Morally Acceptable?

[IPorange]

The rest of the Axis powers declared war on us in the days following Pearl Harbor, when we had only declared war on Japan. They also began to immediately attack US ships where ever they encountered them. Type 9 U-boats had been specifically designed already to be capable of operating off the US seaboard.

 

[JayVols]

The rest of the Axis powers declared war on us in the days following Pearl Harbor, when we had only declared war on Japan. They also began to immediately attack US ships where ever they encountered them. Type 9 U-boats had been specifically designed already to be capable of operating off the US seaboard.

Yep. Visit Cape Hatteras where British cemeteries dot the coast because British sailors were killed when their ships were torpedoed by German u-boats and washed on shore.

 

[tvolsfan]

It's very simple to see the horrific consequences of the US not getting involved in WW2. Watching the formation of a genocidal superpower isn't an option.

Yup. I know nobody wants the US to be world police, but there's only so much you can tolerate.

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

Who killed them, then?

Again, assuming the 50,000 figure you presented is even accurate, I would assume many died of disease unrelated to the war. Civilian deaths are unavoidable in any war.

 

[n_huffhines]

Again, assuming the 50,000 figure you presented is even accurate, I would assume many died of disease unrelated to the war. Civilian deaths are unavoidable in any war.

The estimate is of war-related deaths, only. The blockades of southern ports preventing food and medicine from passing must have contributed to civilian casualties. I wonder how those are calculated and if they are included in the estimate.

 

[therealUT]

I wonder if that 50,000 figure includes those who died of disease. In the mid-19th century many people died of disease even during peacetime.

More people died from influenza in 1919 than in the entire First World War.

 

[n_huffhines]

We did only declare war on Japan. Germany declared war on us the next day.

German declaration of war:

The Government of the United States having violated in the most flagrant manner and in ever-increasing measure all rules of neutrality in favor of the adversaries of Germany and having continually been guilty of the most severe provocations toward Germany ever since the outbreak of the European war, provoked by the British declaration of war against Germany on September 3, 1939, has finally resorted to open military acts of aggression.

On September 11, 1941, the President of the United States publicly declared that he had ordered the American Navy and Air Force to shoot on sight at any German war vessel. In his speech of October 27, 1941, he once more expressly affirmed that this order was in force. Acting under this order, vessels of the American Navy, since early September 1941, have systematically attacked German naval forces. Thus, American destroyers, as for instance the Greer, the Kearny and the Reuben James, have opened fire on German submarines according to plan. The Secretary of the American Navy, Mr. Knox, himself confirmed that American destroyers attacked German submarines.

Furthermore, the naval forces of the United States, under order of their Government and contrary to international law have treated and seized German merchant vessels on the high seas as enemy ships.

The German Government therefore establishes the following facts:

Although Germany on her part has strictly adhered to the rules of international law in her relations with the United States during every period of the present war, the Government of the United States from initial violations of neutrality has finally proceeded to open acts of war against Germany. The Government of the United States has thereby virtually created a state of war.

The German Government, consequently, discontinues diplomatic relations with the United States of America and declares that under these circumstances brought about by President Roosevelt, Germany too, as from today, considers herself as being in a state of war with the United States of America.

Accept, Mr. Chargé d'Affaires, the expression of my high consideration.

December 11, 1941

The Germans had fired (but didn't sink) on the Greer, which was a mail-ship that looked exactly like the 50 ships we traded to Britain specifically for U-boat hunting. FDR responded by declaring a shoot-on-sight order. War with Germany could have been avoided.

 

[n_huffhines]

More people died from influenza in 1919 than in the entire First World War.

I read somewhere that the state was the #1 killer in the 20th century.

 

[tvolsfan]

Continuing the World War II discussion, how do people think the Russia-Germany fight would have turned out had the US just stayed out of the war?

edit: I guess for the purpose of this hypothetical scenario, assume the USA isn't giving anybody aid in terms of weapons, money, etc. Assume the US is completely neutral in this situation.

 

[milohimself]

Russia would have repelled Germany but gridlocked somewhere in Poland instead of taking e Germany. That land army absolutely dwarfed any ground force that has ever existed.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

I think Russia would have eventually subdued Germany. Hitler's decision to declare war on the U.S. pretty much sealed his fate. His first mistake was in taking on Russia before he was able to finish off Britain.

 

[CSVol]

I think Russia would have eventually subdued Germany. Hitler's decision to declare war on the U.S. pretty much sealed his fate. His first mistake was in taking on Russia before he was able to finish off Britain.

One of the "Classic Blunders". Only slighly ahead of "Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line".

 

[therealUT]

One of the "Classic Blunders". Only slighly ahead of "Never go against a Sicilian when death is on the line".

Barbarosa is only a blunder due to the failure to underestimate Soviet resolve; Hitler never desired to share anything nor have peace with Stalin. If the Germans had waited until the British were defeated, then any element of surprise would have been lost against the Soviets.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[justingroves]

Continuing the World War II discussion, how do people think the Russia-Germany fight would have turned out had the US just stayed out of the war?

edit: I guess for the purpose of this hypothetical scenario, assume the USA isn't giving anybody aid in terms of weapons, money, etc. Assume the US is completely neutral in this situation.

Russia would have wound up in a deadlock with them.

 

[tvolsfan]

Barbarosa is only a blunder due to the failure to underestimate Soviet resolve; Hitler never desired to share anything nor have peace with Stalin. If the Germans had waited until the British were defeated, then any element of surprise would have been lost against the Soviets.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

If he was willing to treat the Russian people with any sort of respect when they were invading, Germany may have had a better chance.

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

Germany didn't have the resources to fight a two-front war against two superpowers.

 

[CSVol]

Barbarosa is only a blunder due to the failure to underestimate Soviet resolve; Hitler never desired to share anything nor have peace with Stalin. If the Germans had waited until the British were defeated, then any element of surprise would have been lost against the Soviets.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

It's a joke dude. Line from Princess Bride = Never get involved in a land war in Asia. Ever seen it succeed? You know enough history to know that the Russian strategy for centuries was to give the one thing they had plenty to give - land. If Stalin didn't have thousands of square miles through which he could relocate every bolt of Soviet industry, no amount of resolve would have been enough.

 

[JayVols]

German declaration of war:



The Germans had fired (but didn't sink) on the Greer, which was a mail-ship that looked exactly like the 50 ships we traded to Britain specifically for U-boat hunting. FDR responded by declaring a shoot-on-sight order. War with Germany could have been avoided.

You realize what the Axis Powers Alliance is correct? In a military alliance, countries agree to defend one another if another country attacks. We attack or declare war on Japan, the Axis Alliance kicks in, and we are at war with Japan , Germany, and Italy because Germany and Italy declared war on us.. No way we were going to remain out of WWII for the duration. History doesn't change, my friend. It only gets distorted and perverted by those with an agenda to advance.

Not being smart, just curious, are you a Mennonite?

WWII is, was, and shall remain a just and noble cause, PERIOD. No true lover of freedom wants war, but when an evil despot threatens the free world (and Hitler came within a frog's hair of his goal of a world dominated by fascism) it is immoral for a nation like the US to sit on the sidelines. It flies in the face of our values. This war was forced upon us; we didn't aggressively seek it out. 6 million Jews-dead- just for being Jews, not to mention the attempted eradication of the Gypsies and other ethnic peoples. I wish we could all sit by the camp fire, hold hands, and sing kumbaya while we roast s'mores, but the world is a very dangerous place. You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything, as the song goes. Some things are worth dying for in this world, freedom being one of the foremost ideals that is worth the cost. If one refuses to stand up for and defend their freedom or the freedom of our closest friends, one doesn't deserve the precious gift of freedom. But, that's just me.

 

[therealUT]

It's a joke dude. Line from Princess Bride = Never get involved in a land war in Asia. Ever seen it succeed? You know enough history to know that the Russian strategy for centuries was to give the one thing they had plenty to give - land. If Stalin didn't have thousands of square miles through which he could relocate every bolt of Soviet industry, no amount of resolve would have been enough.

This is correct; however, at the time, the history of the Bolsheviks demonstrated by their precipitous withdrawal in WWI they did not wish to engage in external warfare. I really think that it surprised not only Hitler but the majority of the German military elite when the Soviets committed to fighting, as opposed to just rolling over and surrendering.

 

[n_huffhines]

Not being smart, just curious, are you a Mennonite?

WWII is, was, and shall remain a just and noble cause, PERIOD. No true lover of freedom wants war, but when an evil despot threatens the free world (and Hitler came within a frog's hair of his goal of a world dominated by fascism) it is immoral for a nation like the US to sit on the sidelines. It flies in the face of our values. This war was forced upon us; we didn't aggressively seek it out. 6 million Jews-dead- just for being Jews, not to mention the attempted eradication of the Gypsies and other ethnic peoples. I wish we could all sit by the camp fire, hold hands, and sing kumbaya while we roast s'mores, but the world is a very dangerous place. You've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything, as the song goes. Some things are worth dying for in this world, freedom being one of the foremost ideals that is worth the cost. If one refuses to stand up for and defend their freedom or the freedom of our closest friends, one doesn't deserve the precious gift of freedom. But, that's just me.

Why?

I disagree. We didn't do it to save Jews. I don't know what's noble about it. "Just" is probably true (except for the bombing of civilians), but it was a completely unnecessary war and that's my issue.

 

[JayVols]

Why?

I disagree. We didn't do it to save Jews. I don't know what's noble about it. "Just" is probably true (except for the bombing of civilians), but it was a completely unnecessary war and that's my issue.

Mennonites are against any war for any reason.

We will agree to disagree on the 'justness' of WWII.

 

[tvolsfan]

Why?

I disagree. We didn't do it to save Jews. I don't know what's noble about it. "Just" is probably true (except for the bombing of civilians), but it was a completely unnecessary war and that's my issue.

What was unjustified about it? I really don't understand what you're saying. They were at war with multiple allies of our and had declared war on us.

 

[therealUT]

Why?

I disagree. We didn't do it to save Jews. I don't know what's noble about it. "Just" is probably true (except for the bombing of civilians), but it was a completely unnecessary war and that's my issue.

You are correct that we did not go to war to save the Jews; however, to state that it is "completely unnecessary" for the US to respond when the most supreme military regime of the 20th Century declares war on the US is pretty presents one with the following two hypothetical options:

1. Sit back and hope that this is a bluff.
2. Succumb to that regime and become German subjects.

Or, maybe you are trying to argue that we should not have declared war on Japan after they attacked Pearl Harbor...?

The only valid argument I can see in which the tacit admission that our involvement in WWII was "completely unnecessary" would be an argument that is rooted in the Treaty of Versailles at the end of The Great War. Had we had more force and more influence, the sanctions made upon and the reparations demanded of Germany would have been less severe; Woodrow Wilson fervently desired that the world just cut their losses and try to move forward. That said, France and Britain had invested much more, in terms of men and resources, in The Great War; therefore, they had much greater negotiating power and much higher standing when they basically told the US to **** off and mind their own business during the Treaty process.

 

[n_huffhines]

What was unjustified about it? I really don't understand what you're saying. They were at war with multiple allies of our and had declared war on us.

What are you talking about? I said it was just other than the killing of civilians.

 

[n_huffhines]

You are correct that we did not go to war to save the Jews; however, to state that it is "completely unnecessary" for the US to respond when the most supreme military regime of the 20th Century declares war on the US is pretty presents one with the following two hypothetical options:

1. Sit back and hope that this is a bluff.
2. Succumb to that regime and become German subjects.

Or, maybe you are trying to argue that we should not have declared war on Japan after they attacked Pearl Harbor...?

The only valid argument I can see in which the tacit admission that our involvement in WWII was "completely unnecessary" would be an argument that is rooted in the Treaty of Versailles at the end of The Great War. Had we had more force and more influence, the sanctions made upon and the reparations demanded of Germany would have been less severe; Woodrow Wilson fervently desired that the world just cut their losses and try to move forward. That said, France and Britain had invested much more, in terms of men and resources, in The Great War; therefore, they had much greater negotiating power and much higher standing when they basically told the US to **** off and mind their own business during the Treaty process.

Except for that's not what I said. I didn't say specifically our involvement was unnecessary, I said the war itself was completely unnecessary. The whole thing could have been avoided had it not been for retaliatory foreign policy after WWI. IMO, Hitler does not come to power without the Allies' sanctions of Germany. So we are basically in agreement per your final paragraph. France and USA telling us to **** off when they were putting our future nuts on the line is exactly why entangling alliances are stupid.