The Root Causes of Pearl Harbor Serve as Important Lessons for America Today

DB Daily Update ^ | David Blackmon

[BroJoeK]

eagleone: "14% unemployment is doing just fine?? "

No, FRiend, like any Democrat, you are still ignoring the facts which don't suit your pet theory.
In fact, by the end of 1941, as the graphs clearly show, US unemployment was down around 5% and US employment was the highest ever, to date.

All that was without a US declaration of war.
So FDR did not "need" war for economic reasons, but he did want, as was explained at the time, to help out US allies and to respond to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor.
Soon enough, Hitler declared war on the U.S., and so FDR made defeating Nazi Germany his first priority.

FDR's terms, pretty much from Day One of the U.S. war were: Unconditional Surrender by Axis powers and a United Nations to help prevent future wars.

[ealgeone]

In fact, by the end of 1941, as the graphs clearly show, US unemployment was down around 5% and US employment was the highest ever, to date.

Well, except it wasn't. Unemployment was at 10% by the end of 1941. It only hit 5% in 1942 once we were at war.

You keep shifting your argument.

[ealgeone]

Without the gearing up for the War, the economy under the New Deal wasn’t working.

[ealgeone]

I'm trying to figure out why you're defending ol' FDR. Easily one of the worst presidents we've ever had who did so much damage to this country.

He was for court packing.

He was for socialism.

He was a big government guy.

I'm starting to suspect you might be for all of those as well.

[BroJoeK]

eagleone: "The breaking of their diplomatic code should have been the key we were looking for."

Once again: Japan's diplomatic codes were broken years before 1941.
Japan's naval codes were not broken in time for Pear Harbor, but were partially broken in time for the Battle of Midway.
Breaking Japan's naval codes made a world of difference at Midway.

Nothing in Japan's diplomatic codes told Washington the time, place or nature of the coming Pear Harbor attack.

eagleone: " He [FDR] knew war was coming with Japan...and as I've stated previously, believe he wanted the US in the war. "

FRiend, we do not disagree on that particular point!
But you also claim FDR wanted war solely for economic reasons, and the facts show otherwise.
You also seem to suggest FDR knew specifically the attack on Pearl Harbor was coming, and again, the facts do not support such claims.

In the final weeks of November 1941, Washington sent out official "War Warnings" to ALL Pacific area commanders, telling them to expect and be prepared for a Japanese attack.
But when actual attacks came, none were prepared to defeat them.

I don't blame FDR for that.

[rollo tomasi]

"In 1940 the US was again doing great economically..."



No it wasn't, unemployment was at 14.6% and building a solid economy does not comprise of raising government spending (Cooked/built into the GDP) and supplying war materials to Europe. The European skirmishes affected the import/export/general market place for the economy to grow which caused many US businesses owners to push to get directly involved, just like during the Great War.

War is awful for the overall economy, (Certain businesses thrive of course) the only good thing that arises is an end to the warfare so the market place can get back on track.

[BroJoeK]

"The war was precipitated by an ultimatum to Japan delivered to Secretary Morgenthau by Harry Dexter White, a Soviet agent.
The ultimatum originated in Moscow.
The Japanese diplomatic code was broken.
It all went according to plan, delivering half of Europe to the Soviets. "

Most of that is pure fantasy.
Japan's diplomatic messages did not contain specifics on their upcoming attacks, which included not just Pearl Harbor but also Wake, Guam, the Philippines, Hong Kong, Singapore, the Dutch New Guinea and many smaller islands.
None of this was known in advance from Japan's diplomatic messages.

As for a Soviet ultimatum supposedly delivered to Morgenthau for Japan... FDR's pre-war terms for restored good relations with Japan were a Japanese withdraw from recently conquered countries.
Those terms did not originate with the Russians, but we're FDR's idea and resulted in Japan deciding to attack Pearl Harbor.

It's true that FDR seemed to like "Uncle Joe" Stalin, and took no actions to suppress Communists in his administration.
But FDR understood better than most that the loss of Tsarist Russia in the First World War helped prevent the Allies from thoroughly defeating the Kaiser's Germany, and FDR was determined not to repeat that mistake in the Second World War.

There's no evidence I've ever seen to suggest that "Uncle Joe" was calling FDR's strategic shots through ultimatums to Morgenthau or anything else.

[BroJoeK]

" Admiral Thomas Hart, commander of the Asiatic Fleet was ready and did not lose any ships when Japan attacked. "

Nothing against Hart, I don't know much about him...
Did his fleet help in the defense of the Philippines?
Did they fight battles against the forces attacking MacArthur there?

You say he didn't lose any ships... how many were in the fight?

[BroJoeK]

eagleone: " Unemployment was at 10% by the end of 1941.
It only hit 5% in 1942 once we were at war.
You keep shifting your argument."

My argument has not shifted, but your own graph makes my point, namely that in 1941 US unemployment was down from ~20% in 1938 and nearing the 5% it soon after achieved.
Employment was higher than ever, to date, so by comparison the U.S. economy was already booming, without a declaration of war.

I'm not saying FDR didn't want to join the World War, I am saying his motives were not purely economic.

[Captain Peter Blood]

He was not near the Philippines, he was in the South China Sea, The Asiatic Fleet was based there. Read up on Hart. He did engage the enemy, he was just a smart old Asia hand who understood the Japanese.

[ealgeone]

>>eagleone: " Unemployment was at 10% by the end of 1941. It only hit 5% in 1942 once we were at war. You keep shifting your argument."<<

My argument has not shifted, but your own graph makes my point, namely that in 1941 US unemployment was down from ~20% in 1938 and nearing the 5% it soon after achieved.

Whoa....you said in 1940 unemployment was 5%. It clearly wasn't.

If you're wrong on that fact.....

I think we're arguing two points here.

One, what was needed to end the Great Depression.

Two, did FDR want the US in the War.

How are those two related?

I agree FDR recognized the danger arising in Europe and Japan. He wanted the US in the War. He also wanted the Great Depression to end(?). That one I might have some issues with as it allowed him to grow government.

So how are these related?

Without the War, or even helping via Lend Lease, the economy was not on track.

Morganthau noted in his diary in May 1939:

" We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong ... somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises. ... I say after eight years of this Administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started. ... And an enormous debt to boot."

http://www.burtfolsom.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/Morgenthau.pdf

<(On a side note....reading the memo is insightful as it's full of typical liberal talking points. We don't tax enough, etc, etc.

At one point he notes he doesn't pay enough in taxes!

Well, here's the simple solution: write a check if you feel you don't pay enough.)

So they recognized the New Deal had failed.

They needed something else.

The declines in unemployment are in part reflective of the increase spending on defense/defense related items.

So to keep the economy going he needed the War or some degree of involvement in the War.

I argue his reasons for wanting the war was to primarily get the US out of the economic mess he'd continued with his failed policies.

[Vehmgericht]

Don’t have time to give a detailed rebuttal. Please be more detailed about the fantasy. I should not have written “The war was precipitated by an ultimatum.” If White’s memo was contrary to the official policy it would have been ignored. The rest I will defend. I believe the diplomatic message gave the hour to break off relations. Whites role: “In May 1941 Vitalii Pavlov, in the role of a Soviet diplomatic courier, contacted White. Pavlov was concerned that White might be unwilling to assist the Soviets because of their alliance with Nazi Germany. Pavlov related the account of his contact with White in the Moscow magazine, News of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, in 1995. He had retired from Soviet intelligence in 1987 with the rank of Lieutenant General. Pavlov reported that he provided White with a note containing a recommendation that the U.S. take a firm stand in their negotiations with Japan.” “There’s no evidence I’ve ever seen.” That can be a problem. I disagree with Haynes and Klehr on significant points but on this we can agree. See their Venona book.

[Vehmgericht]

“FDR wanted to help out our British, French, Dutch, Norwegian & other allies.” You left out the most important one: the Soviet Union. He was able to give them half of Europe and decisive power in the Far East.

[BroJoeK]

I'm no expert on Hart, only know what I read:

"Hart was appointed commander in chief, U.S. Asiatic Fleet on July 25, 1939 and was promoted to admiral the same day.
He held that position at the commencement of hostilities in World War II between Japan and the United States in December 1941.[11]
The majority of forces under Hart's command were located in the Philippines, with a small force of destroyers and a light cruiser based in Borneo.[12][13]
His command included the majority of the combat-ready US submarines in the Pacific.[14]
Hart initially commanded U.S. naval forces from Manila, but was forced to relocate to Java on January 15, 1942, in light of rapid Japanese advances through the Philippine archipelago.[15]
On his relocation to Java, Hart was named Commander, Naval Forces, ABDA Command, a joint British, Dutch, American and Australian military command, formed for purposes of holding the southern portions of the Dutch East Indies against further Japanese advances.[16]
While in command of ABDA naval forces, ships under his command fought the Battle of Balikpapan, a tactical victory, but strategic defeat for the allied forces."

Seems that Hart was based in the Philippines and may have played a role in their defense.

[Captain Peter Blood]

Bottom line was Hart did not lose his command, he was deemed expendable and Washington thought he would be hit and destroyed, he wasn’t, he was ready.

[BroJoeK]

eagleone: " Whoa....you said in 1940 unemployment was 5%. It clearly wasn't. "

Are you referring to my post #81?
If so then my exact words were:

"...by the end of 1941, as the graphs clearly show, US unemployment was down around 5% and US employment was the highest ever, to date. "

You quoted those words back to me in post #82.

eagleone: "The declines in unemployment are in part reflective of the increase spending on defense/defense related items.
So to keep the economy going he needed the War or some degree of involvement in the War. "

Sounds to me like we agree on pretty much everything except your last sentence:

" I argue his reasons for wanting the war was to primarily get the US out of the economic mess he'd continued with his failed policies. "

Here's the basic problem with that idea: in September 1939, after Hitler invaded Poland, around 90% of Americans opposed declaring war on Nazi Germany.
But in December 1941, after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, around 90% of Americans favored declaring war.
Was it economics that changed their minds?
No, it was the obvious thing -- the attack on Pearl Harbor.
Without that attack, Americans were determined not to get sucked (or suckered) into another world war.
After the attack, FDR was able to ask for and receive full public support for war.
The admittedly abject failure of New Deal economics had nothing to do with it.

[BroJoeK]

" Pavlov reported that he provided White with a note containing a recommendation that the U.S. take a firm stand in their negotiations with Japan. "

Even assuming that's true, it is still far from amounting to Soviets pulling FDR's strings regarding Japan.
Consider: if Churchill had made a similar recommendation, would it mean that Roosevelt was dancing to Winston's jig?

Anyone can recommend anything.

[ealgeone]

If so then my exact words were: "...by the end of 1941, as the graphs clearly show, US unemployment was down around 5% and US employment was the highest ever, to date. "

There's a huge difference between 10% and 5% unemployment.

If you're off this much in your statement on unemployment, why should I take your word on anything else.

This is an easily verifiable fact.

You also said the US economy was doing just fine at 14% unemployment.

I'm really beginning to question your grasp of what is a strong economy and history.

[ealgeone]

But in December 1941, after Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, around 90% of Americans favored declaring war. Was it economics that changed their minds? No, it was the obvious thing -- the attack on Pearl Harbor. Without that attack, Americans were determined not to get sucked (or suckered) into another world war. After the attack, FDR was able to ask for and receive full public support for war. The admittedly abject failure of New Deal economics had nothing to do with it.

Two different issues.

I'm arguing FDR new the New Deal had failed, as admitted by his on Treasury Secretary, and knew a war would economically benefit the US.

That has nothing to do with whether the public was in favor of the war or not.

I'm discussing FDR's mindset.

[BroJoeK]

"You left out the most important one: the Soviet Union.
He [FDR] was able to give them half of Europe and decisive power in the Far East."

There's no doubt that after June 1941, Roosevelt's administration favored the Soviets over the Nazis.
And doubtless most of that was strictly, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend."
But some was naivety, perhaps deliberate naivety, and some was FDR's hubris in thinking he could deal effectively with Stalin.

Realists at the time and ever since have understood that the Allies' choice was to win back Western Europe for freedom ("half a loaf"), at the sacrifice of Eastern Europe to Stalin, OR, turn over ALL of Europe to the Nazis.
FDR, Churchill & the others chose "half a loaf".