To Make War, Presidents Lie

LewRockwell.com ^ | 1 October 2002 | Robert Higgs

[talk2farley]

I understand. However, when faced with a machine such as that of the combined German/Japanese empires, one must face the facts: War becomes inevitable.

You might not like it, but that doesnt change it. One must realize "...the tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and of tyrants." (Thomas Jefferson)

Likewise with Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Afghanistan. You cannot hide from these people. 9/11 proved this. Unfortunately, however, many knew this long beforehand. And did nothing.

[talk2farley]

It was pacifict liberal politics holding the hand of the army in check. We could have decimated the Taliban regim as easily in 2000 as in 2002, and prevented Sept. 11th. However, pacifist politics demanded a more "moderate" response, in the form of a futile cruise missile attack.

[JohnGalt]

The Americans had violated the terms of neutrality by trading with one combattant but not the other; what choice did the Germans have?

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I don't really disagree with you, but my only point is that the great Franklin Roosevelt cannot in any way be compared to Ronald Reagan. In his first term RR

whipped inflation
got the country going again, and
ended the energy crisis.

In his second term Ronald Reagan

transcended communism.

The "great" FDR who won WWII is really the weak president who spent his first two terms letting the economy stagnate and letting WWII develop in Europe. And whose actual motive for getting us into WWII lead directly to the human tragedy (lest we forget, still ongoing vs China) known as the Cold War. And to policies not even approximately designed to minimize our WWII casualties.

Without the 22nd Amendment, after all, Clinton would probably have been renominated and reelected--and whatever hash he made (continued to make) of a response to terrorism would eventually have become in history some kind of "great legacy."

[wasp69]

Good morning. I apologize for my absence. I think we have established that Wilson was less than truthful, Churchill allowed civilians to be murdered to get the US into the war fully. Now the issue, at least to me, is the blockade and unrestricted sub warfare and why.

October 7, 1916, the German U-Boat U53 just popped up out of nowhere in Newport Harbor and dropped anchor off of Goat Island. The skipper of the U53, Hans Rose, paid an official visit to Rear Admiral Austin M. Knight who was the commander of the Newport Naval District. While the submarine was anchored "the crew came ashore and were treated to beer by the American Sailors, while crowds of curious were admitted aboard the submersible and shown about with the most open courtesy." Captain Rose said he had come to deliver a letter to the German Ambassador, Count von Bernstorff. The Germans stayed until sunset and left.

The Navy Department figured it was over and the U53 was on her way back when a message came in from Captain Smith of the liner Kansan. He wanted to know why he had been stopped and boarded by a German sub in the vicinity of the Nantucket light-ship at 5:30 that morning. He added that after he convinced the German Captain of the nationality of the ship he was allowed to go. This changed between the hours of noon and midnight when ships were being sunk off of the Nantucket coast. One of these being a steam liner from Halifax named Stephano. She had Americans on board when she was sent to the bottom.

One German diplomat at the embassy in Washington said "It should be easy to destroy more of the overseas commerce of the Allies, which is principally with America, near where it originates."

Not only were the Germans sinking Merchant Men and passenger liners, they also sank several schooners in June of 1918.

Source: Our Navy In The War, Lawrence Perry, 1918


Hope this at least helps but if not, a decent look into history.

[JohnGalt]

I am not defending the actions taken by the German Navy in a moral sense, but a strategic sense. Kaiser Bill and Ludendorf believed they were morally, and legally, justified to attack American shipping because the United States was viewed as violating the terms of their neutrality.

Your naval anecdote reminds me of the soccer game the Germans and the British played in no-mans land, Ypres, Belgium, Dec 24, 1914 (The Germans preportedly won 2-1.) It certainly was an age of warrior-poets.

[rintense]

Don't forget Emperor... hell, why not just say Caesar!

[talk2farley]

Oh come on, thats absurd. The "terms of neutrality" certainly do NOT dictate who we may and may not trade with. The terms of sovreignty certainly DO dictate just that. The choice is ours, not ze Germans.

By your logic, the solution to the Chinese trade deficit is justifiable war. Think you'd have Ayn Rand on your side regarding that argument?

WAR IS ONLY AN OPTION WHEN IN RESPONSE TO AN ACT OF FORCE.

[talk2farley]

Im not calling FDR great, by any means. Im just saying its not fair to lay the blame for WW2 on his lap. To do so concedes WW2 was anything but absolutely morally justifiable, and that it was not inevitable. No foreign policy could have prevented it. The LON of tried that avenue, and was utterly destroyed for it.

[Godfollow]

You mean like... "I did not have sex with that woman!"
Or... "I smoked it but I didn't inhale".
Or... How about the jovial face of Bill Clinton as he was walking away from the Ron Brown memorial, which turned immediately to a mournful face when he discovered a camera was following him... Sick!

[JohnGalt]

Spoken like a liberal.

The "terms of neutrality" certainly do NOT dictate who we may and may not trade with. The terms of sovreignty certainly DO dictate just that. The choice is ours, not ze Germans.

I suggest remaining silent and thought a fool rather than posting and removing all doubt...Contraband(munitions for making war), were being sent to the British which violated international laws of neutrality, and by the 1856 Declaration of Paris, made vessels shipping contraband subject to search and seizure and capture. Shipping munitions on passenger vessels put the Germans in a tough spot.

The blockcade of Germany was 'illegal' under The Declaration of London, because it blocked food stuffs from neutrals, however, all the signatories of the DoL had not signed so it was not law per say.

[JohnGalt]

What about a foreign policy that would have answered the calls, rather than being insulted by the Allies, from the German General Staff asking if the Allies would be supported in a coup against Hitler as early as 1936?

The only moral to World War Two was that hundreds of Stalinst sympathizers in FDR's administration angled the country into a war to make the world safe for Communism and Frankie the Crips Welfare/Warfare state.

[Man of the Right]

The author and other leftists have no coping mechanism for the current situation.

Having never encountered anyone who wants to commit genocide for the fun of it, they can't conceive that such people exist.

Following 9-11, their response was to try to find out what Al-Qaeda wants. What Islamists and their state sponsors want is for everyone not in their clique to die a violent death as quickly and painfully as possible, starting with all Americans. That's the totality of their political program and war aims.

The early nuclear powers were circumspect about sharing nuclear weapons. Starting with Pakistan, the attitude regarding proliferation is "mi casa, su casa."

If we were hit, the state or group responsible wouldn't announce themselves. Bush would announce the culprit, and the putz who wrote the article would call him a lier.

The same people who are blaming Bush now would accuse him of the detonation.

Regardless of the level of violence directed against us, the left's response would be to identify with the killers, and scapegoat anyone who proposed to resist the killers.

[JohnGalt]

Only the author is not a leftist but a radical individualist, and thus most 'Conservatives' are left defensless, having been taught only in the skill of debating lice-ridden anti-American leftists. While 'Conservatives' start marching to the beat of the war drum Wolfowitz, Kristol et al have been banging since 1992 on the way to Baghdad, patriots are wondering why the first step wasn't to seal the borders and rescind the FAA regulation that prevents citizens from carrying firearms onto airplanes.

The welfare/warfare state rolls on...

[talk2farley]

The blockade of Germany was British, not American. It has nothing to do with your original argument (that our trade policies legitimized German unrestricted warfare on American vessels). Contraband is not defined as "munitions for making war," as you suggest. Rather, contraband is defined as "Goods or merchandise the importation or exportation of which is forbidden."

The United States had no prohibitions regarding the shipment of munitions to the allies, only regarding the shipment of munitions to the Germans. Therefore, the shipments in question were not contraband.

Moreover, there is no proof whatsoever that the Lucitania (the passenger ship to which I beleive you are indirectly reffering) was carrying munitions. This according to a History Channel special on the subject. So dont tout as fact what stands as rumor.

And dont be such an arrogant prick. Contrary to your "burst of insight," I am a staunch conservative, not a liberal. And whether or not someone who considers sinking a passenger ship on the grounds that it MAY be carrying munitions legitimate, but the sale of arms to one nation and not another illegitimate, considers me a fool is pretty god dman irrelevant in my mind.

Said person has missed out on a healthy dose of reality.

[talk2farley]

Frankie the Crip, eh? You invalidate whatever political point you may be trying to make when you resort to personal attacks on a person whose character is one of the most respected in American history. My personal opinion on the matter aside.

[talk2farley]

Superb proposition. Seal the boarders. Your proposition is moronic..... $10 says your an immigrant. This country was built on the backbone of immigrant labor. Open borders has been our policy for centuries. Voluntary citizens have, statistically, proven themselves more productive and law-abiding than their natural-born counterparts.

And as for allowing any idiot to carry a gun on a plane.... Im all for personal gun rights, but dont be ridiculous. Do you have any idea what happens if you fire off a weapon on board a pressurized aircraft?

You pierce the cabin. Ever shotgun a beer?

[talk2farley]

I heard it described somewhere as the "Battered Wife" syndrome. Liberals and other appeaser, like battered wives, get attacked and immediately blame themselves for the attack. "What did I do to deserve this attack, and how can I prevent it from happening again?" And though the policy results in little more than more beatings of increasing severity, the policy continues until someone else does something, or the wide ends up dead.

Lets look at the eight years of liberal control of government under Clinton. Numerous terrorist attacks, in ever increasing severity and audacity, culminating with 9/11. The Clinton response? Classic appeasement policies. And now someone finally is doing something about it, but liberals whine away regardless.

The metaphore is almost perfect.

[Man of the Right]

Years ago, I managed a political campaign. There was a female white lawyer who mated with an illiterate black career criminal. What followed was a soap opera. He beat her like a drum repeatedly. Multiple contusions, fractures, the works. She was the dental surgery society's best customer. Her friends would try to convince her to terminate the relationship. The more they tried, the closer her bond with him. He had less value than a cockroach, but in her eyes he was Albert Schweitzer. Finally, the relationship ended. Perhaps he had run out of bones to break. Shortly thereafter, I learned she had taken up with another illiterate black career criminal, if anything meaner than the first. Not long after, he murdered her.

Among the loony left, there's an intense lack of self-worth or connection with the community. In adversity they are a natural fifth column.

I'm fascinated by France under the occupation. It's remarkable how many loony leftists collaborated with the Nazis. When we liberated France, they rejoined the communist party without missing a beat.

[JohnGalt]

"Any idiot to carry a gun on an airplane"-- were you blushing when you wrote that? Same tactic used by Sarah Brady et al.

Also suggest you read maritime law between 1850-1913 to find a legal definition for "contraband" and the rules of "neutrality" and "blockade."