[ Show ]
[ Shrink ]
Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor
of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users'
privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your
privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket
to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we
also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.
Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
[ Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message ]
Date Posted: 21:08:11 06/21/05 Tue
Author: Chuck in ND
Subject: This is the question that most
In reply to:
's message, "Ok...Another Question Then...." on 13:18:21 06/21/05 Tue
interventionists bring up--what about the Nazi's?
Let's start with WWI. We had no business getting involved. It was a family feud--cousin George mad that cousin William was helping out his best friend and cousin Alexander reluctantly joining the melee, and everyone in a snit over cousin Ferdinand getting shot--even though he was told assasins were waiting to kill him and there were two attempts on his life the day he was shot but he insisted on finishing the parade route anyway. Stupid STUPID war over stupid STUPID reasons--every contemporary said just that--that it was a meaningless war that no one should have touched. The Europeans had just about worn each other out with the fighting and were ready for a truce when the US jumped into the fray and reinvigorated all sides. Wilson said "We HAVE to get involved in the war so that we can be part of the peace." Well, now if that isn't about the stupidest thing a president has said since "It depends on what the meaning of is is."
The bottom line is that our defeat of Germany et al and the incredibly humiliating terms of surrender (terms which Wilson never liked but the other "victors" insisted on, so he caved) gave rise to WWII and empowered Hitler. If the reparations that Europe required from Germany hadn't impoverished the Germans and driven them to their knees (helping, BTW, to spark a world-wide economic depression. Our depression started first in Europe), Hitler would have never been anything but a nutty colonel in the army. (This is not just my opinion. Read the books and articles that were being written at the time--everyone agrees that the terms of surrender was the direct and leading cause of WWII.)
OK, WWII--again, you really need to read the books that were written at the time, by eyewitnesses and participants in those events. They all agree and the evidence is insurmountable that YES, FDR did manipulate the Japanese in to attacking. He knew about it ahead of time and ordered comanders to NOT respond, not to take precautions. In fact, during the actual bombing, when many airmen reflexively ran to their planes to begin a defensive or retaliatory attack, they were ordered back to the ground.
The fact is that FDR met with Churchill and Uncle Joe months prior to Pearl Harbor to discuss strategy and procedure for US involvement. Even though the entire nation was against our involvement (some of them had actually learned a lesson from WWI), it was a done deal and just needed the spark to light the fuse. FDR's deceit makes Bush Jr. look like an amatuer.
Well, wasn't it right that we save the Jews? Let me ask this--which do you think bothers God more--the 6 million Jews who died under Hitler or the 30+ million who died under Stalin and the 30+ million who died under Mao and the hundreds of millions who suffered for decades under their tyranny? Because but for our alliance with Russia, Stalin's power would have been drastically dimished, the Communists never would have had the access to our money, technology and support that kept them in power for another 40+ yrs and they never would have been able to export their tyranny to half the world. Yes, the suffering and deaths of the Jews was a tragedy beyond belief. But God loved his Ukranian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Veitneses, Cambodian, Cuban and Chinese children just as much, and wept just as much over their suffering.
FDR never hid that fact that he admired Uncle Joe. He had several open, self-avowed Communists that held high Cabinet-level positions, many of whom were laisons between the US and USSR during and immediately after the war, passing on secrets, not to mention enriching (through foreign aid) and propping up a regime that was near collapse after suffering untold losses in the war.
In other words, the rise of the USSR as a super-power, and thus its ability to export communism to the rest of the world while keeping itself in power and maintaining an iron grip on its people, and the untold suffering and death that ensued, is a direct result of our alliance with Stalin during WWII.
Yes, we saved many Jews. But at what cost? Can we justify that? I don't know. My conscience twinges at the thought.
As to the Swiss--Hitler would have all too happily invaded Switzerland, ignoring their neutratility as happily as he did Denmark's but for one thing--the Swiss were armed to the teeth and every citizen was prepared to fight and defend their country. The passes were rigged with bombs that would detonate at the first wave of invasion. (OK, some of the Swiss' money helped protect them as well.) That's the key to healthy neutrality--stay neutral and be well armed and ready to shoot.
(I'll be glad to give you a list of books to read on the topic if you like. But I warn you--there are LOTS of books and you might not be as nutty as I am about reading that stuff.) :D
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
you're not alone in wondering all this, Eppy-- -- Mary, quite contrary, 08:57:41 06/24/05 Fri
Mary...Is There Any Way To Get A Copy.... -- Eppy, 09:27:40 06/24/05 Fri