Best US President

[Nonfiction]

Despite all of the [censored] that Lincoln illegally did and his basically [censored] all over the Constitution, letting the South peacefully secede would have had vast effects for the future. Not having the Civil War would arguably result in millions of not tens of millions of more future American deaths which which otherwise would not have happened. And thats not even considering the whole slavery issue (which is obv not why the war was fought, but the war still brought about the end of actual American slavery). So yeah, basically Lincoln still sucks, but isn't anywhere near as bad as FDR. Lincoln was put in an awful situation by circumstance (no prez before or since had ever had to deal with what he did, and letting 1/2 the country secede or burning the constitution were both awful choices), FDR created them (great depression and US entry into ww2).

Oh, and best prez is obv Washington. Dude could have been the monarch of an American kingdom if he wanted, but voluntarily gave up power. And his advice about foreign entanglements remains the best advice ever given by a President, despite the fact it was obv never followed. Jefferson kicked ass too.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
US entry into ww2

[/ QUOTE ]

... This would be one of those few things I really don't have a problem with. Can't imagine how anyone would.

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
US entry into ww2

[/ QUOTE ]

... This would be one of those few things I really don't have a problem with. Can't imagine how anyone would.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're being a bit results oriented. I certainly think it's up for debate whether or not it was a prudent decision to enter WW2 at the time. Looking back from 65 years in the future it's too easy to question or agree with decisions made back then.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
US entry into ww2

[/ QUOTE ]

... This would be one of those few things I really don't have a problem with. Can't imagine how anyone would.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're being a bit results oriented. I certainly think it's up for debate whether or not it was a prudent decision to enter WW2 at the time. Looking back from 65 years in the future it's too easy to question or agree with decisions made back then.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea how this could possibly be up for debate.

[xorbie]

Cool info on Coolidge though, I'll try to read up on him.

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
US entry into ww2

[/ QUOTE ]

... This would be one of those few things I really don't have a problem with. Can't imagine how anyone would.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're being a bit results oriented. I certainly think it's up for debate whether or not it was a prudent decision to enter WW2 at the time. Looking back from 65 years in the future it's too easy to question or agree with decisions made back then.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea how this could possibly be up for debate.

[/ QUOTE ]
Our country was supposed to be a neutral nation. The people did not want anything to do with this war. It is well documented that we were not neutral towards Japan. We cut them off from our oil and other resources. It is debatable whether or not this was right or wrong, because it directly led to the Japanese trying to attack.

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
US entry into ww2

[/ QUOTE ]

... This would be one of those few things I really don't have a problem with. Can't imagine how anyone would.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're being a bit results oriented. I certainly think it's up for debate whether or not it was a prudent decision to enter WW2 at the time. Looking back from 65 years in the future it's too easy to question or agree with decisions made back then.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea how this could possibly be up for debate.

[/ QUOTE ]
Our country was supposed to be a neutral nation. The people did not want anything to do with this war. It is well documented that we were not neutral towards Japan. We cut them off from our oil and other resources. It is debatable whether or not this was right or wrong, because it directly led to the Japanese trying to attack.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what? [censored] the Japanese, I'd rahter have just gone straight at them and Hitler.

[Case Closed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
US entry into ww2

[/ QUOTE ]

... This would be one of those few things I really don't have a problem with. Can't imagine how anyone would.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're being a bit results oriented. I certainly think it's up for debate whether or not it was a prudent decision to enter WW2 at the time. Looking back from 65 years in the future it's too easy to question or agree with decisions made back then.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea how this could possibly be up for debate.

[/ QUOTE ]
Our country was supposed to be a neutral nation. The people did not want anything to do with this war. It is well documented that we were not neutral towards Japan. We cut them off from our oil and other resources. It is debatable whether or not this was right or wrong, because it directly led to the Japanese trying to attack.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what? [censored] the Japanese, I'd rahter have just gone straight at them and Hitler.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, he did put the country at risk and lied about the US's declared neutrality. If you don't care about that then that's your prerogative. I am only saying that there is some room for debate.

[Nonfiction]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
US entry into ww2

[/ QUOTE ]

... This would be one of those few things I really don't have a problem with. Can't imagine how anyone would.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you're being a bit results oriented. I certainly think it's up for debate whether or not it was a prudent decision to enter WW2 at the time. Looking back from 65 years in the future it's too easy to question or agree with decisions made back then.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have no idea how this could possibly be up for debate.

[/ QUOTE ]
Debate gogogo.

As Case said its very results oriented. The American public did not war, at all. So FDR basically manipulated the Japanese into attacking in order to get into the war vs Germany, which is my main problem with it. By getting the Japanese to attack first, FDR was able to get the full support of the otherwise opposed public towards the war, to get "revenge" for Pearl Harbor. Of course, there was the fact that the majority of men and material went to fight Germany and not Japan thanks to FDR's "Germany first" strategy. I've always wondered what would have happened if Hitler hadn't declared war on us, since he was not bound by the Tri-Partite agreement to do so. Specifically, I wonder what FDR would have done next to get us into the war vs Germany.

And the results of WW2 weren't all that great. All of Eastern Europe (edit: and China) was lost to Communism. with millions killed by the Soviets when they won. History would have played out the same way, just with a 3-way Cold War instead of a 2-way, and the Soviets would have been stronger than us with the addition of all of Germany as a Warsaw Pact-like(which wouldn't exist with no NATO) satellite. The Soviets just would have been stronger than us in the Cold War since they would have had all of Germany instead of just Eastern Germany in their sphere of influence, so their collapse would have taken longer.

The mistake most people make about ww2 is thinking that the Germans definitely would have won had we not intervened. The war would have taken longer but the Soviets still most likely would have won.

[bnrocks]

[ QUOTE ]
The mistake most people make about ww2 is thinking that the Germans definitely would have won had we not intervened. The war would have taken longer but the Soviets still most likely would have won.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well we were intervening in the war before we actually joined in. I forget the actual term for it, but we basically had a huge supply line to Russia and England. I think that without that supply line, a key battle would have swung the other way (I.E Stalingrad) and then who knows.

Also, the higher ups in America viewed Russia as an enemy before the war. There was no way FDR could let the Soviets sweep over Europe on the way back. Who knows what the reprocustions of that non-action could have been.