Roosevelt's Administration: The Way It Was

[regent]

FDR is still rated America's greatest president by the 238 noted historians that last rated presidents.
The American people voted for FDR four times, count em, four times.
FDR has never been rated as less than one of the three greatest American presidents by historians since 1948.
So your campaign that names historians as communist, or college professors as communist or the American people that voted for FDR four times, count em, four times, as communists doesn't seem to be working, but it's sure fun to watch.

 

[Unkotare]

FDR is still rated America's greatest president by the 238 noted historians that last rated presidents.
The American people voted for FDR four times, count em, four times.

I see you still haven't kicked your addiction to logical fallacy, idiot.

 

[Camp]

FDR had to make a choice. The planet was entering a World War of the scope and dimensions never seen before. Weaponry had advanced to the point that nowhere on earth would be safe from total annihilation if an enemy chose to rain down total annihilation.

America was not the world power it is today. FDR knew without any doubt that the nation faced extermination if the wrong decision about sides and partners were made. America could choose to side with the fascist in Germany, Italy, Hungary and Japan, or he could chose the side of England, France, the nations of western Europe, Australia, and Russia.

FDR made the choice to fight on the side that would defeat the fascist. The fascist have never gotten over it.

You are as dumb as asphalt.

It is eminently simple.....almost as simple as you are....to prove same.


1. "FDR knew without any doubt that the nation faced extermination if the wrong decision about sides...."

FDR was as clueless as you are.
a. Due to cuts in military spending through the 30’s as a percentage of the federal budget, the United States was woefully unprepared for war. The US was 17th in the world in military strength, and this ultimately let us into a two-ocean war.
"FDR Goes To War," by Folsom and Folsom

b. FDR did very little for the Army either with its size or weapons and during the 1930s, his defense budgets were cut to the bone. To quote George Marshall's words to FDR in May 1940: "If you don't do something...and do it right away, I don't know what is going to happen to this country". FDR had underestimated the Japanese and the Pearl Harbor attack devastated the American Navy and exposed the president's incompetence.
Ibid.

You truely have little knowdge about military affairs.

FDR did not have support of the public or funds to build up the American military. Nor would it have been wise to build up a military with obsolete weapons and weapon systems that were in use when he became comander in chief. What FDR did was begin a doctrine that is held strong to this day. Develope the best weapons and weapon systems and stay the best. He took what was available and quietly put the military and private industry to work at developement of advanced weapons and weapon systems.

His first order of business was to turn part an accepted work stimulus package into a procurment endeavor. 240 million dollars were allocated to building some ships for the Navy from the Industrial Recovery Act in 1933. The ships were the USS YORKTOWN and the USS ENTERPRISE.
With the building of those ships came the developement of the modern launch system, advanced radio technology, radar, night landing and night navigation and advanced weapons systems including modern fire control systems for carrier escorts and PBY's for anti-submarine activities and tactics.

FDR began the developement of the B-17 four engined heavy bomber in August of 1934. The B-17 became operational a year later.

The developement of the Dauntless Dive Bomber was begun in Nov. 1934.

The developement of the P-38 LIGHTNING began in 1937.

The developement of the P-41 MUSTANG began in 1939.

The developement of the P-47 THUNDERBOLT began in 1939.

The developement of the SHERMAN TANK was conducted with the transition of the LEE Tank into the more advanced GRANT TANK and with the developement of the turrent and other andvancements the SHERMAN TANK under FDR. Not as advanced as German tanks, FDR wisely had a tank developed that could be mass produced by auto makers in already built and operated facilities. It's size also solved transportation problems.

So FDR prepared industry to produce weapons and weapon systems that would be ready to produce as soon as the congress was ready to come up with the funds. The above list is only partial, but all the weapons listed are ones that had significant impact on winning the war.

As far as the Navy being devastated, the British and Germans lost their Battleships in combat pretty quickly. Battleships were obsolete. FDR concentrated on developing carriers. With the building of the YORKTOWN and ENTERPRISE the Navy was able to develope technology that would be installed and implemented on the entire US Carriar Fleet. FDR was absolutely correct in concentrating on the developement of the carrier fleet and ignoring pressure to invest in heavy cruisers and more battleships. The carrier fleet sent the Japanese fleet to the bottom of the ocean and broke down the doors leading to Japanese defeat.

 

[PoliticalChic]

FDR had to make a choice. The planet was entering a World War of the scope and dimensions never seen before. Weaponry had advanced to the point that nowhere on earth would be safe from total annihilation if an enemy chose to rain down total annihilation.

America was not the world power it is today. FDR knew without any doubt that the nation faced extermination if the wrong decision about sides and partners were made. America could choose to side with the fascist in Germany, Italy, Hungary and Japan, or he could chose the side of England, France, the nations of western Europe, Australia, and Russia.

FDR made the choice to fight on the side that would defeat the fascist. The fascist have never gotten over it.

I challenge you to show any way- other than in FDR's affections- Stalin was any better than Hitler.

If Hitler would have won in Europe and against Russia America would have to face an enemy, Germany, who would be armed with ballistic missiles, advanced jet fighters, long range bombers and at some point, nukes.
Most folks are glad Hitler was defeated. At the time, folks thought he, FDR, was making the right decision. Most of them still do. Nobody cared about who was better or worse, Hitler or Stalin. The problem was which one was the greatest threat to America. FDR thought Hitler was the greater threat. He was right.

Did you miss this?

"I challenge you to show any way- other than in FDR's affections- Stalin was any better than Hitler."

 

[PoliticalChic]

And some more insight into the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt, defender of the Soviet Union:


6. George Earle was a special emissary of FDR's to Europe...and returned in 1944 with proof that implicated the Soviets in the Katyn Forest massacre...

(In April of 1943, the mass graves of over twenty thousand shot, bayoneted, and asphyxiated Polish officers were uncovered in the Katyn pine forest near Smolensk, Russia.)

Earle testified later at the Katyn Forest hearings that Joe Levy of the NYTimes, warned him that bringing an anti-Soviet report to FDR would be a career ender :
"George, you don't know what you are going to over there. Harry Hopkins has completed domination over the President and the whole atmosphere over there is 'pink.'"
West, "American Betrayal," p.211.



7. On March 22, 1945, FDR wrote to Earle:
"I have noted with concern your plan to publicize your unfavorable opinion of one of our allies. I do not wish you to do so. Not only do I not wish it, I specifically forbid you to do so." He then ordered Earle to Samoa for the duration.



And so, friends,....and I include the Roosevelt-groupees,....I ask again...why was the American President so protective of Stalin, the Soviets, and American communists????

 

[Camp]

I challenge you to show any way- other than in FDR's affections- Stalin was any better than Hitler.

If Hitler would have won in Europe and against Russia America would have to face an enemy, Germany, who would be armed with ballistic missiles, advanced jet fighters, long range bombers and at some point, nukes.
Most folks are glad Hitler was defeated. At the time, folks thought he, FDR, was making the right decision. Most of them still do. Nobody cared about who was better or worse, Hitler or Stalin. The problem was which one was the greatest threat to America. FDR thought Hitler was the greater threat. He was right.

Did you miss this?

"I challenge you to show any way- other than in FDR's affections- Stalin was any better than Hitler."

I thought I answered you. It didn't make a difference who was worse, Stalin or Hitler. They were both horrible. The question was how can we beat Hitler. Hitler was the guy who without our assistance to England and Russia was going to invade and occupy all of Europe, including England and Russia. With those resources controled by the Nazi's America was open for attack, including bombing and missile attacks, naval bombardment and eventually invasion buy an unending supply from troops of the conquered slavik and Soviet nations and territories.

 

[Moonglow]

I am certainly glad there are so many underachievers here to complain about those that have actually done something with their lives, excluding, sitting at a keyboard and hurling insults...


That is right, in the USA you can't have your job taken away if you have committed no crime, and being in the party ranks as of a political party is not against the law..

 

[PoliticalChic]

If Hitler would have won in Europe and against Russia America would have to face an enemy, Germany, who would be armed with ballistic missiles, advanced jet fighters, long range bombers and at some point, nukes.
Most folks are glad Hitler was defeated. At the time, folks thought he, FDR, was making the right decision. Most of them still do. Nobody cared about who was better or worse, Hitler or Stalin. The problem was which one was the greatest threat to America. FDR thought Hitler was the greater threat. He was right.

Did you miss this?

"I challenge you to show any way- other than in FDR's affections- Stalin was any better than Hitler."

I thought I answered you. It didn't make a difference who was worse, Stalin or Hitler. They were both horrible. The question was how can we beat Hitler. Hitler was the guy who without our assistance to England and Russia was going to invade and occupy all of Europe, including England and Russia. With those resources controled by the Nazi's America was open for attack, including bombing and missile attacks, naval bombardment and eventually invasion buy an unending supply from troops of the conquered slavik and Soviet nations and territories.

Although, having read some of your posts, I'm not certain that the emotion, your drooling love of Roosevelt, is a large or small factor.....an innate lack of insight and intelligence is probably the provenance....your analysis,i.e., " It didn't make a difference who was worse, Stalin or Hitler," is right up there with some of the other stupid pronouncements in your posts.

Allying the United States with the psychotic regime, responsible for multiple millions of murders of its own citizens certainly makes a difference.
FDR knew it....and that is why he constantly lied to the American public about Stalin and his regime.


Hanson Baldwin, military critic of the New York Times, declares in his book, "Great Mistakes of the War:"
'There is no doubt whatsoever that it would have been to the interest of Britain, the United States, and the world to have allowed and indeed to have encouraged-the world's two great dictatorships to fight each other to a frazzle.'

Baldwin writes that the United States put itself "in the role-at times a disgraceful role-of fearful suppliant and propitiating ally, anxious at nearly any cost to keep Russia fighting. In retrospect, how stupid!"



You should take those last two words to heart.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I am certainly glad there are so many underachievers here to complain about those that have actually done something with their lives, excluding, sitting at a keyboard and hurling insults...


That is right, in the USA you can't have your job taken away if you have committed no crime, and being in the party ranks as of a political party is not against the law..

So...you just can't stand any having a differing opinion....especially since that other opinion is undeniably correct.


Help me with the correct term: is your view fascistic or communistic?

Or just plain Liberal?

 

[Camp]

FDR had to make a choice. The planet was entering a World War of the scope and dimensions never seen before. Weaponry had advanced to the point that nowhere on earth would be safe from total annihilation if an enemy chose to rain down total annihilation.

America was not the world power it is today. FDR knew without any doubt that the nation faced extermination if the wrong decision about sides and partners were made. America could choose to side with the fascist in Germany, Italy, Hungary and Japan, or he could chose the side of England, France, the nations of western Europe, Australia, and Russia.

FDR made the choice to fight on the side that would defeat the fascist. The fascist have never gotten over it.

You are as dumb as asphalt.

It is eminently simple.....almost as simple as you are....to prove same.

2. "The planet was entering a World War of the scope and dimensions never seen before."
When, you imbecile???
In 1933????

FDR came into office March 4th of 1933. One of his first official acts was to recognize the USSR, November 16th, 1933.

I wonder if you think the person who wrote this stuff in an imbecile, simple and dumb as asphalt. I happen to think she is brilliant. She has several Doctorate degrees in History.

"Russian confiscation of American property and it's failure to pay it's wartime debt's remained paramount issue's deterring American recognition. At the same time, in the post World War I era, national interest and the global order left little choice politically, economically or diplomatically but for the United States and the Soviet Union to establish some form of cooperative relationship." LeeAnn Ghajar spring 2006

"The gratest benifit was perhaps that recognition enabled the Untited States to field a diplomatic presence in Moscow that would prove invaluable during World War II..." LeeAnn Ghajar, fall 2005 Historian, Advisory Board Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Historian, Woman's Memorial, PhD American History George Mason University.

 

[PoliticalChic]

FDR had to make a choice. The planet was entering a World War of the scope and dimensions never seen before. Weaponry had advanced to the point that nowhere on earth would be safe from total annihilation if an enemy chose to rain down total annihilation.

America was not the world power it is today. FDR knew without any doubt that the nation faced extermination if the wrong decision about sides and partners were made. America could choose to side with the fascist in Germany, Italy, Hungary and Japan, or he could chose the side of England, France, the nations of western Europe, Australia, and Russia.

FDR made the choice to fight on the side that would defeat the fascist. The fascist have never gotten over it.

You are as dumb as asphalt.

It is eminently simple.....almost as simple as you are....to prove same.

2. "The planet was entering a World War of the scope and dimensions never seen before."
When, you imbecile???
In 1933????

FDR came into office March 4th of 1933. One of his first official acts was to recognize the USSR, November 16th, 1933.

I wonder if you think the person who wrote this stuff in an imbecile, simple and dumb as asphalt. I happen to think she is brilliant. She has several Doctorate degrees in History.

"Russian confiscation of American property and it's failure to pay it's wartime debt's remained paramount issue's deterring American recognition. At the same time, in the post World War I era, national interest and the global order left little choice politically, economically or diplomatically but for the United States and the Soviet Union to establish some form of cooperative relationship." LeeAnn Ghajar spring 2006

"The gratest benifit was perhaps that recognition enabled the Untited States to field a diplomatic presence in Moscow that would prove invaluable during World War II..." LeeAnn Ghajar, fall 2005 Historian, Advisory Board Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Historian, Woman's Memorial, PhD American History George Mason University.

Now....watch me eviscerate both you and your quotee......



Roosevelt signed the recognition agreement: Litvinov "returned to the Soviet embassy.....all smiles....and said 'Well, it's all in the bag; we have it.'"

On September 23, 1939, Dr. D. H. Dombrowsky testified before the Dies committee. The Winona Republican-Herald ? 20 October 1947 ? Page 12 - Newspapers.com

Litvinov:
" "Well, it's all in
the bag. They wanted us to recognize the debts we owed them
and I promised we were going to negotiate. But they did not
know we were going to negotiate until doomsday. The next one
was a corker; they wanted us to promise freedom of religion
in the Soviet Union, and I promised that, too. I was very much
prompted to offer that I would personally collect all the Bibles
and ship them over."
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution," p.33.



Really, who is most dense....you, your quotee, or Franklin Roosevelt???

Did I say 'dense'???

I meant an imbecile, simple and dumb as asphalt.




"I happen to think she is brilliant..."
Pleeeeezzzzeee....don't ever consider branding me with your imprimatur!



When will you learn that I know so very much more than you do?



Now...wanna see a real President, one who understands geopolitics?


Why, ever, sign treaties with the communists? Why?

In 1982, Ronald Reagan asked his arms control advisory committee to conduct a review of Soviet compliance in the 25 years of arms control treaties. It was the first such concerted review ever. The answer to the question of Soviet arms controls compliance was that there was none.
West, "American Betrayal," p. 198.


"The Soviet Union repeatedly violates treaties, and the rest of the world turns their heads and proceeds to enter into still more treaties, which the Soviets violate with impunity." Joseph D. Douglass, Jr., "Why the Soviets Violate Arms Control Treaties," vii, 83.

 

[Camp]

You are as dumb as asphalt.

It is eminently simple.....almost as simple as you are....to prove same.

2. "The planet was entering a World War of the scope and dimensions never seen before."
When, you imbecile???
In 1933????

FDR came into office March 4th of 1933. One of his first official acts was to recognize the USSR, November 16th, 1933.

I wonder if you think the person who wrote this stuff in an imbecile, simple and dumb as asphalt. I happen to think she is brilliant. She has several Doctorate degrees in History.

"Russian confiscation of American property and it's failure to pay it's wartime debt's remained paramount issue's deterring American recognition. At the same time, in the post World War I era, national interest and the global order left little choice politically, economically or diplomatically but for the United States and the Soviet Union to establish some form of cooperative relationship." LeeAnn Ghajar spring 2006

"The gratest benifit was perhaps that recognition enabled the Untited States to field a diplomatic presence in Moscow that would prove invaluable during World War II..." LeeAnn Ghajar, fall 2005 Historian, Advisory Board Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Historian, Woman's Memorial, PhD American History George Mason University.

Now....watch me eviscerate both you and your quotee......

Really, you eviscerate me and my quotee with a quote from Chesley Manly. People browsing this thread may not bother to check out sources you use. You depend on that. I use a source and include enough information about the source so that a person can quickly google the name of the author and ascertain whether the source can be considered reliable.

So my source is a respected working Historian at a well known university and has an impressive resume. You use the name Chesley Manly and a book written during the red scare and McCarthy hearings to what you imagine is to "eviscerte". Perhaps you can give us some information about Manly. Perhaps readers of this thread might google the name.

Oh wait, if they do that they may discover that on Dec 4, 1941, three days before Pearl Harbor he published a story in the Chicago Tribune that leaked the "Rainbow" plans which were the secret contingency plans for a potential war with Germany. And, if they read further they may discover that Hitler used the article in his Declaration of War speech on Dec. 11 as proof of the ill intent of the USA.

What may be truely amazing is if anyone finds an actual bio or proof that Manly existed and was anything other than a pseudonym for a fascist cabal. That would surely indicate a person would have impressive research skills.

 

[regent]

FDR is still rated America's greatest president by the 238 noted historians that last rated presidents.
The American people voted for FDR four times, count em, four times.

I see you still haven't kicked your addiction to logical fallacy, idiot.

Since this is the history board I'll stick with 238 noted historians that recently named FDR America's greatest president and you can stick with your name calling, deal? But I gotta tell you, your name-calling ain't very impressive either, sort of like playground stuff. but if one is losing an arugument what is one to do, but call names?

 

[Camp]

I wonder if you think the person who wrote this stuff in an imbecile, simple and dumb as asphalt. I happen to think she is brilliant. She has several Doctorate degrees in History.

"Russian confiscation of American property and it's failure to pay it's wartime debt's remained paramount issue's deterring American recognition. At the same time, in the post World War I era, national interest and the global order left little choice politically, economically or diplomatically but for the United States and the Soviet Union to establish some form of cooperative relationship." LeeAnn Ghajar spring 2006

"The gratest benifit was perhaps that recognition enabled the Untited States to field a diplomatic presence in Moscow that would prove invaluable during World War II..." LeeAnn Ghajar, fall 2005 Historian, Advisory Board Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Historian, Woman's Memorial, PhD American History George Mason University.

Now....watch me eviscerate both you and your quotee......

Really, you eviscerate me and my quotee with a quote from Chesley Manly. People browsing this thread may not bother to check out sources you use. You depend on that. I use a source and include enough information about the source so that a person can quickly google the name of the author and ascertain whether the source can be considered reliable.

So my source is a respected working Historian at a well known university and has an impressive resume. You use the name Chesley Manly and a book written during the red scare and McCarthy hearings to what you imagine is to "eviscerte". Perhaps you can give us some information about Manly. Perhaps readers of this thread might google the name.

Oh wait, if they do that they may discover that on Dec 4, 1941, three days before Pearl Harbor he published a story in the Chicago Tribune that leaked the "Rainbow" plans which were the secret contingency plans for a potential war with Germany. And, if they read further they may discover that Hitler used the article in his Declaration of War speech on Dec. 11 as proof of the ill intent of the USA.

What may be truely amazing is if anyone finds an actual bio or proof that Manly existed and was anything other than a pseudonym for a fascist cabal. That would surely indicate a person would have impressive research skills.

Some coincidence. Perfect timing for Adolf. Leaked plans on Dec. 4 and Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7. Made the war declaration for the Nazi's so much easier.

 

[Unkotare]

That is right, in the USA you can't have your job taken away if you have committed no crime, ..

Huh?

 

[Unkotare]

FDR is still rated America's greatest president by the 238 noted historians that last rated presidents.
The American people voted for FDR four times, count em, four times.

I see you still haven't kicked your addiction to logical fallacy, idiot.

Since this is the history board I'll stick with 238 noted historians that recently named FDR America's greatest president and you can stick with your name calling, deal? ?

You'll "stick to" falling back on a logical fallacy over and over and over again because apparently that's all you've got and are incapable of thinking for yourself.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I wonder if you think the person who wrote this stuff in an imbecile, simple and dumb as asphalt. I happen to think she is brilliant. She has several Doctorate degrees in History.

"Russian confiscation of American property and it's failure to pay it's wartime debt's remained paramount issue's deterring American recognition. At the same time, in the post World War I era, national interest and the global order left little choice politically, economically or diplomatically but for the United States and the Soviet Union to establish some form of cooperative relationship." LeeAnn Ghajar spring 2006

"The gratest benifit was perhaps that recognition enabled the Untited States to field a diplomatic presence in Moscow that would prove invaluable during World War II..." LeeAnn Ghajar, fall 2005 Historian, Advisory Board Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund, Historian, Woman's Memorial, PhD American History George Mason University.

Now....watch me eviscerate both you and your quotee......

Really, you eviscerate me and my quotee with a quote from Chesley Manly. People browsing this thread may not bother to check out sources you use. You depend on that. I use a source and include enough information about the source so that a person can quickly google the name of the author and ascertain whether the source can be considered reliable.

So my source is a respected working Historian at a well known university and has an impressive resume. LeeAnn GhajarPerhaps you can give us some information about Manly. Perhaps readers of this thread might google the name.

Oh wait, if they do that they may discover that on Dec 4, 1941, three days before Pearl Harbor he published a story in the Chicago Tribune that leaked the "Rainbow" plans which were the secret contingency plans for a potential war with Germany. And, if they read further they may discover that Hitler used the article in his Declaration of War speech on Dec. 11 as proof of the ill intent of the USA.

What may be truely amazing is if anyone finds an actual bio or proof that Manly existed and was anything other than a pseudonym for a fascist cabal. That would surely indicate a person would have impressive research skills.

"Really, you eviscerate me and my quotee with a quote from Chesley Manly."


Since you misspelled the name, clearly, you didn't 'check out' anything.



No, you lying sack of sewage.....I provided three sources....including a newspaper article of the time...with the quote.






And that means that your source..... LeeAnn Ghajar....is just one more propagandist mouthpiece for the pro-communist Roosevelians.

As you are.



Bottom line: you have not been able to disprove any of the material provided.
Conclusion: you are merely a simpleton who will follow Roosevelt to the grave.

 

[gipper]

I see you still haven't kicked your addiction to logical fallacy, idiot.

Since this is the history board I'll stick with 238 noted historians that recently named FDR America's greatest president and you can stick with your name calling, deal? ?

You'll "stick to" falling back on a logical fallacy over and over and over again because apparently that's all you've got and are incapable of thinking for yourself.

Here is a thought experiment for our FDR lover and dutiful believer in historians who proclaim their admiration for the fool.

Do you think Russian historians during the Soviet era, wrote of the greatness of Lenin and Stalin freely and without coercion?
Do you think Chinese historians during and after Mao's reign of terror, wrote of the greatness of Mao freely and without coercion?

Not sure this will awaken any brain cells, but I thought it worth a try.

 

[regent]

I see you still haven't kicked your addiction to logical fallacy, idiot.

Since this is the history board I'll stick with 238 noted historians that recently named FDR America's greatest president and you can stick with your name calling, deal? ?

You'll "stick to" falling back on a logical fallacy over and over and over again because apparently that's all you've got and are incapable of thinking for yourself.

Originally, I thought I wonder which of our presidents was the greatest, and after thinking long and hard I said "Of course,FDR." So I guess that was what you mean by thinking for yourself? No one was impressed, however, so I decided to check with the ratings of presidents by noted historians and they concurred, FDR number one. That thinking for yourself is great but who cares, but mention 238 noted historians and people are impressed. You still seem impressed.

 

[regent]

Since this is the history board I'll stick with 238 noted historians that recently named FDR America's greatest president and you can stick with your name calling, deal? ?

You'll "stick to" falling back on a logical fallacy over and over and over again because apparently that's all you've got and are incapable of thinking for yourself.

Here is a thought experiment for our FDR lover and dutiful believer in historians who proclaim their admiration for the fool.

Do you think Russian historians during the Soviet era, wrote of the greatness of Lenin and Stalin freely and without coercion?
Do you think Chinese historians during and after Mao's reign of terror, wrote of the greatness of Mao freely and without coercion?

Not sure this will awaken any brain cells, but I thought it worth a try.

So you are suggesting that the communist historians use history differently than the American historians? Of course they do. We even have American "historians" writing histories for and against FDR, they sort of write what they want in America.