of the best presidents the US ever had.

Answer 10

If FDR claimed he had absolute proof the Brazilians were behind the attack on the United States most people would believe it. Who ever thought the American people would be lied to by the President?