Backdoor to war theory - do you believe it?

[EKB]

Some official draft messages, dated 29 November 1941, found at FRUS online;

- Cover letter from Secretary of State Hull to President Roosevelt
- Draft Message of President Roosevelt to Congress
- Draft Message From President Roosevelt to the Emperor of Japan:

https://history.state.gov/historicaldoc ... 41v04/d507

[ljadw]

Another good reference:https://www.americanheritage.com/strang ... lanikai#7

The War Cabinet, totally unaware of the Pearl Harbor attack force, met at noon to discuss the major Japanese expedition now heading south off Indochina. As usual, Stimson recorded the gist of the proceedings; it was the opinion of everyone that “if this expedition was allowed to get around the southern point of Indochina and to go off and land in the Gulf of Siam … it would be a terrific blow at all of the three Powers, Britain at Singapore, the Netherlands, and ourselves in the Philippines. It was the consensus of everybody that this must not be allowed .… that if the Japanese got into the Isthmus of Kra, the British would fight. It was also agreed that if the British fought, we would have to fight.”

So, FDR had already committed us to war against Japan, whether they attacked USA forces or not. And on Page 7, the conclusion:

No, FDR could not commit the US to war against Japan ,because only Congress could declare war on Japan .

[OpanaPointer]

I get the feeling that someone has only read one book on the topic.

[rcocean]

If you want to read more on FDR's back door to war, you could read the following:

1) Tansill -Back Door To War: The Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941
2) Robert Stinnett -Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor
3) Robert Smith - A Time for War
4) John toland - Infamy
5) Koster - Operation Snow.

These provide a different perspective than the conformist "party line".

[ljadw]

Toland is not a historian,and Tansill is biased .
Besides, one can doubt that FDR ( I have no sympathy for him ) directed the US Foreign Policy : Congress has as much influence in this matter as the White House . The Neutrality Act and Cash and Carry were imposed by Congress, not by FDR .

[OpanaPointer]

If you want to read more on FDR's back door to war, you could read the following:

1) Tansill -Back Door To War: The Roosevelt Foreign Policy, 1933-1941
2) Robert Stinnett -Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor
3) Robert Smith - A Time for War
4) John toland - Infamy
5) Koster - Operation Snow.

These provide a different perspective than the conformist "party line".

Stinnett is an idiot. He provided the source for the messages he said were decoded before the raid. The source is the Pearl Harbor Congressional Hearing. Those messages were provided by the Japanese after the war. He also got east and west confused and had a Japanese tanker located between Hawaii and the mainland. Another non-historian.

[rcocean]

John Toland won the Pulitzer prize for non-fiction for his history of Japan during WW2. And I count 8 published books by Toland related to WW2. But of course, all have our feelings.

[OpanaPointer]

I had to coin a category for Toland's books: Narrative Chronologies.

[ljadw]

John Toland won the Pulitzer prize for non-fiction for his history of Japan during WW2. And I count 8 published books by Toland related to WW2. But of course, all have our feelings.

A Pulitzer prize is not an argument : a journalist of the NYT who denied the existence of the 1932 famine in the SU ,also got a Pulitzer prize . And The Guns of August also got a Pulitzer Prize .
Other point : Toland's Pulitzer prize was not for a history of Japan during WW2, but for a history of Japan between 1936 and 1945 .
And, one can say a lot of negative things about Toland's book about Hitler .

[rcocean]

Lets see: first its let talk about the word "War" what does it really mean? Next, its lets talk about whether Japan 1936-1945 = "during WW2". And now its does the Pulitzer equals quality 100% of the time. As opposed to 95% or 82.5% of the time, I suppose. Anyway, sorry you have negative feelings about Toland.

[OpanaPointer]

The difference between Pulitzer and Nobel is sometimes Pulitzer is factual, but it's not a requirement just chance.

[Takao]

Well, gee willikers.

Roosevelt - Soldier of Freedom won the 1971 History Pulitzer.

Anyone want to bet that rcocean has not read it, or will pooh-pooh it.

Toland's book won the 1971 General Non-Fiction Pulitzer. Despite rcocean's claim that it is "history." wonder why it did not win the History Pulitzer?

[OpanaPointer]

Hearst, Pulitzer, same bucket.

The Cuban Revolution of 1895, came at a perfect time for Hearst and his New York Journal. ... As the story goes, Remington, who had been sent to Cuba to cover the insurrection, cabled to Hearst that there was no war to cover. Hearst allegedly replied with, "You furnish the pictures. I'll furnish the war."

[rcocean]

I like apple pie. its the best.

[EKB]

A Pulitzer or Nobel Prize is no guarantee of quality. The international awards system is a mixed bag that is sometimes laughable.

John F. Kennedy got a Pulitzer for Profiles in Courage, which was ghostwritten. Moreover, his handling of the Vietnam crisis and President Ngo Dinh Diem was far from valorous.

Fredrik Logevall got a Pulitzer for Embers of War, which is well written overall. But the author was sympathetic to Ho Chi Minh and somewhat dismissive of mass murder campaigns carried out by the Viet Minh. During his book promotion tour, Logevall revealed that he admires the late professor George McTurnan Kahin, who was a leading apologist for the Khmer Rouge.

War mongers have received the Nobel Peace Prize; e.g. Theodore Roosevelt, Henry Kissinger, Le Duc Tho, Shimon Peres and Barack Obama (his administration dropped at least 26,000 bombs on seven countries in 2016).