2007-12-10 08:22:07 · 29 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes, the military was great then too. Liberals would have been shot on site
2007-12-10 08:24:32 · answer #1 · answered by NEO PIRATE 3 · 4⤊ 3⤋
There were those who disagreed with involvement in WWII, in spite of Pearl Harbor and the German declaration of war that followed. They just didn't have the traction that the anti-war types today have. Had the reaction to Pearl Harbor been more like the reaction to 9/11, and the reaction to D-Day more like the reaction to the invasion of Iraq, then, no, I don't think the US could have sustained a war effort.
2007-12-10 08:39:59 · answer #2 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well it became our war on December 7th, but we could have gotten involved a lot earlier and it would have ended earlier. Remember, where as FDR was a great president, he was a democrat and we were isolationist minded. It was Europe and Asia's war and we were happy to just send supplies to our friends. It took Pearl Harbor to make it personal and then we took action, but we lost a lot of good people that day.
War is not always the answer, and should always be a last resort, but we must always be ready to fight when the need arises.
2007-12-10 08:31:07 · answer #3 · answered by Carl W 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That attitude was espoused by the majority in the US to begin with (which is why you took so long to get involved) along with a general support of Nazi Germany. After all, one of the largest Nazi rallies was in Madison Square Garden and the US ambassador to Great Britain went off to have a chat with Hitler during the Battle of Britain. There was a feeling amongst many in the US that the " old Empire" needed to be taught a lesson. Only FDR wanted to get involved earlier, but congress wouldn't have it.
The only reason the US took part in a European conflict is because Germany declared war on them in support of Japan.
2007-12-10 08:38:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Your question ASSUMES all wars are just. We entered WWII to stop the Axis powers (after they attacked us, big mistake on their part) from completely taking over Europe and Asia with they're massive military offensive (obviously, America would have been the next target as evidenced by Pearl Harbor). I doubt anyone would protest stopping world domination by a single power.
Besides, history as we read it in the books it MUCH clearer than the reality happening at the time.....we didn't learn about the Nazi concentration camps until AFTER the war was over.
As stated above: You're comparing apples to oranges.
2007-12-10 08:31:41 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
The truth is that the media, a succession of weak presidents and a lack of morals shown by our political leaders have robbed us of our dignity, our national pride and our freedom to even show our patriotism.
This is not the United States that won WWII.
My mom used to tell me about how in those days, everyone wore different colored socks as a show of patriotism. Now, even our yellow bows are up for vandalism
2007-12-10 18:24:01 · answer #6 · answered by wider scope 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No
It took Deutsch Bank 60 years to Win WWII. If they had that attitude the Euro would have never become the Global Standard
2007-12-10 08:27:40 · answer #7 · answered by Guerilla Liberal fighter 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Actually that was the dominant American attitude in the two years before Pearl Harbor was attacked. FDR's aid to Britain had to be done largely behind the public's back.
2007-12-10 08:31:16 · answer #8 · answered by sjpatejak 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, WWII would not have been won if that attitude was not taken. if we would have went into the war at the same time as everyone else, our army would have been just as tired as everyone elses. but, we went in after everyone so we had a nice, new, healthy army to fight all the tired people.
2007-12-10 08:28:42 · answer #9 · answered by sysemidy 1 · 1⤊ 1⤋
We did win wwII!
WWII was our Nations war, and not a personal campagin by our demonic President Bushes to control a country for oil.
The Japanese bombs in Pearl harbor were real, The so called weapons of mass destruction were/are a lie of Bush.
Argue the lie of Bush all anyone wants, but until those weapons are found (his reason for the start of this personal campaign) you have nothing to back it up!
2007-12-10 08:32:48 · answer #10 · answered by Grape Stomper 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
WWII meant attacking those that were attacking us and our allies. If you can remember as far back as WWII you should also be able to remenber back to 2001 when the dem/libs were on board with attacking Bin Laden and "those that sheltered him" in Afghanistan. In fact, we still are. Obama has said that upon taking office he will assign more military resources to Afghanistan. This is not cut and run as you like to say. This is take the fight to those who deserve it.
2007-12-10 08:33:01 · answer #11 · answered by David M 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋