Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: epicure who wrote (14326)	3/1/2003 7:00:13 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 25898

Entering WWII was very unpopular before Pearl Harbor. People said there was a greater danger in the world we should be concerned about more - communism. Others said the German and Japanese empires might be threats to the others - the British, Chinese, Europeans - but not to America. Some said the push to war was made by special interests - in particular the Jews and the British. We had no treaty commitments to anyone being attacked. The League of Nations should handle the problem. And of course, some just knew that people die in war. All these arguments against entering WWII earlier sound sort of familiar to me. I can't be the only one to see parallels. I posted a speech by Alistair Cooke here who lived through those times and he spoke of the similarities of the arguments of those times to today. And Craig Crawford posted a Charles Lindbergh antiwar speech from the pre-WWII period also on this thread.