FDR conspiracy...?


#1

Just watched a documentary on FDR and Pearl Harbor. In it, it was speculated by a number of WWII historians that FDR knew that the Japanese were going to attack the U.S. and deliberately withheld that information. The reason? Because he itched to have an excuse to get involved in WWII and the attack on Pearl Harbor would rise the anger of the American people–whom, up until that time, did not want the U.S. to get involved in a European conflict. There were other historians who claimed that this was simply not true. What do you think?


#2

I wrote something about this on my blog recently when the paulbot conspiracy minded freaks were bringing this up again around Pearl Harbor Day. The conspiracy simply isn’t true. Please don’t waste anymore time researching this stuff! Believe me I have studied conspiracies for ten years and the only one still lingers on in my mind is the Roswell Crash in 1947. However, I think it was a secretly military experiment, not a UFO and having nothing to do with the weather…

As with most of their conspiracies the paulbots offer absolutely no evidence to support their claims and revise the actual occurrence of events to suit their own anti-war agenda. In order to believe this insane conspiracy you would have to believe that Roosevelt had prior knowledge (maybe working secretly with the Japanese- OMG he must be a Japanese spy!!!) about the planned attack. This simply is untrue. For “evidence” of this, Paultards turn to the secret codes that the US hackers broke. Yet, there is simply nothing in those documents about Pearl Harbor. There were rumors of an attack somewhere in the pacific, but nobody knew it would be Pearl Harbor!

For this theory to also work you would have to believe that those secret codes were destroyed by the US Government so no one would know. However, as with all inconsistent conspiracies, why would we know about the secret codes that we broke in the first place, if they were just going to be destroyed anyway? If this was a true conspiracy theory, we wouldn’t know about the secret codes! We also wouldn’t know about such codes because then the Japanese would have been made aware of our secret hacking programs.

Anti-Ron Paul Bot: Paulbots Try to Bring Back Pearl Harbor Conspiracy:


#3

I don’t believe it either, and I’m no fan of FDR. I was just hoping to get some input from others. What do you think about the idea that JFK’s assassination had mafia connections? I sort of believe it. I have never watched Oliver Stone’s “JFK” because I don’t care for him to begin with. I watched a documentary just a few weeks ago on proving or disproving that there was more than one shooter at Dallas. These folks were absolutely precise in re-creating all of the data on the day of JFK’s assassination right down to some company in Europe making actual replications of both JFK’s and the guy in the front seat’s bodies. They managed to replicate almost to perfection the exact results of the bullets on both bodies. Very cool stuff. They pretty much concluded that there was only one shooter. Whether it was Oswald or not has not been determined.


#4

What these are are fun stories. It is interesting and the fact remains we may never know if FDR withheld information. Would it matter? It led to our hegemony over the world, our place in history, and destroyed one of history’s moments of true evil. Is it therefore justified? What if he only assumed? Would he be at fault if he had an “instinct” with no proof and did nothing? As for Kennedy, that one I tend to believe more because his family does have a criminal enterprise past. What really drives that one is Ruby killing Oswald before answers could be found. Was there more to that than meets the eye? There are a plethora of fun tales and what makes them last is the fact sometimes historians have to tell people “we are not 100% sure of this”. That leaves open the chance for imagination to take flight, I suppose.


#5

I tend to agree with you. There really doesn’t seem to be much credence to this conspiracy theory regarding FDR. Ruby was an associate of the mob. He was well-known to a number of high-ranking mob bosses. I don’t remember which one now, but it would appear that his killing Osward before Oswald was interviewed by the police would clearly cast doubt that he wasn’t involved.


#6

:rofl: I just love it when someone says, or posts, “It simply isn’t true”, no rebuttal evidence, it just simply ain’t true.:rofl::rofl:

I think it’s very posible he was purposely forcing Japan into a corner where they had to attack somewhere. I don’t think he had a clue it’d be Pearl Harbor because the water is to shallow for torpedoes dropped from planes. They’d hit bottom and explode before levelling out on target. Like all Democrats, he lied his way into the White House. He knew he was going to the U.S. into the war, even if he had to creat his own, “gulf Of Tonkin” incident. He just way underjudged the Japanese.


#7

I’ve always read that FDR did more harm than good to this country. With his “new deal”, I can see why. Why do you think he was itching to get into the European war? Just curious…


#8

He had to promise not to send American boys into a foreign war to get elected, but he knew that sooner or later the U.S. would have to bow down to Hitler or fight. If The U.S. hadn’t entered the war it could very well have eventually been the U.S. alone against Germany supported by all the industrial power and natural resources of the rest ot the World. It was a different World than we know today.
War was more a natural state of the Human experience and many more people than we may like to admit were not concerned with the fate of the Jews and other “undesirables” around the World. Many would have joined Germany in the fight against the U.S. if they thought that’s where their best fortunes lay. Big Brother to the north kept some South American Countries from joining Germany. If it had been only the U.S. against Germany, they may very well have attacked from our south, just to get even for the big bully to the north’s ‘exploitation’ (real or percieved) of them.


#9

As for the damage FDR did, mainly he shredded the Constitution a lot more than anyone prior to his Regime. Like all ‘good progressives’ he took advantage of and prolonged a ‘good crisis’ to milk it for all the socialist programs he could get.


#10

Whether it’s out of guilt or something else, many extremely rich people become Progressives. They make sure their wealth is protected and then attack the very system that allowed their forefathers to accumulate such vast wealth. Kennedies, Roosevelts, Rockefellers,
Carnegies…


#11

By that reasoning alone one could justify his assumed actions. This would is not black and white. He either did this countr and world a huge favor or its just a conspiracy. Either way it makes for good talk.


#12

Well, if WW2 hadn’t broken out on his watch, he would have done much more damage to us on the domestic front. He wasn’t the best Commander In Chief we could have had, but he gets the credit for it. For one thing, Macarther was not the General he’s made out to be. His dereliction allowed the Phillipines to be run over by the Japanese so easy. Hawaii didn’t have warning, Macarther in the phillipines had warning and still sent no patrol planes out, left the planes lined up on the runways like ducks in a shooting gallery, and continued peacetime daily routine.
Macarther should never have been in the Phillipines, he should have been fired from the Army for his shameful attack on WW1 Veterans in the last days of the Hoover Administration. Macarther was a political Officer more than anything and family connections, family military history made Macarther untouchable.


#13

Don’t know much about Macarthur except that he said “I will return.” It sounds like he was an incompetent if that is true. He did return to the Philippines, didn’t he?


#14

Oh yeah, with a battery of movie cameras, after the beach head had been well secured.

When I served in the Amphibous Forces there was a saying among Marines, “By the grace of God and a few Marines, I shall return to the Phillipines” - Macarther.


#15

Ha, if MacArthur had been given his head in Korea, there would be a united Korea today.


#16

maybe so, maybe no, When the U.S. forces were at the Yellow River on the Manchurian border, and Chinese forces were massing across the river, Truman forbade Macarther to pre-emptively attack them, allowing the Chinese to build up their forces until they had overwhelming forces to attack and push the U.S. back to the 38th Parallel. That can’t be blamed on Macarther. I wish the U.S. would have committed our full capabilities to the effort, including nuclear attacks on China.

I remember sitting around Mrs. Crawford under her big oak tree with the other neighborhood kids while she read a letter to us from her son Jerry, who was a POW in North Korea. Someway word would get around that she had recieved a letter from him and all the kids would go to her house and she would read it to us. He was our hero, even though most of us had never seen him. I remember her showing us how most of the letter was blacked out by Communist censors. There were very few letters and they came near the end of the war, after the North Koreans allowed Red Cross access to the POWs.
When Jerry got home he was mean to everybody. they didn’t have a name for it yet, but I think he suffered from PTSD. Another POW came home to our neighborhood with one arm missing, he was always friendly and kind to everyone. If he came by while we were walking he’d pick us up in his Army Surplus Jeep. I remember him rolling a Bull Durham cigarette with his one hand while steering the Jeep with one knee, using a fold in hs pants to form the cigarette. Everyone I knew was patriotic and Nationalistic in those days.
Viet Nam shattered America like nothing else in our history. It was the beginning of the end of something I can’t seem to get a total grasp on. America lost it’s moral compass during that dark time in our history.

IMO:
Back to Macarther, he had his failings and defects, but he also had his triumphs. Most great military leaders have something in their character that would be bad in civilian life, but allows them to be successful in war. U.S.S. Grant kept throwing men into a ‘meat grinder’ until Robert E. Lee ran out of men. Grant wouldn’t even allow a truce to recover wounded from the field of battle, leaving men to needlessly die, just so the Confederates could not recover their men who may survive to fight again. Grant just kept attacking, lose a battle, just throw more men into it and the enemy will run out of men sooner or later. Damn the casualties.
With Macarther it was an unbelievably super ego. He really did think he was some sort of God like super human. Men like Macarther, Grant, and Patton would never have made it in civilian life.
Again, just my opinion


#17

So…you have no problem with him knowingly lying and misrepresenting himself to get re-elected?
Sounds like Obama’s lies and misrepresenting himself is just fine with you!


#18

I wasn’t blaming MacArthur (check for correct spelling, you’ve got it wrong), I was blaming Truman.


#19

More about Macarthur:
Nimitz (U.S. Commander of Naval Forces Pacific) wanted to skip many of the lesser islands, cut off their supplies and starve the occupying troops. The islands he had in mind were no threat to the U.S. forces with their supplies cut off and their air forces bombed out of existence. Macarthur’s plan was to take every little Japanese occupied island on the way to Japan just because they were there. Roosevelt went with Macarthur’s plan, resulting in tens of thousands of unnecessary American casualties.

Kinda like when some of Lee’s Generals wanted to bypass the Union Army at Gettysburg, attack Washington D.C., and capture Lincoln, possibly ending the war. Lee responded, “There’s my enemy and there’s where I’m attacking”, resulting in the beginning of the end for Lee’s Army Of Virginia.


#20

Yeah, I do that a lot. Can’t expect too much from a third grade education.