Assuming we let Pearl Harbor happen in order to get public support for war...

[Reason]

Assuming we let Pearl Harbor happen in order to get public support for war...

& assuming Europe would have fallen without our assistance...

Was the president in any way even remotely justified in allowing pearl harbor attack to take place assuming his motivation was to get us into the war before it was "too late".


I know this is a lot of assuming, but play along, this is a discussion I am having right now with a friend.

I am defending the side that would say it would not be justified due to the fact that we essentially forced Japan to attack us when we cut their resources off with our desire to halt their aggression against China.

Thoughts?

What would you have done if you were president and you "knew" that eventually Germany would invade the US and that if you wait long enough that you won't have many powerful allies left to assist?

 

[Anti Federalist]

The ends never justify the means.

Down that road lies madness and death.

 

[dannno]

The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

Why should the government stop private businesses from trading? If private businesses wanted to stop trading with Japan then they have every right to.

 

[Philhelm]

As Commander-in-Chief, I would never allow my soldiers to be attacked without warning, if I had knowledge of an impending attack. Bottom line. Anything less is treasonous.

edit: The idea of Germany launching a serious invasion of the U.S. during WWII is laughable. Also, the idea that Hitler wanted to conquer the world is inaccurate.

 

[Reason]

The idea of Germany launching a serious invasion of the U.S. during WWII is laughable.

Also, the idea that Hitler wanted to conquer the world is inaccurate.

I need articles and sources to prove this to the person I am debating with.

 

[Philhelm]

I need articles and sources to prove this to the person I am debating with.

You really don't need articles and sources for something like this, unless you were to write a formal paper. The German Navy was never anything special. Could Germany honestly be at war with both Britain and the USSR while attempting a large amphibious assault across the Atlantic in order to invade the U.S. which would necessarily divert their manpower? The U.S. was fortunate to have a staging area from which to conduct D-Day. From where would Germany launch a similar assault, against one of the largest nations in the world, filled with armed citizens? Not to mention that their supply line would be cut, rendering any German soldier that managed to land in the U.S. worthless.

As far as Hitler and world conquest, the fact that he did not want to go to war with Britain initially, allowed Vichy France to exist, had European allies, didn't invade Switzerland, etc., shows that world conquest wasn't his goal. Not to mention that it makes him sound like a cartoon villain if people truly believe that he intended to conquer the world. Judging the imagry of Nazi Germany, it is clear that there was a Romanesque feeling to it. Furthermore, during the medieval era, the idea of reforming the grandeur of the Roman Empire had always been an objective in the back of the mind of many rulers (Note that Frederick Barbarosa, emperor of the Holy Roman Empire (Germany) had an argument with the Byzantine emperor over who was the emperor of the Romans. They eventually agreed that Barbarosa was emperor of the Western Romans, and that the Byzantine emperor was emperor of the Eastern Romans). Hitler pretty much wanted a large, regional power that would emulate the grandeur and longevity of Rome (i.e. 1,000 year Reich).

 

[amy31416]

If a president allowed something like that to happen, he'd be an accessory to murder....mass murder in this case.

And since the president has to follow the same laws we do, he should be punished to the full extent of the law, which would likely mean execution.

 

[surf]

If a president allowed something like that to happen, he'd be an accessory to murder....mass murder in this case.

And since the president has to follow the same laws we do, he should be punished to the full extent of the law, which would likely mean execution.

unless you're FDR or either of the Bush clan.

when i was in HS my history teacher/austrian econ teacher played a tape made by a guy named Percy (don't remember the last name, know it's not Harvin, Graves perhaps) in which he described the moment that FDR was informed of the attack as a "smile crossed his face" type moment.

i have no doubt that FDR knew of an impending attack (see the ships that happened to be out to sea when the attack occured) and even worse he blamed the naval commanders for not being prepared/aware of the attack.

 

[amy31416]

unless you're FDR or either of the Bush clan.

when i was in HS my history teacher/austrian econ teacher played a tape made by a guy named Percy (don't remember the last name, know it's not Harvin, Graves perhaps) in which he described the moment that FDR was informed of the attack as a "smile crossed his face" type moment.

i have no doubt that FDR knew of an impending attack (see the ships that happened to be out to sea when the attack occured) and even worse he blamed the naval commanders for not being prepared/aware of the attack.

I'm sure that the Bushes and FDR aren't the only presidents who are guilty of murder.

 

[TNforPaul45]

You know, if you really look at it, the reasons for Germany and WWII are rooted in their anger at post world war I treatment by the allies.

Just a quick look at the wikipedia page for wwi shows two "German terrorist" attacks in new jersey on munitions plants, that were never conclusively proven to be carried out by germans, and our old buddy Woodrow Wilson, who had the navy bully the German army AFTER they promised to stop attacking passenger ships, and who wanted any excuse for a league of nations, pushing hard, to the glee of Theodore Roosevelt to enter the war by any means.

Go back and look into the "black Tom island" and Kingsport port explosions. Bombings, that were immediately blamed on a foreign power, but with no proof, but decided to have been Germans by a US government commission. Sound familiar? It should ...

Then there is the telegram "found" by a desperate brittian's intelligence agency, saying that germany would help mexico reclaim the south west US states. Yeah, sure, I bet that was legit. The kings empire was desperate to get his former colony involved in any way by that point...

So anyway, I'm sure that FDR even if he didn't know about the impending attack, welcomed it with open arms. Those roosevelts sure like to increase American imperial power, don't they?

 

[cindy25]

Churchill celebrated it. that is fact.

the war was fought to save Poland, and instead of Nazi controlled Poland it ended up Stalinist Poland,
the British and French lost their empires, Europe was poor for 40 years.

 

[Fredom101]

Assuming we let Pearl Harbor happen in order to get public support for war...

& assuming Europe would have fallen without our assistance...

Was the president in any way even remotely justified in allowing pearl harbor attack to take place assuming his motivation was to get us into the war before it was "too late".


I know this is a lot of assuming, but play along, this is a discussion I am having right now with a friend.

I am defending the side that would say it would not be justified due to the fact that we essentially forced Japan to attack us when we cut their resources off with our desire to halt their aggression against China.

Thoughts?

What would you have done if you were president and you "knew" that eventually Germany would invade the US and that if you wait long enough that you won't have many powerful allies left to assist?

"We" didn't do any of the above.
Watch the collectivist speak.

 

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

No assumption needed... The United States government did allow Pearl Harbor to happen and we instigated going back at least as far as Project Black Chamber.

Germany was never a threat to attack us!

So no.... the end did not justify the means here and we never should have been involved in that stupid war.

 

[erowe1]

Assuming we let Pearl Harbor happen in order to get public support for war...

& assuming Europe would have fallen without our assistance...

Was the president in any way even remotely justified in allowing pearl harbor attack to take place assuming his motivation was to get us into the war before it was "too late".

As a side point, I don't like the use of the word "we" in your assumptions.

But my answer is no, given those assumptions it would not be justified, at least not the way it was done.

I wouldn't begrudge any individual Americans, even tens of millions of individual Americans, for being convinced in their own consciences that they need to intervene to aid France or the UK or Poland or whomever, and to use their own means to do that, whether by sending money or enlisting in those nations' military or whatever. I might even be very sympathetic to their cause and commend them in it or even help in some way myself (were I around in such a hypothetical situation). But in doing that those individuals would have no right to conscript other unwilling Americans to help them, whether by an actual draft, or by taxation, or by rationing or any other uses of force to manipulate the free market.

 

[Maximilian American]

No assumption needed... The United States government did allow Pearl Harbor to happen and we instigated going back at least as far as Project Black Chamber.

Germany was never a threat to attack us!

So no.... the end did not justify the means here and we never should have been involved in that stupid war.

Can you give more detail on Project Black Chamber, I tried searching online with no results.

 

[ibaghdadi]

What would you have done if you were president and you "knew" that eventually Germany would invade the US and that if you wait long enough that you won't have many powerful allies left to assist?

The same line of reasoning used to invade Iraq, Afghanistan, and probably Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea...

In fact, it's so similar that it makes one wonder about 9-11. And I'm not even a "truther."

Besides, as someone noted earlier, Hitler didn't want to conquer the world. Neither did the Soviet Union a few decades later. Neither are Muslims are now.

Can't say the same about the neocons, though.

 

[erowe1]

Besides, as someone noted earlier, Hitler didn't want to conquer the world. Neither did the Soviet Union a few decades later. Neither are Muslims are now.

Can't say the same about the neocons, though.

I agree with your general sentiment. But I find this comment odd.

Do you really think the neocons are some new breed of statist who for the first time in recent history stumbled upon the idea of global dominance? I just don't see that. It is innate to the state that those in power always want more, and there is no such thing as enough. Hitler and Stalin may have been prevented by circumstances from increasing as much as they would like, but not by scruples, nor by contentment.

 

[jdmyprez_deo_vindice]

Can you give more detail on Project Black Chamber, I tried searching online with no results.

No problem. I am actually in the process of writing a book about it.

Project Black Chamber was the first group in the United States dedicated solely to cryptanalysis. It was founded after WW1 by a guy named Herb Yardley and was funded by the War Department and the State Department. There is a lot of shady dealings related to this group but it specifically gets tied into Japan at the time of the Washington Naval Conference.

During this time, Black Chamber was intercepting diplomatic relations between the Japanese government and their ambassadors in the United States. The Japanese government had instructed their ambassadors on the least amount of Pacific power they would be able to settle for and since the United States government knew this information (because of Black Chamber) they were able to totally manipulate the Japanese and basically screw them badly.

A few years later, Henry Stimson (Secretary of State) decided he did not agree with the actions of the Black Chamber and announced that they should be shut down saying "gentlemen do not read another mans mail". So the funding was pulled and the program was shut down.

Yardley was left without a job and with a lot of anger towards the government and decided to write a book exposing the secrets of the Black Chamber and one of the secrets exposed was how they were able to read the Japanese diplomatic texts and how they used that to screw them over at the Washington Naval Conference. Needless to say, the Japanese were not amused and there was a lot of talk in the Japanese government of even going to war over the issue.

 

[ibaghdadi]

Do you really think the neocons are some new breed of statist who for the first time in recent history stumbled upon the idea of global dominance? I just don't see that. It is innate to the state that those in power always want more, and there is no such thing as enough. Hitler and Stalin may have been prevented by circumstances from increasing as much as they would like, but not by scruples, nor by contentment.

Yes, that's exactly my point. I guess Hitler and Stalin knew they couldn't conquer the world, while the neocons thought they could actually pull it off.

Hitler knew he couldn't conquer the world, and Stalin knew he shouldn't conquer the world (Rothbard talk about this in "For a New Liberty"). But neither of them had the firepower and global control that neocons had for a while.

 

[Maximilian American]

No problem. I am actually in the process of writing a book about it.

Project Black Chamber was the first group in the United States dedicated solely to cryptanalysis. It was founded after WW1 by a guy named Herb Yardley and was funded by the War Department and the State Department. There is a lot of shady dealings related to this group but it specifically gets tied into Japan at the time of the Washington Naval Conference.

During this time, Black Chamber was intercepting diplomatic relations between the Japanese government and their ambassadors in the United States. The Japanese government had instructed their ambassadors on the least amount of Pacific power they would be able to settle for and since the United States government knew this information (because of Black Chamber) they were able to totally manipulate the Japanese and basically screw them badly.

A few years later, Henry Stimson (Secretary of State) decided he did not agree with the actions of the Black Chamber and announced that they should be shut down saying "gentlemen do not read another mans mail". So the funding was pulled and the program was shut down.

Yardley was left without a job and with a lot of anger towards the government and decided to write a book exposing the secrets of the Black Chamber and one of the secrets exposed was how they were able to read the Japanese diplomatic texts and how they used that to screw them over at the Washington Naval Conference. Needless to say, the Japanese were not amused and there was a lot of talk in the Japanese government of even going to war over the issue.

That's very interesting information. I look forward to your book to go into more detail. Thanks for sharing and I wish you the best with your book, and I hope you post the release date of it on this forum once known.