Posted on 04/01/2014 8:08:36 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The views in the video aren’t surprising.
They’re the views of Ron and Rand Paul and their intellectual milieu which believes that most wars are set up by banks. According to them, the US need not have gotten involved in WW2.
“There are times when sanctions have made it worse. I mean, there are times .. leading up to World War II we cut off trade with Japan. That probably caused Japan to react angrily. We also had a blockade on Germany after World War I, which may have encouraged them … some of their anger.” Paul says.
Paleocon revisionist historians go on to claim even that Japan exhausted every diplomatic outlet and that it had no choice left but to bomb Pearl Harbor.
Sanctions were never really the issue though. Japan wanted European powers out of Asia. And it considered America a European power.
The attack on Pearl Harbor was a flanking raid in support of the Japanese seizure of the Dutch East Indies. A major reason for Japan’s attack on the US was its assumption that FDR would not have let Japan attack the UK without a response. We no doubt could have abandoned the UK and the Dutch, watched the atrocities from a distance, the torture, mass murder and rape, and gone on selling Japan anything it wanted.
Would that have worked? Doubtfully.
The Japanese army and navy were poorly controlled and its officers were drunk with power and victory. Their understanding of their own limitations was often non-existent. Plans for war with the US had been in place for a while and there were historical grudges there long predating FDR.
A victorious Japan would have been even more difficult to co-exist with than an overcommitted one. Furthermore Hawaii had enough Japanese that the whole Volksdeutsche scenario would have reared its ugly head.
The US could no doubt have ceded Hawaii, but where exactly does all that end?
Japan, like Nazi Germany, was trying to compensate for a bad economic policy with war and conquest. Every victory fed military egos while piling up more problems that could only be dealt with through more war and conquest.
The idea that the US could have just stayed out of Japan’s way is like thinking that you can stay out of a mugger’s way. You can, a few times, but if you intend on being in the neighborhood, he will come for you.
Rand is picking some strange battles...he’s his father’s son, after all..
Rand Paul has too many knots in his kite string just like his father.
Joe Biden said the GERMANS attacked Pearl Harbor?
Who are WE to dispute what the VeeP says??
IIRC, the comment was from a speech from several months (maybe 2 years?) ago. Seems that his comment, out of context, is being twisted and headlined now.
Muy El Flako like his dad & his hair needs an oil change. Would have been an America Firster.
Ted Cruz in 2016. Is there really any doubt, now?
Fundamentally, Rand is correct - FDR cut off 80% of Japan’s oil imports and impacted their supply of natural resources through sanctions.
I think this is mis-information and veiled attempt be establishment Republican supporters to hurt Rand’s front-runner status - nothing more, nothing less. Freepers should start reading between the lines as RINOS have learned a lot from Democrat propaganda.
No Paul's for me thank you!
Using Rand Paul logic, we should not secure our own borders, otherwise Mexico could retaliate with a cross border invasion....oh, wait...
The US *is* responsible for the Pearl Harbor attack, but for a different reason. There were 9 official inquiries between 1941 and 1946 and a tenth in 1995:
“The inquiries reported incompetence, underestimation, and misapprehension of Japanese capabilities and intentions; problems resulting from excessive secrecy about cryptography; division of responsibility between Army and Navy (and lack of consultation between them); and lack of adequate manpower for intelligence (analysis, collection, processing)”
So we can feel comforted that nothing like this could ever happen nowadays...
“There are times when sanctions have made it worse. I mean, there are times .. leading up to World War II we cut off trade with Japan. That probably caused Japan to react angrily. We also had a blockade on Germany after World War I, which may have encouraged them … some of their anger.” Paul says.
Of course, most people won’t pick up on the nuances that cause someone who is actually familiar with the world that led to war in the pacific to say what he said.
Yep. Remember that viral video about instant karma and road rage? Well, the US was the woman and Japan was the man.
Was it Rand or the liberal reporter that did the story yesterday?
The chain of financial related links leading down to WWII are usually beyond the scope of threshing out on a discussion forum without a lengthy associated reading list, but suffice it to say if they didn’t facilitate the creation of the large military forces on credit, the options of the involved powers would have had a far more limited scope. Their actions associated with WWI are what set the stage for the subsequent conflict 20 years later.
As for us maneuvering the Japanese into taking the first shot, of that I have no doubt, and given the situation overall it was good strategic thinking. My main problem with it is that the government “left a lot on the table” so to speak with respect to having the citizen soldiers in the forward areas prepared to meet the coming storm.
I really like Rand Paul, but engaging a debate of the cause or our involvement in WWII is TERRIBLE politics. Those were different times, and most people aren’t aware of all of the variables in play back then. There’s just simply nothing to be gained on his part by such a discussion or debate. In this political world comprised of 5 second sound bites and 30 second ads, you should ONLY say things that will HELP you.
RE: Fundamentally, Rand is correct - FDR cut off 80% of Japan’s oil imports and impacted their supply of natural resources through sanctions.
Is Rand Paul suggesting with should not impose sanctions on Russia today because they might bomb the USA like Japan?
so youd rather another dem?
Yep, and those inquiries were designed to crucify the commanders on site at Pearl, while those who denied them access to our best intelligence got medals and promotions.
All the Republicans need is a candidate. Are there any unemployed generals around who managed to keep their pants on? So far Clint Eastwood's empty chair looks like the best bet against Hillary.
A gross distortion of what Rand said... And it is not all that out of line with some historians not of the libertarian stripe
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.