Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: FDR PURPOSELY CAUSED PEARL HARBOR?

  1. #1
    Senior Member PROBASCO's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    PACIFIC NORTHWEST
    Posts
    1,622

    FDR PURPOSELY CAUSED PEARL HARBOR?

    http://www.theamericanconservative.c...-pearl-harbor/

    Did FDR Provoke Pearl Harbor?

    Patrick J. Buchanan December 5th, 2011


    On Dec. 8, 1941, Franklin Roosevelt took the rostrum before a joint session of Congress to ask for a declaration of war on Japan.

    A day earlier, at dawn, carrier-based Japanese aircraft had launched a sneak attack devastating the U.S. battle fleet at Pearl Harbor.

    Said ex-President Herbert Hoover, Republican statesman of the day, “We have only one job to do now, and that is to defeat Japan.”

    But to friends, “the Chief” sent another message: “You and I know that this continuous putting pins in rattlesnakes finally got this country bit.”

    Today, 70 years after Pearl Harbor, a remarkable secret history, written from 1943 to 1963, has come to light. It is Hoover’s explanation of what happened before, during and after the world war that may prove yet the death knell of the West.

    Edited by historian George Nash, Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover’s History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath, is a searing indictment of FDR and the men around him as politicians who lied prodigiously about their desire to keep America out of war, even as they took one deliberate step after another to take us into war.

    Yet the book is no polemic. The 50-page run-up to the war in the Pacific uses memoirs and documents from all sides to prove Hoover’s indictment. And perhaps the best way to show the power of this book is the way Hoover does it — chronologically, painstakingly, week by week.

    Consider Japan’s situation in the summer of 1941. Bogged down in a four year war in China she could neither win nor end, having moved into French Indochina, Japan saw herself as near the end of her tether.

    Inside the government was a powerful faction led by Prime Minister Prince Fumimaro Konoye that desperately did not want a war with the United States.

    The “pro-Anglo-Saxon” camp included the navy, whose officers had fought alongside the U.S. and Royal navies in World War I, while the war party was centered on the army, Gen. Hideki Tojo and Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka, a bitter anti-American.

    On July 18, 1941, Konoye ousted Matsuoka, replacing him with the “pro-Anglo-Saxon” Adm. Teijiro Toyoda.

    The U.S. response: On July 25, we froze all Japanese assets in the United States, ending all exports and imports, and denying Japan the oil upon which the nation and empire depended.

    Stunned, Konoye still pursued his peace policy by winning secret support from the navy and army to meet FDR on the U.S. side of the Pacific to hear and respond to U.S. demands.

    U.S. Ambassador Joseph Grew implored Washington not to ignore Konoye’s offer, that the prince had convinced him an agreement could be reached on Japanese withdrawal from Indochina and South and Central China. Out of fear of Mao’s armies and Stalin’s Russia, Tokyo wanted to hold a buffer in North China.

    On Aug. 28, Japan’s ambassador in Washington presented FDR a personal letter from Konoye imploring him to meet.

    Tokyo begged us to keep Konoye’s offer secret, as the revelation of a Japanese prime minister’s offering to cross the Pacific to talk to an American president could imperil his government.

    On Sept. 3, the Konoye letter was leaked to the Herald-Tribune.

    On Sept. 6, Konoye met again at a three-hour dinner with Grew to tell him Japan now agreed with the four principles the Americans were demanding as the basis for peace. No response.

    On Sept. 29, Grew sent what Hoover describes as a “prayer” to the president not to let this chance for peace pass by.

    On Sept. 30, Grew wrote Washington, “Konoye’s warship is ready waiting to take him to Honolulu, Alaska or anyplace designated by the president.”

    No response. On Oct. 16, Konoye’s cabinet fell.

    In November, the U.S. intercepted two new offers from Tokyo: a Plan A for an end to the China war and occupation of Indochina and, if that were rejected, a Plan B, a modus vivendi where neither side would make any new move. When presented, these, too, were rejected out of hand.

    At a Nov. 25 meeting of FDR’s war council, Secretary of War Henry Stimson’s notes speak of the prevailing consensus: “The question was how we should maneuver them (the Japanese) into … firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.”

    “We can wipe the Japanese off the map in three months,” wrote Navy Secretary Frank Knox.

    As Grew had predicted, Japan, a “hara-kiri nation,” proved more likely to fling herself into national suicide for honor than to allow herself to be humiliated.

    Out of the war that arose from the refusal to meet Prince Konoye came scores of thousands of U.S. dead, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the fall of China to Mao Zedong, U.S. wars in Korea and Vietnam, and the rise of a new arrogant China that shows little respect for the great superpower of yesterday.

    If you would know the history that made our world, spend a week with Mr. Hoover’s book.

  2. #2
    Guns Network Lifetime Member #2

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    8,906
    I just got done reading a good book on the subject a couple months ago?, it appears we did have some complicity in pushing them against the wall.

  3. #3
    Senior Member tank_monkey's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    7,032
    Everyone at the time KNEW America was chomping at the bit to get into the European war, but the American public, though mostly supportive of Britain was still not in the mood to get into a major conflict.

    Most everyone knew we were waiting for some kinda of opportunity to declare war in Europe and most of the smart guys knew that the oil embargo against Japan would make they do something pre-emptive. Once we got into a shooting war with Japan, we could throw our hat into the war with Europe.

    Sounds like interesting reading, and also the fact that the LEFT'S big hero, FDR, is also very very tainted.

    For years I've heard that we KNEW the Japanese were going to do something months before Pearl. For years, ever since my boyhood, I found it astonishing that we were caught so flat footed when everyone was saying that we had good intel and that we had broken the japanese Code. Something didn't smell right for decades with me.

  4. #4
    Team GunsNet Silver 12/2012 Warthogg's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,648
    The simple answer is America's oil embargo on Japan forced the attack though these things are seldom to never that simple. Japan had decided when their oil supplies dropped to X months supply (may have been a six months supply....not sure any longer), Japan had to attack.

    Then in what might well be the dumbest move of the time, Hitler (Germany) declared war on the US.

    United State's interest may well have been better served had we told Great Britain to sit back and watch and then supplied both Germany and the Soviet Union with war materials and let them pound each other into oblivion.


    Wart

  5. #5
    Senior Member raxar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    PA, where the cold is only matched by the isolation
    Posts
    3,797
    Quote Originally Posted by tank_monkey View Post
    Everyone at the time KNEW America was chomping at the bit to get into the European war, but the American public, though mostly supportive of Britain was still not in the mood to get into a major conflict.
    rephrase that, the gubmit was chomping at the bit, America wanted nothing to do with it.

  6. #6
    Team GunsNet Silver 12/2012 Warthogg's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,648
    Quote Originally Posted by raxar View Post
    America wanted nothing to do with it.
    Yup, after WW I, the American public wanted nothing to do with European wars.


    Wart

  7. #7
    Senior Member raxar's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    PA, where the cold is only matched by the isolation
    Posts
    3,797
    The American public didn't want anything to do with WW 1 either, Wilson's big campaign slogan was that he kept us out of the war.

  8. #8
    Senior Member tank_monkey's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    7,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Warthogg View Post
    Then in what might well be the dumbest move of the time, Hitler (Germany) declared war on the US.
    Duh! The Tripartite agreement forced Hitler to come to the aid of Japan. Article 3 states that each signatory will assist another member country with all Political, economic and military means if one is attacked from a non-signatory nation). Though Hitler is no poster child for keeping his word when it comes to treaties, Germany would have looked pretty stupid to ignore the one major treaty that created the Axis Powers in the first place. I also expected that HITLER expected to (a) defeat Russia and (b) defeat Britain before America could really do anything in Europe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Warthogg View Post
    United State's interest may well have been better served had we told Great Britain to sit back and watch and then supplied both Germany and the Soviet Union with war materials and let them pound each other into oblivion.
    Now that's a dumb statement! Sit back? Britain (and most of Europe) would have been 100% conquered or destroyed. More Jews and minorities would have been killed under the 'Final Solution"' (or is that something you actually secretly support?). Actually supply Germany with war materials? Now You'Re the one who is high.

  9. #9
    Senior Member tank_monkey's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    7,032
    Quote Originally Posted by raxar View Post
    rephrase that, the gubmit was chomping at the bit, America wanted nothing to do with it.
    Correct. America aka the American Administration and government WAS, ahem, the DEMOCRATIC party at the time .........

    Okay, Dems in office during WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam. How in the world did the Republicans get the "war" party smear? and the Democrats get the "Party of Peace"? How the fuck did THAT HAPPEN?

  10. #10
    FDR's election campaign held a promise not to enter foreign wars.
    It helped get him elected.

    Like Wart mentioned, the US State Dept. was squeezing Japan's resource flow.
    Some of FDR's cabinet warned him of consequences, but it was a calculated move
    and the pressure continued.
    At some point he knew Japan would strike, but nobody knew how hard.

    The parallels between Pearl Harbor and 9/11 are overwhelming.
    The sentiment toward war changed in a flash.

    Yeah, FDR knew his actions would facilitate hostile action.
    We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm.
    George Orwell

  11. #11
    Team GunsNet Silver 12/2012 Warthogg's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Warthogg View Post
    Then in what might well be the dumbest move of the time, Hitler (Germany) declared war on the US.
    Quote Originally Posted by tank_monkey View Post
    Duh! The Tripartite agreement forced Hitler to come to the aid of Japan. Article 3 states that each signatory will assist another member country with all Political, economic and military means if one is attacked from a non-signatory nation). Though Hitler is no poster child for keeping his word when it comes to treaties, Germany would have looked pretty stupid to ignore the one major treaty that created the Axis Powers in the first place. I also expected that HITLER expected to (a) defeat Russia and (b) defeat Britain before America could really do anything in Europe.

    DUH !
    The Tripartite Pact, which said that Germany had to support Japan if Japan was attacked, did not necessarily obligate Germany to declare war if Japan initiated the attack.


    Now that's a dumb statement! Sit back? Britain (and most of Europe) would have been 100% conquered or destroyed. More Jews and minorities would have been killed under the 'Final Solution"' (or is that something you actually secretly support?). Actually supply Germany with war materials? Now You'Re the one who is high.
    You might note most of continental Europe was both conquered and destroyed.
    By May 1945, Red Army hordes occupied all the great capitals of Central Europe: Vienna, Prague, Budapest, Berlin. A hundred million Christians were under the heel of the most barbarous tyranny in history: the Bolshevik regime of the greatest terrorist of them all, Joseph Stalin.
    http://buchanan.org/blog/did-hitler-want-war-2068
    Hitler allowed the British Army to escape at Dunkirk.
    Many of the British upper class were pro Germany.
    The allies knew Jews, Slavs, Germans, Gypsys....etc., etc. were being killed in the camps. Didn't seem to help much now did it.

    I could explain the rest to you but you are really too ignorant to waste that time on.


    Wart

  12. #12
    Senior Member tank_monkey's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Kalifornia
    Posts
    7,032
    Quote Originally Posted by Warthogg View Post
    I could explain the rest to you but you are really too ignorant to waste that time on.
    Wart

    The fact that you use DAILY KOS as a source, confirms that you're a Democrat plant.

  13. #13
    Team GunsNet Silver 12/2012 Warthogg's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,648
    Quote Originally Posted by tank_monkey View Post

    The fact that you use DAILY KOS as a source, confirms that you're a Democrat plant.
    I'm guessing your dick is as limp as your response.


    Wart

  14. #14
    Senior Member Oswald Bastable's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Somewhere In The Troposhpere
    Posts
    7,462
    Quote Originally Posted by Warthogg View Post
    I'm guessing your dick is as limp as your response.
    Once again, first ad hominem attack of the thread.
    If we refuse to rule ourselves with reason, then we shall be ruled by our passions.

    He, Who Will Not Reason, Is a Bigot; He, Who Cannot, Is a Fool; and He, Who Dares Not, Is a Slave. -Sir William Drummond

    There are some things I will not abide within my sight!

  15. #15
    Senior Member

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    323
    Back to the OP, the fallacy of the argument presented is that the US not getting involved in the Pacific War would have somehow constituted "peace." It fails to mention why Japan wanted the oil: so that they could continue their territorial expansion through the Pacific rim, brutally victimizing every native population along the way (i.e. "The Rape on Nanking.")

    The argument depends on the erroneous idea that not going to war, in and of itself, would have been in the United States' best interests. At the very least that's a matter of debate, but anyone reasonable would have to agree that stopping Japanese imperialism would be in our best interest, long-term. They were slowly taking over all of the resources of SE Asia, and given the culture and arrogance of Japan it would have only been a matter of time before American interests, like the Philippines, were invaded.

    While I'm no fan of FDR, his Japan policy was one of the few competent things he did. He essentially created a win-win for the USA: If Japan backs down based on the oil embargo and curtails their expansion (which he knew was unlikely), America wins. If Japan feels forced to attack US interests in the Pacific and brings us into the war against them, he was confident of a US victory and all the good things that would bring: Again, America wins.

  16. #16
    Team GunsNet Silver 12/2012 Warthogg's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    8,648
    Quote Originally Posted by Sergis Bauer View Post
    Back to the OP, the fallacy of the argument presented is that the US not getting involved in the Pacific War would have somehow constituted "peace." It fails to mention why Japan wanted the oil: so that they could continue their territorial expansion through the Pacific rim, brutally victimizing every native population along the way (i.e. "The Rape on Nanking.")

    The argument depends on the erroneous idea that not going to war, in and of itself, would have been in the United States' best interests. At the very least that's a matter of debate, but anyone reasonable would have to agree that stopping Japanese imperialism would be in our best interest, long-term. They were slowly taking over all of the resources of SE Asia, and given the culture and arrogance of Japan it would have only been a matter of time before American interests, like the Philippines, were invaded.

    While I'm no fan of FDR, his Japan policy was one of the few competent things he did. He essentially created a win-win for the USA: If Japan backs down based on the oil embargo and curtails their expansion (which he knew was unlikely), America wins. If Japan feels forced to attack US interests in the Pacific and brings us into the war against them, he was confident of a US victory and all the good things that would bring: Again, America wins.
    Japan wanted the oil: so that they could continue their territorial expansion through the Pacific rim...............
    Definitely Japan wanted the oil and I think at least the initial Japanese expansion was to secure a reliable oil supply. Not pleasant to remember but we pushed the Japanese into that decision.

    The United States of America would do well to note Japan's actions when their country's economy was threatened by lack of oil. (Or maybe I should say Canada and Mexico should note Japan's actions.)

    IMO Roosevelt, immediately upon Germany's declaration of war on the US, stated the Pacific war was of secondary importance - and would be fought with that fact in mind - reveals the Pacific was just another lever to get the US in the European war.

    In Japan, the peace party was actually in power. Roosevelt's refusal to broker a peace between Japan and China caused the peace party to fall and the militarists took over.

    Believe it or not the US failure to continue to sell scrap metal to Japan was probably a causative factor.


    Wart

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •