As a professional historian, I agree 100%. America Firsters were NOT anti-defense. They wanted to build up the army and navy, but not get involved in Europe.
Now, I think they were wrong. In retrospect, we see that Russia was able to repel the Nazis-—but it was damn close. I did a study on US air power and bombing, where the Germans spent 30% (!!) of their military resource to stop the bombing. Anyway, I looked at Kursk, the key tank battle in the East, if the Germans had 30% more airplanes-—and they would have won. You can get carried away with “what ifs,” but for sure they wouldn’t have collapsed as they did in the East without the incredible siphon of US bombing, even before D-Day. The America Firsters were also correct that we were not prepared for war (actually, FDR did a very good job with what he had getting us ready).
But Trump is fine using the line. Our people today are so clueless of history that they don’t know what the term meant, what it might have meant, or what people want it to have meant.
Yes, you’re right. Unfortunately, Rush has missed an opportunity to explain who ordinary American Firsters were. But then he supports Cruz so why would he?!
What are the RNC rules about selecting a running mate, before being named the nominee? Anything about that? TIA
Recall during King William's "Operation Desert Fox" nobody batted an eye showing any recognition of what the original "Desert Fox" was.
There were so few rifles available at the outbreak of the war our recruits were drilling with broomsticks. We leased a fleet of WWI destroyers to England to buy them some time as the Arsenal of Democracy geared up for war production, a valuable story in itself- Trump's interest in restoring American manufacturing reminds me of that.
Germany's best divisions were squandered on the Eastern Front about the time that we entered the war. If those troops had been available in June of 1944 we would have been shoved right back into the English Channel. The Russian winter and Hitler's insanity were valuable allies.