Seeker,
Where did I state that Roosevelt "should have ignored the attack on Pearl Harbour"? I didn't say that.
For OVER A YEAR before Pearl Harbour the US Navy had been at war with Germany in the Atlantic, with American destroyers going after German subs and American warships serving as escorts for British convoys.
This was done in secret and illegally but cover was provided, as we now know, by Wendell Wilkie, the 1940 Republican candidate who, against the wishes of his party and the vast majority of the country at large, had an agreement with FDR to avoid making an issue of FDR's attempts to bring the country to war.
But try as he might, Germany wisely did not take the bait and counterattack or declare war, at least till after Pearl Harbour.
In the Pacific, what Roosevelt did was instruct Cordell Hull to make impossible demands upon Japan the basis for American consideration of any Japanese demand.
In August 1941, Roosevelt illegally froze all Japanese accounts in the US, then immediately left on one of his famous "fishing trips" and then lied to the press about his actions upon his return, when some details of his action had become public. This made it impossible for Japan to obtain oil and other strategic imports anywhere in the world, and so a Japanese attack was provoked, as was the intention.
Roosevelt had worked tirelessly for years to bring the country to war, and finally he succeeded.
And Germany had to declare war after Pearl Harbour because of German treaty obligations to Japan.
You want something that applies to the current situation? Notice the similarities with the method used to justify the Iraq invasion. Likewise, study Woodrow Wilson's 1916 reelecton campaign where he ran as the "peace candidate" all the while making secret plans to bring the country to war. Some things never change.
Slagle |
