Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

Discussions on all aspects of the United States of America during the Inter-War era and Second World War. Hosted by Carl Schwamberger.
john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#31

Post by john2 » 24 Jul 2019, 04:18

Here are some interesting quotes from Churchill and Mussolini from the website "Countdown to Infamy." Here's the link: http://plhb.tripod.com/p2.html It is a non political website that gives a very detailed timeline of events leading to Pearl Harbor. I'm simply trying to give food for thought here - I'm not trying to push a particular theory. Here is Churchill's reaction:

December 7, 1941: Churchill, in his memoirs, relates his phone conversation this day with FDR:
In two or three minutes Mr. Roosevelt came through. "Mr. President, what's this about Japan?" "It's quite true," he replied. "They have attacked us at Pearl Harbor. We are all in the same boat now." [Note: unintentional black humor]. No American will think it wrong of me if I proclaim that to have the United States at our side was to me the greatest joy. I could not foretell the course of events. I do not pretend to have measured accurately the martial might of Japan, but now at this very moment I knew the United States was in the war, up to the neck and in to the death.

So we had won after all! Yes, after Dunkirk; after the fall of France; after the horrible episode of Oran; after the threat of invasion, when, apart from the Air and the Navy, we were an almost unarmed people; after the deadly struggle of the U-boat war—the first Battle of the Atlantic, gained by a hand's-breadth; after seventeen months of lonely fighting and nineteen months of my responsibility in dire stress. We had won the war. England would live; Britain would live; the Commonwealth of Nations and the Empire would live. How long the war would last or in what fashion it would end no man could tell, nor did I at this moment care. Once again in our long Island history we should emerge, however mauled or mutilated, safe and victorious. We should not be wiped out. Our history would not come to an end. We might not even have to die as individuals. Hitler's fate was sealed. Mussolini's fate was sealed. As for the Japanese, they would be ground to powder. (Churchill)
Keep in mind this is Dec 7th so Churchill is clearly implying he thinks the war with Japan will lead to war with Germany.

Mussolini's is even more interesting:
December 3, 1941: From the diary of Mussolini's son-in-law, Count Galeazzo Ciano, Foreign Minister of Italy:

Sensational move by Japan. The Ambassador asks for an audience with the Duce and reads him a long statement on the progress of the negotiations with America, concluding with the assertion that they have reached a dead end. Then invoking the appropriate clause in the Tripartite Pact, he asks that Italy declare war on America immediately after the outbreak of hostilities and proposes the signing of an agreement not to conclude a separate peace. The interpreter translating this request was trembling like a leaf. The Duce gave fullest assurances, reserving the right to confer with Berlin before giving a reply.

The Duce was pleased with the communication and said, "We are now on the brink of the intercontinental war which I predicted as early as September 1939." What does this new event mean? In any case it means that Roosevelt has succeeded in his maneuver. Since he could not enter the war immediately and directly, he entered it indirectly by letting himself be attacked by Japan. Furthermore, this event also means that every prospect of peace is becoming further and further removed and that it is now easy—much too easy—to predict a long war. Who will be able to hold out longest? It is on this basis that the problem must be considered. Berlin's answer will be somewhat delayed because Hitler has gone to the southern Front to see General Kleist. (IMT)
Can anyone help verify the above quote? The point of showing the quotes is to show that world leaders thought the "backdoor to war" theory was possible.

OpanaPointer
Financial supporter
Posts: 5644
Joined: 16 May 2010, 15:12
Location: United States of America

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#32

Post by OpanaPointer » 24 Jul 2019, 06:38

rcocean wrote:
24 Jul 2019, 03:58
I left "shit" out of "jack shit", meaning "zip shit nada".
Wow, how intellectual. I could spend hours rebutting your deep knowledgeable post.

Interacting with you is a waste of time. Time to put you back on ignore. NO great loss. But keep putting away those brewski's - and remember to vote Democrat in 2020!
Well, raise your game and you might get my attention.
Come visit our sites:
hyperwarHyperwar
World War II Resources

Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.


User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#33

Post by Takao » 24 Jul 2019, 10:53

john2 wrote:
24 Jul 2019, 04:18
Here are some interesting quotes from Churchill and Mussolini from the website "Countdown to Infamy." Here's the link: http://plhb.tripod.com/p2.html It is a non political website that gives a very detailed timeline of events leading to Pearl Harbor. I'm simply trying to give food for thought here - I'm not trying to push a particular theory. Here is Churchill's reaction:

December 7, 1941: Churchill, in his memoirs, relates his phone conversation this day with FDR:
In two or three minutes Mr. Roosevelt came through. "Mr. President, what's this about Japan?" "It's quite true," he replied. "They have attacked us at Pearl Harbor. We are all in the same boat now." [Note: unintentional black humor]. No American will think it wrong of me if I proclaim that to have the United States at our side was to me the greatest joy. I could not foretell the course of events. I do not pretend to have measured accurately the martial might of Japan, but now at this very moment I knew the United States was in the war, up to the neck and in to the death.

So we had won after all! Yes, after Dunkirk; after the fall of France; after the horrible episode of Oran; after the threat of invasion, when, apart from the Air and the Navy, we were an almost unarmed people; after the deadly struggle of the U-boat war—the first Battle of the Atlantic, gained by a hand's-breadth; after seventeen months of lonely fighting and nineteen months of my responsibility in dire stress. We had won the war. England would live; Britain would live; the Commonwealth of Nations and the Empire would live. How long the war would last or in what fashion it would end no man could tell, nor did I at this moment care. Once again in our long Island history we should emerge, however mauled or mutilated, safe and victorious. We should not be wiped out. Our history would not come to an end. We might not even have to die as individuals. Hitler's fate was sealed. Mussolini's fate was sealed. As for the Japanese, they would be ground to powder. (Churchill)
Keep in mind this is Dec 7th so Churchill is clearly implying he thinks the war with Japan will lead to war with Germany.

Mussolini's is even more interesting:
December 3, 1941: From the diary of Mussolini's son-in-law, Count Galeazzo Ciano, Foreign Minister of Italy:

Sensational move by Japan. The Ambassador asks for an audience with the Duce and reads him a long statement on the progress of the negotiations with America, concluding with the assertion that they have reached a dead end. Then invoking the appropriate clause in the Tripartite Pact, he asks that Italy declare war on America immediately after the outbreak of hostilities and proposes the signing of an agreement not to conclude a separate peace. The interpreter translating this request was trembling like a leaf. The Duce gave fullest assurances, reserving the right to confer with Berlin before giving a reply.

The Duce was pleased with the communication and said, "We are now on the brink of the intercontinental war which I predicted as early as September 1939." What does this new event mean? In any case it means that Roosevelt has succeeded in his maneuver. Since he could not enter the war immediately and directly, he entered it indirectly by letting himself be attacked by Japan. Furthermore, this event also means that every prospect of peace is becoming further and further removed and that it is now easy—much too easy—to predict a long war. Who will be able to hold out longest? It is on this basis that the problem must be considered. Berlin's answer will be somewhat delayed because Hitler has gone to the southern Front to see General Kleist. (IMT)
Can anyone help verify the above quote? The point of showing the quotes is to show that world leaders thought the "backdoor to war" theory was possible.
The quotes are genuine, but are based on their own biases and beliefs.

According to the terms of the Tripartite Pact, Germany and Italy were under no commitment to go to war with the USA. It was a defensive pact, that only garunteed support if one was attacked...Not if one was doing the attacking. Germany and Italy declared war on their own decision and not because of any pact.

As to Churchill, the US was now in the fighting, if only in the Pacific, but Lend Lease and the support of the US was now garunteed.

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#34

Post by john2 » 24 Jul 2019, 14:20

According to the terms of the Tripartite Pact, Germany and Italy were under no commitment to go to war with the USA. It was a defensive pact, that only garunteed support if one was attacked...Not if one was doing the attacking.
Yes I had mentioned that in my original post which I'm sorry was rather long.
The tripartite pact was a defensive pact - Germany only had to come in if Japan was attacked by the US - not the other way around. Now in March Hitler did promise he would join in even if Japan attacked first however assuming Roosevelt was aware of this how did he know Hitler wasn't lying? Hitler had in fact broken numerous treaties before. It would in fact be in his best interest to let the US fight Japan while he dealt with Britain and the SU. Hitler had a long record of broken promises. This is the big hole in the theory - there is no definite link to show war with Japan equals war with Germany. Now some versions of theory are more inventive. They argue that if there was war with Japan the isolationist movement would end and the US would be more interventionist - that Roosevelt might get congress to declare war on Germany. However Roosevelt here would be taking a bit of a gamble. Another point to keep in mind is that Japan could have chosen not to attack Pearl Harbor or the Philippines - there were multiple targets they could have gone after. Without the spectacular attack on Pearl Harbor Roosevelt might not even if had gotten war with Japan.
And while I agree that Mussolini's opinion doesn't prove anything I thought it was interesting in that it at least showed other people at the time particularly major world leaders believed the backdoor theory possible and that it wasn't a crackpot idea that came after the war.

User avatar
Takao
Member
Posts: 3776
Joined: 10 Mar 2002, 20:27
Location: Reading, Pa

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#35

Post by Takao » 24 Jul 2019, 18:26

It's always been a crackpot theory, even when FDR'S detractors were pushing it in the weeks and years following the attack.

Most of what I have read give the publication, in the December 4th, 1941, Chicago Tribune, of US secret 1943 war plans, as the reason Hitler declared war.

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#36

Post by john2 » 24 Jul 2019, 22:54

Most of what I have read give the publication, in the December 4th, 1941, Chicago Tribune, of US secret 1943 war plans, as the reason Hitler declared war.
That's an interesting idea and something I hadn't thought of.
It's always been a crackpot theory, even when FDR'S detractors were pushing it in the weeks and years following the attack.
Ever since the tripartite pact was signed Roosevelt had to have known there was the possibility of fighting a two front war between Germany and Japan. So the 2 scenarios to consider are Japan attacks after the US is already fighting Germany or attacks before. Now the problem with the 2nd scenario is that a war with Japan could distract from the war with Germany. Now apparently there isn't anything to show Roosevelt's thoughts on this. The only thing one could guess is that he would still find a way to go to war with Germany even while fighting Japan. Now historically a theory had been going around after Pearl Harbor that Germany had a role in the attack - which we know is false today. Some historians have suggested Roosevelt would have tried to use that thinking to get congress to declare war on Germany. But this isn't really backdoor to war but rather trying make the best of a bad situation. The key charge - that Roosevelt believed war with Japan would lead to war with Germany and that this caused him to provoke Japan into war is still to me at least still unproven. Thanks everyone for a good discussion.

OpanaPointer
Financial supporter
Posts: 5644
Joined: 16 May 2010, 15:12
Location: United States of America

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#37

Post by OpanaPointer » 24 Jul 2019, 22:59

"Now apparently there isn't anything to show Roosevelt's thoughts on this."

LOL You really have to read more than one book.
Come visit our sites:
hyperwarHyperwar
World War II Resources

Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#38

Post by john2 » 24 Jul 2019, 23:07

I don't know why you keep claiming I only read "one book." The only thing I am aware of is Roosevelt saying "I haven't got enough navy to go around" - suggesting he didn't want to fight a two front war. However I didn't think this one quote was enough to prove anything unless you have something more?

OpanaPointer
Financial supporter
Posts: 5644
Joined: 16 May 2010, 15:12
Location: United States of America

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#39

Post by OpanaPointer » 25 Jul 2019, 01:16

john2 wrote:
24 Jul 2019, 23:07
I don't know why you keep claiming I only read "one book." The only thing I am aware of is Roosevelt saying "I haven't got enough navy to go around" - suggesting he didn't want to fight a two front war. However I didn't think this one quote was enough to prove anything unless you have something more?

Well, demonstrate that you've read more than one book then.
Come visit our sites:
hyperwarHyperwar
World War II Resources

Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#40

Post by john2 » 25 Jul 2019, 02:07

Well the books I've read give an outline of events but don't go into any details on what Roosevelt may have been thinking. Perhaps you could recommend something?

rcocean
Member
Posts: 686
Joined: 30 Mar 2008, 01:48

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#41

Post by rcocean » 25 Jul 2019, 02:09

This is what FDR said on December 9th BEFORE THE GERMANY DECLARATION OF WAR:

We know also that Germany and Japan are conducting their military and naval operations in accordance with a joint plan. That plan considers all peoples and nations which are not helping the Axis powers as common enemies of each and every one of the Axis powers.

That is their simple and obvious grand strategy. And that is why the American people must realize that it can be matched only with similar grand strategy. We must realize for example that Japanese successes against the United States in the Pacific are helpful to German operations in Libya; that any German success against the Caucasus is inevitably an assistance to Japan in her operations against the Dutch East Indies; that a German attack against Algiers or Morocco opens the way to a German attack against South America and the Canal.

On the other side of the picture, we must learn also to know that guerilla warfare against the Germans in, let us say Serbia or Norway, helps us; that a successful Russian offensive against the Germans helps us; and that British successes on land or sea in any part of the world strengthen our hands.

Remember always that Germany and Italy, regardless of any formal declaration of war, consider themselves at war with the United States at this moment just as much as they consider themselves at war with Britain or Russia. And Germany puts all the other Republics of the Americas into the same category of enemies. The people of our sister Republics of this Hemisphere can be honored by that fact.


IOW, the REAL ENEMY is Germany.

john2
Member
Posts: 1023
Joined: 04 Feb 2003, 00:25
Location: north carolina

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#42

Post by john2 » 25 Jul 2019, 02:16

Yes this is what I mentioned earlier about how Roosevelt would have likely tried to get a declaration of war on Germany. Many people believed that Germany had participated in the attack and Roosevelt I'm sure would have used that to his advantage. But Hitler declared war right away saving Roosevelt from having to do anymore political maneuvering.

OpanaPointer
Financial supporter
Posts: 5644
Joined: 16 May 2010, 15:12
Location: United States of America

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#43

Post by OpanaPointer » 29 Jul 2019, 16:41

john2 wrote:
25 Jul 2019, 02:07
Well the books I've read give an outline of events but don't go into any details on what Roosevelt may have been thinking. Perhaps you could recommend something?
Best way to find good books would be to google "FDR isolationism". Let me know if you want thoughts on books you find. I've got 35-40 in my library right now.
Come visit our sites:
hyperwarHyperwar
World War II Resources

Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.

OpanaPointer
Financial supporter
Posts: 5644
Joined: 16 May 2010, 15:12
Location: United States of America

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#44

Post by OpanaPointer » 29 Jul 2019, 16:42

john2 wrote:
25 Jul 2019, 02:16
Yes this is what I mentioned earlier about how Roosevelt would have likely tried to get a declaration of war on Germany. Many people believed that Germany had participated in the attack and Roosevelt I'm sure would have used that to his advantage. But Hitler declared war right away saving Roosevelt from having to do anymore political maneuvering.
But in neither case did the US declare war on the other party before they declared war on us.
Come visit our sites:
hyperwarHyperwar
World War II Resources

Bellum se ipsum alet, mostly Doritos.

LineDoggie
Member
Posts: 1275
Joined: 03 Oct 2008, 21:06

Re: Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

#45

Post by LineDoggie » 30 Jul 2019, 07:07

Takao wrote:
24 Jul 2019, 10:53
but Lend Lease and the support of the US was now garunteed.
Lend lease was US Law before Pearl Harbor and FDR ordered the US Navy to sink on sight German war vessels in October 1941.
"There are two kinds of people who are staying on this beach: those who are dead and those who are going to die. Now let’s get the hell out of here".
Col. George Taylor, 16th Infantry Regiment, Omaha Beach

Post Reply

Return to “USA 1919-1945”