My Dad, a WWII vet non-historian, believed that FDR ignored warnings about the attack on Pearl Harbor. I never heard him mention baiting. I have taken a look at these issues from time to time. FDR clearly wanted to be more actively involved in the War and was chomping at the bit, but he couldn't engage the USA until Pearl Harbor. There is logic to the argument that FDR was able to launch us dramatically into the war after the attack. Would a less-disastrous attack have done the job? Maybe not.
A footnote to this is that my Dad believed that Truman and the bomb saved his life. He was in training for the invasion of Japan at the time. Chris From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kevin Kervick Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 2:09 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [RC] [ RC ] Military Expansionism & etc One of the causes of WWII was WWI. And World War I did not need to happen. Wilson lied to the US and then got us into an insanely ridiculous war. It left Germany deflated and wandering economically and virtually all of Europe a mess. The disastrous Weimar Republic was created in Germany which created hyperinflation and ultimately economic collapse. That set the stage for the fascists who told Germans they could restore their pride and their economy. The world wide depression did not occur out of thin air. Nor did Hitler. As to the Pacific aspect of the war, there is a fascinating new treatise that purports that your hero FDR baited Japan and pushed the US into war covertly. I am sure a great historian such as yourself would have looked into this history. http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2011/12/06/did-fdr-provoke-pearl-harbor / These pompous Progressives were war mongerers. They believed they could reshape the world and they did. Note to Chris's query. A conservative is someone who believes this history could have been avoided if we had been smarter and more humble. Kevin Not the result of military expansionism : Maybe the original 13 colonies / states, although there was a ( military ) revolution that dragged along with it a good number of local communities that were loyalist. the Louisiana purchase the Gadsden purchase the Virgin Islands the state of Washington, although there was threat of military action at the time " " " Hawaii " " " " " " " " " " Alaska Everything else was the result of military expansion Causes of WWII ? # 1 and far away most important, the Depression # 2 the rise of totalitarian ideologies, Fascism / Communism # 3 dysfunctional European political policies in GB, France, etc plus policies of various colonial powers in the Pacific WWI created the conditions for a military industrial complex ? ? ? After WWI we demobilized almost completely. We had an army of about 250,000 in 1940, the smallest for a country of our size of any nation in the world. We were, except for the Navy, ridiculously unprepared for WWII. There was NO military-industrial complex in 1940, that idea is unfounded. Where does that idea come from, if I may ask ? Whoever came up with it is anything but an historian and simply does not know what he / she is talking about. If you are going to make historical generalizations it would be a really good idea to actually study relevant history. Liberal Fascism is a really interesting book with a lot to say, but it is anything but the last word on many of the subjects it covers. Billy -================================================== 12/20/2011 12:14:54 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes: It all went South with entry into WW1 when America sent millions to fight overseas. That created the conditions for WWII and the military industrial economy and we have been stuck in the interventionist mindset ever since. Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: Kevin Kervick <mailto:[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 3:05 PM Subject: Re: [RC] [ RC ] Military Expansionism Perhaps we are talking about degree. Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: [email protected] To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 2:22 PM Subject: [RC] [ RC ] Military Expansionism Actually, James Polk, no 20th century liberal, was responsible for the War with Mexico that added the SW, California, and Texas to the USA, and that was the 1840s. But military expansionism dates to the Revolution itself even if our various attempts to conquer Canada fell flat, both then and in 1812. There also was a threat of war with Canada as late as "54-40 or fight," also under Polk. BTW, Ben Franklin favored military expansion. So did other Founders, not least George Washington. So did TR, then a Republican , in the 1890s, and for quite a while we had the Philippines, and still have Guam and PR from that era. These are established facts that are not in the least dispute. Billy ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 12/20/2011 11:09:48 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes: I agree with that Chris. To me conservative = classical liberal or constitutionalist. Military expansionism is actually a liberal idea that began in the early 20th Century. Kevin If Paul is the most conservative candidate, how do you define conservative? I don't resonate well with either label, liberal or conservative. Both terms are bloated with contradictory meanings that are in the eye of the beholder. Chris From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kevin Kervick Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 11:36 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [RC] Age of Ron Paul I like to use the term, Independent Conservative to show that he is conservative. He has the most conservative voting record in the House. The Independent label refers to the fact that he does not toe the line with neoconservatives and Progressives who say they are conservatives. His opponents and the media use libertarian to paint him as something other than conservative. I believe paul is the most conservative candidate in the race, bar none. Kevin Kevin, >From your article, "Why are they so afraid of Ron Paul? They are afraid because his message does not fit their increasingly outdated and tired narrative. If people begin to embrace Paul's independent conservative message, many of them will undoubtedly stop listening to dinosaur Conservatives on the airwaves." First sentence is great and I think true. Second sentence, I am confused by your use of the term "conservative" to define Paul. To me, he doesn't fit into the normal bi-polar liberal-conservative box. Why bother to put a conservative label on him? Chris ------------------------------------------ Christopher P. Hahn, Ph.D. Constructive Agreement, LLC <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] P.O. Box 39, Bozeman, MT 59771 (406) 522-4143 (406) 556-7116 fax ------------------------------------------ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kevin Kervick Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2011 11:10 AM To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: [RC] Age of Ron Paul http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-manchester/the-age-of-ron-paul-panics -the-conservative-and-gop-establishments Discovering Possibility: A Common Sense Conservative Manifesto (For Classical Liberals Too) is available at www.discoveringpossibility.com <http://www.discoveringpossibility.com/> . The book offers a sociological perspective and corresponding culture change approach, that relies on the principles of classical liberalism and a Deistic spirituality and promotes four pillars of community - freedom, personal responsibility, neighborliness, and thrift. All proceeds from Discovering Possibility go toward the furtherance of our mission at A Place for Possibilities, www.aplaceforpossibilities.org <http://www.aplaceforpossibilities.org/> , a 501 (c) 3 educational nonprofit corporation. Also, check out my writing about Independent politics on Examiner.com at http://www.examiner.com/independent-in-manchester/kevin-kervick -- -- -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
