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

If the liberals and all the war apologists were in charge during the 1930s and 1940s have World War II ended up like this? http://youtube.com/watch?v=nEly8nXA6Oo

2007-12-26 09:03:58 · 20 answers · asked by arkainisofphoenix 3 in Politics & Government Politics

Okay, when i say liberals now. I'm not talking about the liberals of their time. JFK was a liberal of his day and he still had the cojones to take on the Soviets when they were sending missiles to Cuba to attack us directly. FDR was a liberal of his day, and chose not to go to war, but made sure that after the bombing of Pearl Harbor, he settled with his morality and did what was right for the country. What I dispise now are the liberals who have hijacked the Democratic party to the point where it's basic principles are to not fight no matter what. I'm talking about the liberals of now who wouldn't fight an enemy even their were foreign tanks rolling down 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. I'm talking about the Liberals who call American soldiers terrorists and Al Qaida Freedom Fighters. I'm talking about the liberals in this country who want us to bring ourselves to our knees to get along with groups who would rather us die than to believe in something other than what they do. Those Liberals!!

2007-12-26 09:21:25 · update #1

20 answers

That about sums it up.

To "Nostradumbass" who says Democrats were in charge then, of course they were, but the Liberals weren't. The modern Liberal didn't take over the Democrat party until the Hippies came along in the late 1960's.

2007-12-26 09:12:57 · answer #1 · answered by hose_b 3 · 2 3

No. The only reason that America changed from sitting back and making a bundle off the arms sales to the Allies and, likely, to the Germans was because of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.

As a matter of fact, if the Allies hadn't moved to help America in the South Pacific it is likely America would not have entered the war in Europe and the Manhattan Project would likely have taken place in Saskatchewan, Canada which may have ended up with America having to play catchup while the Allies developed the bomb outside of America.

The fact of the matter is that the bulk of the war was won by the Allies and the west's development of the Atomic Bomb relied mostly upon European physicists.

Without the Allied help in the South Pacific and the control of the Bomb it is not unlikely that Times Square and the rest of North America would be under Japanese control now.

2007-12-26 09:18:43 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

LIberals were in charge in wW32. And, contrary to your claims, they are no different today tan they were then--that clip shows what the conservatives openly worked for at the time and wanted to subject Aerica to. .Prior to WW2, it was the conservatives who wanted to appease Hitler--and who continued to support the Nazis even when they were sinking American ships NOT involved with supplying Britiain.

Liberals today are no different than the liberals of the past. If this country faces a real threat--count on the liberals to step up. Faced with a real threat, the cons turn yellow and run for the hills.

All they have is mouth. Today, they invade a counnntry that never attacked us and had nothing to do with the people who did. Today--as in the 1930s, they support a dictator (Musharaf) who is giving sanctuary to America's real enemies. And then when liberals refuse to support their actions, they whine.

Conservatives go to war to make money or kill people of different races or religions. Liberals go to war to defend our country.

And nothing has changed in 70 years. The cons are just as unpatriotic as they ever were. Actions speak far louder than their empty words.

2007-12-26 09:29:38 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

The liberals WERE in charge in the 1930s and 40s. FDR was President.

2007-12-26 09:18:40 · answer #4 · answered by wyldfyr 7 · 2 1

I have news for you buddy, the biggest liberal of them all FDR was in charge during WWII. The Congress was also very liberal at the time. Where do you people get your silly notions?

2007-12-26 09:32:33 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Liberals were in charge. The President during WW2 was a liberal Democrat from a blue state, New York. Read a history book.

2007-12-26 09:07:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 9 1

Liberals like Neville Chamberlain in britian let hitler rise to power.

It took a republican like Douglas Macarthur and George Patton to defeat Hitler.

FDR did nothing until we were attacked.

JFK blew it big time during the bay of pigs by not supporting the troops.

Liberals make us lose wars, republicans win them.

2007-12-26 09:36:51 · answer #7 · answered by infobrokernate 6 · 1 1

Well, since liberals WERE in charge in the 1930s and 1940s, I'd say that was a GOOD thing.

2007-12-26 09:09:11 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 6 1

Liberals have been in value before WWII!! Roosevelt grow to be the perfect liberal alongside with Neville Chamberlain in England. There wasn't plenty difference between at the instant and then. before WWII there grow to be a very huge-unfold US isolationist flow that grow to be adversarial to any conflict. Pascifism grow to be additionally stable., The Communist party grow to be the main powerfull it has ever been interior the U. S.. The Nazis have been socialists and Hitler called his usa the German national Socialist Republic. only approximately 50% of the U. S. inhabitants supported going to conflict with Germany. We even had the international Olympics held in Nazi Germany with the U. S. engaging. Chamberlain's call is linked using fact the perfect appeaser. very like at the instant (Iran and the Islamic facists) he and different countries had many talks and ultimatums with Hitler. First they laid down the line whilst he took Austria. Then Poland, and Chamberlain mentioned Hitler could supply up there. He negotiated a treaty with Hitler. Then got here Nazi invasion of Belgium, France, Netherlands and so on and Chamberlain grow to be nevertheless attempting to barter peace with Hitler. His head grow to be buried interior the sand. only whilst the Nazis began bombing Britain did Winston Churchill income capacity and threw out the appeasers and started protecting their very own perilous situation. the comparable innovations-set existed interior the U. S.. After many treaties with Japan and Germany (capitulation) the conflict got here only after Pearl Harbor grow to be bombed and Roosevelt found out what grow to be inevitable. The Pearl Harbor attack resulted with the inability of two,500 human beings and maximum of our Pacific Fleet. The sneak attack on the twin Towers resulted interior the inability of close to to 4,000 lives yet Democratic liberals attempt and faux it in no way got here approximately. That it grow to be our fault or the Republicans fault. They act like they could be chuffed if the U. S. surrendered. it rather is the way I see it. Pelosi, Reed, Kennedy and all of those creeps could supply up our soverignty to the UN using fact they hate Bush plenty. I see Iran using fact the hot Nazis. i think of our occupation of Iraq is the only way we are in a place to administration Iran.It grow to be deliberate as such. If the U. S. ought to deliver democracy to Imperial Japan we are in a place to additionally deliver it to Iraq in spite of the liberals.

2016-10-02 09:29:41 · answer #9 · answered by kovie 4 · 0 0

The real shame is that today's conservatives can't seem to tell the difference between those who are actually threatening us and those who aren't. If today's liberals had been in charge back then, WWII would have turned out the same. If today's liberals had been in charge in 2001, Bin Laden would have been caught or killed.

2007-12-26 09:17:28 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

fedest.com, questions and answers