Pearl Harbor decisively refutes Paul’s stupid theory.
As if the disgrace of America leaving the UK to fight the Reich alone isn’t enough refutation of Paul’s America First! non-interventionism.
On what basis do you make that conclusion? Pearl Harbor doesn't "refute' Paul's theory, though it does confirm the fact that FDR probably deserved impeachment for his possiby criminal failure have us reasonably well prepared for such an attack.
Like the other howling baboons on this thread, you simply rely on what other people have told you to think.
Basic history lesson: FDR pushed the Japanese hard with embargoes and trade sanctions. There is substantial evidence to suggest that he did it to force them to do something overt, thereby giving us a reason to get involved with World War II. The evidence also shows that he vastly underestimated their reaction, thereby resulting in many deaths and loss of military armament. However, his goal was achieved.
I marvel at the empty minds who think everything that happens on the geopolitical stage occurs in a vacuum. I’d be willing to bet you’re one of those people who is proud that we took Saddam out, but who is utterly oblivious to the fact that we put him there in the first place.
Oh, and by the way, I’m not sure what you think “Paul’s stupid theory” is, but I’d be willing to bet that what you think he said is, in fact, not at all what he said. You likely either read what others have said about it, or you clutched at your emotional reaction to parts of what he said and failed to engage your brain to completely understand.
But according to President Hoover, we weren’t using non-interventionism as he said the day after Pearl Harbor: “You and I know that this continuous putting pins in rattlesnakes finally got this country bitten.” See others posts here too.
Further, Dr. Paul is not a pacifist- he indicates here that war against Japan was justifiable:
http://www.house.gov/paul/congrec/congrec98/cr022598ffi.htm
Going to war should be the most reluctant decision that we make. We should go to war only when there is no other reasonable alternative. I saw George Stephanopoulos on television a few days ago and he said that even in World War II, we had some people who were opposed to World War II. But I can tell you the day after Pearl Harbor, the Senate voted 82-0 and the House voted 388-1 to go to war against Japan. But Japan had attacked us at that time. It was a totally different situation from the one we face in Iraq. — 1998
Good day.