On December 7, 1941, Japanese bombers launched an early morning surprise attack on Pearl Harbor Naval Base in Hawaii, which destroyed 188 U.S. aircraft, killed 2,403 Americans and injured 1,178. Presidential Franklin Delano Roosevelt addressed Congress on December 8, 1941, in what became known as the famous Infamy Speech delivered at 12:30 P.M. ET. The address is regarded as one of the most famous American political speeches of the 20th century.
That very day, just one day after the attack, the U.S. Congress declared war on the Empire of Japan, ushering in U.S. involvement in World War II.
But many Americans have a distorted version of history, one which even the Discovery Channel and History Channel specials have perpetuated with little mainstream pushback. America’s entry into the war was long underway before Japanese pilots ever took off from their assaulting aircraft carriers.
The importance of the Anglo-American alliance, a 20th century progressive worldview held by former Democratic President Woodrow Wilson, enabled him to reason leading Americans into World War I. In the years leading up to Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt’s agreement with this worldview made him inclined to favor U.S. intervention in the war in Europe, and he made policy decisions in accordance with this inclination.
Modern progressives reconcile the real historical record by distorting it further, just as long as it fits with their modern-day cause. “Few people realize that it was oil — the shortage of oil — that precipitated the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941,” the liberal-progressive outlet Salon published last year on this very day.
Because big oil is now the enemy of the left, which has moved in an increasingly radical direction, they highlight this part of the story and leave out — well — the other 99 percent.
While a multitude of so-called “moderate” Democrats have been sacrificed on the altar of global warming by party leadership — including, in part, their House and Senate majorities, i.e. most recently Sen. Mary Landrieu — there haven’t been too many facing defeats over scrap metal.
That’s right, scrap metal. U.S. embargo policies on scrap metal, steel and various other items — one being oil, which only came much later — prompted the fascist empire to attack Pearl Harbor. In October of 1940, a year before the oil embargo, Secretary of State Cordell Hull wrote to Roosevelt regarding his meeting with Japanese Ambassador Kensuke Horinouchi, who at that time made it very clear “conquest by force of all worthwhile territory in the Pacific Ocean area” would only be moved up if the U.S. insisted on the embargo policy.
However, while conservative “America First” Republicans such as Henry Stimson, who was appointed to head up the War Department, held out hope that the Japanese were bluffing, progressives like Mr. Hull hoped they were not. For Mr. Hull, who ironically was more restrained toward Japan than other progressives in the Roosevelt Administration, believed Japan was “a challenge to international order, civilized behavior, and the open door.”
The “open door” referred to U.S. and European big business interests in China and greater Indochina, hardly an industry confined to oil. The idea that Oil led to Pearl Harbor, as Slate declared, is an oversimplified and borderline bogus interpretation.
But progressive internationalists, who wanted a global body to keep the world stable for their business partners, couldn’t actually tell the public their intentions. That just wouldn’t have been an easy sell to the American people, who still favored conservative “America First” isolationism.
Former President Wilson justified U.S. intervention in World War I by calling it an American duty to preserve freedom, arguing “the world must be made safe for democracy.” He didn’t say “the world must be made safe for” my multinational corporate cronies.
President Roosevelt went one step further, belittling the fact “our people like to believe that wars in Europe and in Asia are of no concern to us” in his national radio address on December 29, 1940. In his radio remarks — which were made both before the oil embargo and almost exactly one year before the fateful attack — he argued that the U.S. must play a greater role in the world to further the cause of freedom.
“We must be the great arsenal of democracy,” he said. (As a side note, the once great city of Detroit, which took the nickname “Arsenal of Democracy” for its role in World War II, is now broke.)
Yet, the attack on Pearl Harbor was sold to the American public as an unprovoked attack, as was the Lusitania. In reality, Wilson’s and Roosevelt’s worldview led to policy decisions that left Germany — and then the Empire of Japan — with little choice but to launch such attacks.
While each of these tragedies are horrific and public outrage over them more than just, we would be fooling ourselves if we didn’t acknowledge the truth. Allowing progressive politicians, or any group of politicians who believe they are smarter than us to pull the wool over our eyes, isn’t patriotism — it’s blind ignorance.
That said, I not only support the eradication of fascism and all its horrors, but recognize what an equally horrific world dominated by fascists would look like. As a result, I also support President Truman’s decision to drop the atomic bomb on Japan rather than invade, costing hundreds of thousands if not a million American lives.
However, I do so with the realization that sometimes “better them than us” truly does make sense. I do so with the full knowledge that both Presidents Wilson and Roosevelt did what proponents of big government do best — create crisis to expand government and further crony interests. I do so with the sad understanding that cronyism was infinitely furthered by the post-World War II world order, an order they promised the “Greatest Generation” was meant to protect their freedom.
If we are to truly honor those who lost their lives at Pearl Harbor, as well as the 407,000 American lives lost as a result of direct military action in World War II, then we must recognize the whole story, not just the parts that fit political agendas or appeal to nationalistic fervor.
Richard D. Baris is the editor of People’s Pundit Daily and author of Our Virtuous Republic: The Forgotten Clause in the American Social Contract.
View Roosevelt’s Entire Infamy Speech Below:
guidopilot / December 7, 2014
As a liberal and a veteran, I find author Baris’ apologist version of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor to be a festival of half-truths. Yes, the Japanese attacked the United States because their oil (and steel) were cut. But Baris fails to mention that the Japanese had not only waged a brutally aggressive campaign of imperialist expansion throughout Asia – including attacking US protectorates and allies in the region. The atrocities of Japan’s actions in Asia were grossly under-reported in the press before 1941, and the oil embargo was the U.S.’s attempt to slow Japan’s expansion (and aggression). Regardless of what Roosevelt (or Hull or Stimson) wanted, war was coming to the United States either in Asia or in Europe. The assumption on Baris’ part seems to be “The U.S. deserved Japan’s aggression because…Roosevelt,” is tantamount to a wife-beater saying “I hit you because you made me mad, and you shouldn’t make me mad because you know I’ll hit you.”
/
eddieb2 / December 7, 2014
This guy is full of shit. Period.
/
clubchampion / December 7, 2014
The oil embargo was a result of the invasion of French Indochina by Japan–an attempt to cut off the flow of arms and supplies into China. At the time, Chinese citizens were being tortured, murdered, raped, and enslaved by the Japanese–a 1930s version of ISIS, writ large. This barbarism was literally fueled by U.S. oil–accounting for 80% of Japan’s supply. So–you believe that the Unites States should have continued to sell oil to Japan? Really?
The idea that Japan had “no choice” but to attack Pearl Harbor after the U.S. oil embargo is clearly, obviously false. Here’s another option: Japan could have withdrawn from its brutal relentless regime of war, slavery, rape, torture and murder.
/
flakwhacker / December 16, 2014
The military minds that were the real power inside Empire of Japan at the time were extremely conservative and based their military operations on the ancient principles of Bushido – a cultural code in which any enemy of the Japanese master race was inhuman and required no mercy. Soldiers under the command of Bushido – driven superiors were encouraged to butcher anyone who stood in their way by any creative means possible and leave indelible impressions on the survivors of their carnage in order to assure their absolute compliance with their new owners. Any and all of this is well-documented everywhere – except in Japan’s history books, that is.
/
Richard Baris / January 3, 2015
Which embargo are you referring to? You, have no idea what you are talking about. The embargoes weren’t imposed all at once. You do know that don’t you? Don’t be a fool, what I wrote is exactly what happened, even if it hurts your feelings.
/
donjames911 / January 6, 2015
See http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/united-states-freezes-japanese-assets. YOU are the fool.
/
Jeremy Lynes / December 7, 2014
Your take on Truman’s bombing of Japan needs updating. No such choice existed btwn bombs and soliders. Surrender was imminent, without emperor. It was coldblooded murder by Truman. He should have hung for war crimes on civilians for a power display for USSR.
/
IPlay4Fun / December 7, 2014
Nonsense…You’re just plain wrong…
” Surrender was imminent”… Nope, you got that wrong too…
/
Jeremy Lynes / January 2, 2015
Google this site…. American Military Leaders Urge President Truman not to Drop the Atomic Bomb. Its true.
/
IPlay4Fun / January 3, 2015
anyone can find a small minority dissent for any military or political activity.. a very tiny minority… listened to, and dismissed.. for all the right reasons…
/
Jeremy Lynes / January 3, 2015
obviously you didn’t read it. There were more generals and admirals there than you can shake a quirt at. No small minority. War crimes have a way of bringing out the most in people. If you have evidence of them being refuted, then post it. Hard to refute a blatant violation of the Geneva Convention. Bombing civilians is wrong. It’s not like he missed a military target and accidentally hit a major city.
/
IPlay4Fun / January 3, 2015
Evidence by Google, Great…I pronounce you nuts. I did try and look up “SHAKE A QUIRT AT” but not much luck with that either…
(there were over 1200 generals and admirals in ww2, so your number is a tiny minority… get used to it, you are in the minority opinion dating back to 1945)
/
Jeremy Lynes / January 3, 2015
The fact that you would support the bombing of civilians pretty much says it all. No sense arguing with degenerate mentality. The article about generals is from a book by that goes into great detail about this crime and the many efforts by people who tried to stop it or spoke out against it. You said there were none. The book proves you wrong. If you care to reply, please bring some facts to the table. Here’s the website….one of many to present historical facts exposing Truman’s act as unnecessary, let alone a war crime. http://www.colorado.edu/AmStudies/lewis/2010/atomicdec.htm Look further and you’ll find the book.
But I suppose facts don’t really interest you. You are like the loyal solider who will support his emperor no matter how many innocents he murdered. No sense in letting a little international law and moral compunction cloud your loyalties.
/
Jeremy Lynes / January 3, 2015
Here is a letter from MacArthur stating clearly the unnecessary act of dropping the bomb.
and his statement that the other high ranking leaders of the Allies did not need the A bomb. You may have heard of him. I hope this is satisfactory. I can’t find any generals higher ranking than him. http://wagingpeacetoday.blogspot.com/2012/08/the-unnecessary-bombing-of-hiroshima-67.html
/
Jeremy Lynes / January 3, 2015
Until the Geneva Convention, there were myriad International laws against bombing civilians.
/
Richard Baris / January 3, 2015
The saddest part about this thread, is that I am more conservative than anyone commenting. However, I am also not a blind idiot, and everything I wrote is, in fact, true — backed-up by Wilson and Roosevelt’s own records. Sadly, some cannot come to grips with the culpability we have in WWII or other wars, which is not what you would expect from self-proclaimed conservatives, who should always be weary of government action-inaction and lies. Blind patriotism, pathetic.
/
donjames911 / January 6, 2015
You REALLY need to get a life….
/
Diane Merriam / December 7, 2014
Wishful thinking. Some elements in Japan acknowledged that they had lost, but the head military brass wasn’t buying it. Dying for the Emperor was the height of personal honor in a way that westerners don’t quite consider or even comprehend. Defeat before dishonor and as long as there was one person left to fight on, they weren’t defeated.
/
donjames911 / December 7, 2014
What a load of biased buffalo chips. Anyone with any knowledge of the 1930’s knows that the embargoes were a result of Japanese incursion into China, including the “Rape of Nanking” in 1937. The embargoes are equivalent to today’s sanctions that have been leveled against Russia for it’s incursion in Ukraine.
/
Richard Baris / January 3, 2015
Which embargo? You, as with the last commentator, have no idea what you are talking about. The embargoes weren’t imposed all at once. You do know that don’t you? Don’t be a fool, what I wrote is exactly what happened, even if it hurts your feelings.
/
flakwhacker / December 7, 2014
Revisionist history is fabricated the same way today as it was back when Josef Goebbels was running his propaganda ministry, and this article is an excellent 21st century example.
It takes snippets of fact out of context, mixes them with jingoistic phrasing and uses the opportunity to invert the results in order support a false conclusion.
One obvious example (quoting from the article}:
“That’s right, scrap metal. U.S. embargo policies on scrap metal, steel and various other items — one being oil, which only came much later — prompted the fascist empire to attack Pearl Harbor.”
Correct on only one point – Roosevelt’s oil embargo on Japan DID come much later after the scrap metal prohibition— AFTER Japan used all that scrap metal to build battleships, Zeros and tanks and rape Nanking. The objective was to slow down Japan’s advance through the western Pacific region. Roosevelt had to know he could not stop it, however, because Japan went straight for the Indonesian oil fields thereafter. Retarding Japan’s murderous advance through Asia was just about the only thing that could be done until the Empire of Japan did something that justified a formal declaration of war. So the Premise in this article is spurious at best and fabricated claptrap at best.
Then, the author presumes to rely on the usual neoconservative’s short-term selective memory with this ridiculous statement aimed at people other than tea baggers (again, quoting):
” I do so with the full knowledge that both Wilson and Roosevelt did what proponents of big government do best — create crisis to expand government and further crony interests.”
This is not only patently absurd but ignores a few other facts… Henry Ford’s cozy relationship with the Reich’s Krupp Armament steel works and Prescott Bush’s petroleum technology exchange with Speer’s ministry of production for the possible creation of synthetic lubrication oil. And then there’s the most obvious deliberate omission of all: the yellow cake and aluminum tubes gambit that Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld used to ratchet up their fabricated Iraq war.
Even more facts: the Republican party did everything they could to block the Lend-Lease programs to Great Britain before the war and in fact was adamantly against any aid to anyone involved in the European theater of war – in fact I recall an article in the old New York Tribune which chronicled a Republican political rally in the city on December 7th, 1941 where one of the speakers at that event was ranting on over “…that socialist Roosevelt trying to get us involved in foreign entanglements”… then as the news among the crowd spread that Pearl Harbor had been attached, the theater began to empty, and the speaker was still screaming epithets against Roosevelt, Henry Wallace and others.
This author is probably the same guy who’s rewriting the school book history texts for the state of Texas – the ones in which Thomas Jefferson is omitted because of his position on the subject of separation of church and state and replacing him with Moses as being one of the founding fathers. And as far as that goes, perhaps the author should read the article that Wallace wrote for the New York Times written on April 9, 1944 entitled “The Danger of American Fascism” (easily Googled). Though I suspect this author wouldn’t deign to sully his preconceived beliefs with anything that might threaten them, it is nevertheless a worthwhile read as well as a visionary glimpse into America’s future at the time it was written.
It’s disgusting when people like this rely on today’s woefully lacking education curriculum which almost completely overlooks American History and takes advantage of that ignorance to spread bigoted inaccuracies, revisionist fiction and distorted facts inserted in contexts loaded with biased agendas.
/
Flash Fyre / December 7, 2014
This story makes the rounds every so often — Japan was starved for oil by US policy, hence Pearl Harbor.
A war uses a lot of energy — ships, manufacturing, aircraft — it’s never been properly explained how Japan, down on her knees and struggling for oil, suddenly had enough of the stuff to invade and hold several nations and hold them for years, all while maintaining a huge war machine.
/
Robert Riversong / December 7, 2014
Let’s hope that what Americans “remember” about this event is that it was the template for what the neocon Project for a New American Century called “a new Pearl Harbor” – the attacks of 9/11/01 which, just like its predecessor, was allowed to happen by our military leaders and White House in order to justify engaging in yet another global war.
/
Red / December 7, 2014
Weather forecast for Hawaii, December 7th, 1941: partly cloudy, with a little nip in the air
/
WyldeRules / December 7, 2014
More shameful liberal blame-the-victim nonsense. I’m sure this version will make the rounds on MSNBC.
/
Richard Baris / December 8, 2014
Many things I have been called, but liberal – nay. Read the column again, in its entirety. It is very critical of liberalism and liberal internationalism.
/
IPlay4Fun / December 7, 2014
Nuts.
/
Richard Baris / December 7, 2014
There was no surrender in sight, and only a complete unread person would believe or say something so ignorant. Save for IPlay4Fun and Diane Merriam, who also seem to have an actual education on the subject, I would recommend reading “Crisis in U.S. Foreign Policy,” edited by Michael E. Hunt, in which you can read Wilson’s and Roosevelt’s own words and the words of their cabinet members. I will say this though: realism rules the international system, not idealism. So, for those who took this article from an ideological perspective, grow up. Threats don’t care what party you belong to or vote for.
/
Diane Merriam / December 7, 2014
If Japan wanted to go all out on controlling the Pacific, there was really only one power that stood in her way … the US. Yes, we embargoed goods including scrap metal (you need metal to build all those ships and planes and Japan itself doesn’t have much in the way of native resources) and oil (for fueling them). If we weren’t going to do what they wanted, they had to get those resources elsewhere and our navy was their biggest threat.
Admiral Yamamoto himself had spent a considerable amount of time in the US and cautioned them against attacking us. Our public isolationist policy (which somehow included economic embargoes in the Pacific and Lend-Lease in Europe. Roosevelt knew we would wind up in the war and did everything he could, short of actually declaring war, to help our allies and hurt those who would become our enemies, but that’s a different discussion.) would be shredded in the wake of such an attack. He was told to go ahead with it anyway, so he did as was ordered. He told them it would probably give them a year of free rein in the Pacific.
For all the Japanese successes at Pearl Harbor, their luck (and intelligence) went against them in one huge way … Our carriers weren’t in harbor. They also cancelled the last wave of planned attacks that was supposed to go after infrastructure. If that had been taken out as planned, we wouldn’t have been able to repair so many ships as fast as we did and wouldn’t have had all the stockpiled fuel to get them moving. Same mistake that Hitler made at Dunkirk. Couldn’t believe that it was all really going even better than hoped and feared overstretching. Those few days of halted battle saved the BEF and Free French, giving them the time to evacuate across the channel.
/
Robert / December 8, 2014
I have two graduate degrees. One in aerospace/ aeronautical engineering, and the other in architecture, both very difficult majors. I minored in history. Specifically, world conflicts (war). I graduated summa cum laude. The only way the author of this article would be admitted to those classes is if he swept the floors. I also lived in Japan during the early 50s, and my two sisters were born there.
Leave it to some rag newspaper written by a poorly educated media jerk to distort history. Your article is a lie, distorted, with many things taken out of context. The author Richard D. Baris is typical of the left wing low intelligence media prostitutes whose only purpose is to sell a story. The more outrageous the story, the better chance it has of selling. I am so sick and tired of jerks like this author, writing garbage to degrade the efforts of honorable people.
The generation of WW II who I refer to as America’s greatest generation, built America into the world’s greatest power. Every generation (including mine) since have lived off the legacy of what the “great generation” left us………….and no generation since has put anything back.
You say to honor these people Baris ? You know nothing about the meaning of honor. I have seven overall military pilots in my family. My father commanded a B-24 at the age of 19 years old. My uncle a U.S. Navy fighter pilot whom I am named after, was killed in combat before his 21st birthday, and 3 weeks after being married. I was also a fighter pilot, and saw combat in “Desert Storm”.
Do you think today’s generation would be willing to make the sacrifices the generation of WW II made ? To even think that possible is laughable.
Do us all a favor Baris……shut the hell up, and keep your flawed opinions to yourself. I don’t know what diploma mill you received your education from, but you might want to ask for your tuition to be refunded.
/
Richard D. Baris (Author) / December 8, 2014
Mr. Robert,
I am not sure what column you read, or where you may have purchased your esteemed degrees, because they apparently didn’t teach you how to make an actual intellectual argument, which first requires you to lay out that argument and back it up with a fact or series of facts that constructs a little something called… a thesis.
Let’s talk honor. I was recruited for the U.S. Army’s 18 X-Ray Special Forces pipeline immediately following Sept. 11, 2001, where they found me in an Atlantic City Thai boxing arena beating the crap out of men that weighed 60-80 plus pounds more than me in a tournament I had to sign a waiver to enter.
It was easy.
After serving honorably and being injured in the line of duty, along with a friend — whom together, we walked 21 miles crippled just to return to the green zone — I was honorably/medically retired and returned to college.
There, I finished my B.A. in political science and moved on to International Relations — never falling below a 3.9 GPA, Mr. “summa cum laude” — and later graduated from the State Department’s own tailored program 12 months early.
I write the truth because I’d rather be with my young son, my daughter and my beautiful wife, than off chasing ghosts. Besides, I’ve always managed pretty well without the dole.
So, how stupid do you look/feel now? Probably, as stupid as a student in the 1950s juxtaposed to a mediocre student in my day, Pops.
Sadly, all these years under your belt, and yet, you are still an ignoramus.
Pathetic.
/
Richard Baris / December 8, 2014
Mr. Robert,
I am not sure what column you read, or where you may have purchased your esteemed degrees, because they apparently didn’t teach you how to make an actual intellectual argument, which first requires you to lay out that argument and back it up with a fact or series of facts that constructs a little something called… a thesis.
Let’s talk honor. I was recruited for the U.S. Army’s 18 X-Ray Special Forces pipeline immediately following Sept. 11, 2001, where they found me in an Atlantic City Thai boxing arena beating the crap out of men that weighed 60-80 plus pounds more than me in a tournament I had to sign a waiver to enter.
It was easy.
After serving honorably and being injured in the line of duty, along with a friend — whom together, we walked 21 miles crippled just to return to the green zone — I was honorably/medically retired and returned to college.
There, I finished my B.A. in political science and moved on to International Relations — never falling below a 3.9 GPA, Mr. “summa cum laude” — and later graduated from the State Department’s own tailored program 12 months early.
I write the truth because I’d rather be with my young son, my daughter and my beautiful wife, than off chasing ghosts. Besides, I’ve always managed pretty well without the dole.
So, how stupid do you look/feel now? Probably, as stupid as a student in the 1950s juxtaposed to a mediocre student in my day, Pops.
Sadly, all these years under your belt, and yet, you are still an ignoramus.
Pathetic.
/
Robert / December 9, 2014
Christ, you’re even dumber than I thought you were. You don’t know what article I responded to ? Are you saying you write other garbage ?
The U. of Miami doesn’t sell college degrees. You have to earn them. Not only that, you have to qualify academically to enter.
You claim that U.S. Army Special Forces recruited you to inspect and lay pipe ? Then you claim, you were “injured in the line of duty”, and walked 21 miles in the desert injured ? Really ?……………..yeah right. Now I know you’re lying. First, anything to do with construction in the Army, goes through the Army Corp. of Engineers. You are so full of it.
I’m guessing what really happened, is you went to an Army recruiter like everyone else that wants to enlist, and joined the Army. After getting out of boot camp, you were tested to see what job you could qualify for. The Army obviously discovered you were not very smart, so they assigned you to a construction crew laying pipe. The Army’s conclusion regarding your intelligence was confirmed, when a pipe rolled over your foot, because you were to stupid to avoid putting yourself in such a situation. As for the walking 21 miles in the desert injured, if you are claiming you were in the middle east…………BS.
You really do have an inferiority complex. If you are trying to impress me with your Thai boxing as a tough guy…….forget it. I’m not impressed. What an immature stupid comment for you to make. What the hell does Thai boxing have to do with the idiotic article you wrote ?
You claim a degree in political science ? Wow ! Talk about a useless degree. It might get you a job at Denny’s as a short order cook. Political science, psychology, and recreational management, are majors that college football coaches enroll their not so smart football player in, because they are easy majors so the football player can stay academically eligible to play.
You claim to write the truth ? After reading your childish, and full of it response, it’s quite evident you avoid the truth. You also talk about all these jobs you have had. Not a very consistent resume. In other words, you have no job skills that anyone would want to hire you. So you write BS articles for this rag, making things up as you write, and you comment on your own blog. That tells me you have a lot of time on your hands.
As to why you wrote the Pearl Harbor article ? I’ll tell you why. Because you’re a blowhard loser, who has never done anything meaningful in life, so you tear down others who have accomplished something successfully. Got it…….Sonny ?
/
Richard Baris / December 15, 2014
You are more simple than I thought you were, and you might be beyond help. But, in the interest of truth, I will go ahead and make one last effort to educate you. But this is it, because I am way too busy to continue this.
After 9/11, George W. Bush signed an executive order implementing the 18X-Ray program, of which, I was the second cycle through. Further, you do not have to be an Army Corp MOS, you ignoramus. Anyone, repeat, anyone, in the U.S. Army can try out for SFAS (which, is Special Forces Assessment and Selection for those who can’t use Google), as long as they have a GT score of 115 or higher.
READ: https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CC0QFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.goarmy.com%2Fcareers-and-jobs%2Fbrowse-career-and-job-categories%2Fcombat%2Fspecial-forces-candidate.html&ei=uZyPVIT_L8GfNsuxgcAN&usg=AFQjCNFX-t2Iq-MUDguLOzFCZxXHeiBMAA
But, at this point, I really just put this out for others reading the comment, so that they aren’t swayed by your ignorant claims. Surely they can use Google to check the facts.
Meanwhile, you’re a sad little person, and I wish the best for you, though I doubt you will get it.
/
Robert / December 16, 2014
You’re way to stupid to educate anyone……….blowhard. You were a pipe layer. If you want to invent technical names for a simple entry level job because it makes you feel important………go ahead. Maybe it bolsters your insecurity problem.
Just so we are clear on something. They don’t award the “Purple Heart” to someone stupid enough, to allow a pipe to roll over his foot either.
The “Purple Heart” is only awarded to those wounded in combat. Unlike me……..you were never in combat. I hope you’re not going to tell me George Bush ordered a combat unit of pipe layers, whose job was to assault the enemy by rolling pipe over their feet.
The fact is, you are as phony as a three dollar bill. Try getting a real job.
/
dildenusa / December 8, 2014
Oh Please, this is nothing but a self serving revisionist load of fertilizer pushed out the back end of a cow by Mr. Baris. Yes Roosevelt desperately wanted to aid the British but knew he didn’t have the votes in congress to send aid and there was a palpable fear that if France fell Britain was about to be invaded by Nazi Germany and would be the next to fall. Nobody wanted American military aid to Britain to possibly fall into the hands of the Nazis. In fact by the time Churchill attacked the French fleet at Mers-el-Kebir on July 3, 1940 France had already fallen to the Nazis. For Roosevelt and most Americans that clinched things that Britain would fight to the death if need be against Nazi tyranny. On March 11,1941 Roosevelt signed into law the Lend-Lease act which provided military, food aid, and yes, oil to Britain, Free France, China, USSR, and other allied nations. For Japan that was the clincher. When Roosevelt moved the Pacific Fleet to Pearl Harbor early in 1941 Japan initiated its plan of attack. The rest as they say is history.
So Please Mr. Baris, take your spin and stick it you know where. You only give ammunition to the inverted totalitarians and corporate tyrants like he Koch Brothers intent on world domination by economic strangulation of freedom loving people everywhere.
/
Richard Baris / December 8, 2014
“Period,” huh? As in – “if you like your health care plan, you can keep your health plan, period.”
That kind of “period”?
/
eningrampant / April 21, 2023
Roosevelt’s agreement with this worldview led him predisposed to support American engagement in the war in Europe in the years before to Pearl Harbor, and he made policy decisions in line with this predisposition. drift hunters
/