United States-Noble Ideal

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Freedom! self reliance : One Thread

The following question was deleted from 'Countryside' forum for 'nothing to do with homesteading'...I am a Russian Jew living in rural Saskatchewan, Canada, would like to make the following observation...The United States of America was founded on noble ideals of freedom, liberty and independence. The American pioneers, many of whom were simple farmers wanted to throw off a colonial oppression of England. What happened to these noble ideals? Today the United States has evolved into a super complex society that dictates and contlols every aspect of human endeveour. Even more disturbing is American desire to impose its will on other countries. United States has become a Monster of sorts, its economic and military power has become a menace to the whole world, and I mean not only to muslims, but to European civilization as well. If went unchecked, United States is on a collission course with the rest of the world. Did Founding Fathers envision such a country? Individual Americans are decent people, and many American organizations do good work. How then, to deal with eroding personal freedoms for Americans, and how to deal with American 'menace' to the world?

-- Alexander Levin (morsealexlevin@hotmail.com), March 11, 2002


I agree,, the founding fathers even state, that WE shouldnt interferr with other countries. WIsh We would just keep out of the whole worlds business

-- Stan (sopal@net-port.com), March 11, 2002.

Mr. Levin I believe it is quite a bit more complex than your synopsis.

First, let me say "Know Thine Enemy". The only way to know our enemy is to be involved in the affairs of the world. Especially third world nations where thugs like the Taliban are allowed to rule. Although I don't advocate an excessive entanglement between ours and other nations we must accept that they key to security is intelligence which necessarily includes supporting one suppossed friend in common defense from a common enemy.

Hate for the west and America in particular has not materialized in the last 10, 20 or even 50 years, try hundreds of years ago with a little affair commonly known as the Crusades. Like it or not many of us are descendants of those would be champions of christianity who went to the middle east to capture the holy land and convert or kill the inhabitants (not altogether christian either huh?). Whats more these murderous muslim fanatics who believe in their Jihad do so because we support Israel. The single biggest goal of these misguided animals is to destroy Israel and reestablish it as thier homeland. I submit that we must as a nation support Israel. For it is written in the bible that those who bless god's people will be blessed. Make no mistake the descendants of the Israelites are gods people.

As for the founding fathers please remember that many of our founding fathers were themselves of questionable ethics and moral character. Freedom, liberty and independence were envisioned for male, white property owners not all regardless of status or plight in life.

We tried the "not getting involved theory", it didn't work. As we slept prior to entrance into WWII the Japanese calculated and pulled off a diabolical plot which completely destroyed and entire Pacific Naval Fleet. When we awoke most of europe had been captured and destroyed and those steam rollers the Nazi's would not have stopped at the Atlantic Ocean. America was on the menu of conquest.

On one point we are in agreement. The United States has evovled such that our government has it's hand in just about everything it's citizens can or can't do. However, don't throw the baby out with the bath water. A return to recognition and adherence to the Bill of Rights and Constitution would cure many of our ills. Read the Federalist Papers and enlighten yourself on what was envisioned with the formation of this union.


-- PoePoe (rpd932@yahoo.com), March 11, 2002.

Hello Alexander,

Why do Canadians always want to "DEBUNK" the United States! Every time we try to do something in the world, Canada sits back and either criticizes or condemns our efforts. Good or bad, at least the US is out there trying to right the wrongs of others.

Why does Canada sell Canola oil to the US knowing full well that it is just the dredges of remanufacture oil and has very harmful effects on the people that consume it?

Why does Canada export its worst pesticides to the US and the rest of the world but, REFUSE to use them on their on soil?

Why does Canada undercut the AMERICAN farmer with potatoes year after year causing the farmers that produce them to go on welfare?

Lets clean up our own countries before we start criticizing others. Shoot, none of you can even get along to be completely united as one single nation. Rioting is always going on in Quebec!

How many times has the United States bailed your country out, never expecting to get anything in return and never getting anything anyway?

If America is so bad, why is it that four fifths of Canadians live NEAR the American BORDER?

If America is so bad, why does your meager little Air Force have to come to the US to get TRAINED? And who builds your Airplanes, huh? America thats who!

And what about that Army of Boy Scouts you have PROTECTING your borders? United States could send in JUST ONE PLATOON of our FINEST the US MARINES and take the whole country in just a few days. Your meager little soldiers would just cry if that happen, now wouldn't they?

And I don't certainly see CANADIANS turning AMERICANS away and telling them we do not need the billions of dollars spent in CANADA on tourism. Shoot, they would not even turn DRAFT DODGERS from America away as long as they had plenty of their daddies money to spend there!

Bad enough that we are trying to rid the world of terrorism but, we have to listen to our NEIGHBORS complain that we are making TOO MUCH NOISE!

I have had it with "wimpy ass" CANADIANS and their "wimpy ass" efforts to be SO POLITICAL CORRECT!

Keep a "stiff upper lip" or whatever they say in the north....we the US will again carry all the burdens of CLEANING up the WORLD alone as usual without you.

I would rather live in a country that is TRYING to keep PEACE and makes a few mistakes in the progress, than a country that WHINES and sits back and does NOTHING!


-- http://communities.msn.com/livingoffthelandintheozarks (espresso42@hotmail.com), March 11, 2002.

I havnt heard Earnest get so riled up before,, I LOVE it

-- Stan (sopal@net-port.com), March 11, 2002.

If you noticed Ernest, I am not Canadian, I just 'live' here. I have many my own reasons to despice Canadians, among those is questionable trade practices, hipocricy of government and cowardice. True, Canadians sit back and dont stick out their neck for anything, and try to make a buck wherever convinient. To answer the previous writer, true, God shall bless those who protect Israel, and for that I applaud America. With American war on terrorism, I think that those Arab countries that support barbarian acts should be invaded and 'restructured'. But I think there is no justification of American involment in Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Kosovo.

-- Alexander Levin (morsealexlevin@hotmail.com), March 11, 2002.

You sometimes have to read between the lines and get to the true motivation behind Alexaders thread.What he's realing saying is , he's jealous that Florida isn't part of Canadian territory. Especialy this time of year.

-- SM Steve (unreal@msn.com), March 11, 2002.

Wow, Ernest....:)

For my 2 I have to say that US is too busy sticking it's nose into literally everything and establishing CIA picked governments with an extremelyu poor track record at success and they facilitate bringing in too many narcotics and and and and and, ad infinitum

As for Canada, the Canadians I know I like quite a bit...they do drink a lot tho'.

Yes we have a much stronger military. Too bad they aren't able to really uphold the Constitution. If the US would get out of the UN and stop trying to fix everyone elses problems like a codependent retard on steroids we wouldn't have so many people willing to infiltrate and kill ignorant, nice everyday Joe Sixpacks.

Poe Poe- no offense intended, but you seriously need to study up on the issue of Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt knew about it a full month in advance, but decided that it would be better to sacrifice a bunch of pawns to make his banker friends in England hapy. Same deal with the Lusitania and WWI. Study up on it. There is documentation. It's all been about bringing about a One World single government. In other words, it IS all about money and power.

-- Doreen (bisquit@here.com), March 11, 2002.

I'm a little behind so-First--Welcome to the Home of those who got a few threads deleted from CS forum. That won't happen here ! Next--don't underestimate them Canadians, They kicked our ass and burned Washingtn D.C. the last time we got cocky with them. I learned in Parris Island last week that the battle for D.C. was the only battle our Marines admit to ever losing.

We do stick our noses everwhere we don't belong and I believe you are correct ! We will be defeated in the same way every civilization was by spreading ourselves to thin. It is just that age old motto that everyone forgets---"Those who refuse to remember the past are condemned to repeat it"

-- Joel Rosen (JoelnBecky@webtv.net), March 12, 2002.

Doreen, I'm curious. I have not been able to find a legitimate or provable reference to Roosevelts prior knowledge of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Please cite one for me. Additionally, I find it counterproductive that a president who wanted his nation involved in a war would have wilfully allowed the destruction of an entire naval fleet. However, I usually read your contributions to posts and do find you to be very knowledgeable on matters of history.

Please enlighten me!


-- PoePoe (rpd932@yahoo.com), March 12, 2002.

Poe Poe, here is a press release for a book that covers much of it. I left all the excess for contextual reference for you. It is shocking, and it makes one sick. I visited Pearl a few years ago....sad. You just will have to do your own research, there are a ton of things out there and readily available, but it depends how you process info, and your own research.

Day of Deceit: The Truth About FDR and Pearl Harbor Saturday, March 26, 2000

Robert B. Stinnett will be onboard the USS Hornet from 11:00am to 3:00pm to sign his newly released book Day of Deceit. The author will be available to discuss his research on the Pearl Harbor controversy and tell of his experiences during WWII.

About the Book An explosive, well-written look at the events leading up to the Japanese raid on Pearl Harbor, including FDR's provocation of the attack, by a WWII veteran and longtime journalist. Stinnett has left no stone unturned in this exciting publication, which should rewrite the historical record of WWII.

Though rumors have long circulated about American prior knowledge of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, Stinnett easily makes his case that the United States knew an attack was coming and did not prepare for it. Even more shocking is his discovery that the North Pacific area, where an attack was believed likely to originate, was declared a "vacant sea" just weeks prior to the attack and U.S. patrols were forbidden in the area. The real heart of the book is the argument that the attack on Pearl Harbor was deliberately instigated by the Roosevelt Administration as a way of quickly bringing a unified America into the war.

About the Author Robert B. Stinnett served in the United States Navy under Lieutenant George Bush from 1942 to 1946, where he earned ten battle stars and a presidential Unit Citation. He worked as a photographer and journalist for the Oakland Tribune until 1986, after which he resigned as a full-time employee to devote himself to the research for Day of Deceit. He is a consultant on the Pacific War for the BBC and for Asahi and NHK Television in Japan.

-- Doreen (bisquit@here.com), March 12, 2002.

Wow, I second stan . . . outstanding effort and eloquence, Earnest! Went right down to the heart of the matter and listed the reasons why 'do I as say and not as I do' won't wash here.

America, IMO, has been coerced into this war on terrorism, most of the rest of the world condemns it, but they do nothing to back it up. Only Israel is probably nodding their heads, saying "Welcome to our world". With no action, terrorists and would be terrorists will only be encouraged to continue.

The U.S. has made many enemies, some were our fault, with some heavy handed actions committed by us on them. Others were made by positions taken by us. If you are not making enemies, you are doing nothing.

-- j.r. guerra in s. tx. (jrguerra@boultinghousesimpson.com), March 12, 2002.

Hello Folks,

I like a quote that Harrison Ford once said. It goes something like this...."If you don't piss off anybody, you are probably kissing too much ass!"



-- http://communities.msn.com/livingoffthelandintheozarks (espresso42@hotmail.com), March 12, 2002.

Interesting Doreen, but not substantial enough for proof. I spent an hour on the internet last night trying to find reasonable proof of what you ascert. No proof. It's sort of like all the conspiracy theories surrounding the assasination of JFK. Was it Oswald, no it was a CIA agent posing as a bum on the grassy noll, no there were 2 shooters and DPD knew about it!

Thanks for the dialogue though.


-- PoePoe (rpd932@yahoo.com), March 12, 2002.

Poe Poe,

I did a paper when I was in college about Pearl Harbor. I don't remember the sources, but the conclusion was obvious. FDR knew about the attack for some time BEFORE it happened. I also remember that FDR had the Japanese Ambassodor whisked out of the country also, so that he would not be lynched by irate Americans.

It has been suggestd by many that a war was the only way to get the country out of the depression, since Roosevelt's social programs were not really succeeding.

-- Bob in WI (bjwick@hotmail.com), March 12, 2002.

de ja vu

-- Laura (Ladybugwrangler@hotmail.com), March 13, 2002.

Vu ja de.

Thanks, Bob.

-- Doreen (bisquit@here.com), March 13, 2002.

Still speculation. One thing I did learn in college, be able to prove your points in a debate. I haven't found any yet have you?


-- PoePoe (rpd932@yahoo.com), March 13, 2002.

Poe Poe, if you want to be so anal, then any and all history is speculation as there is no one still alive after a few hundred years to verify(IF they are a trustworthy source....and IF the folks who say they are trustworthy are trustworthy...sheesh) the finer aspects of what transpired. Documents from the FOIA and several books and lectures and enough knowledge of FDR's lovely War Time Powers Act (go find a transcription of Senator Linbergh's speech that ripped him up one side and down the other) and I think the accusation speaks for itself. YOU can't prove he DIDn't know about it, yet you expect ME to prove he did. I believe they call that a Strawman argument.

-- Doreen (bisquit@here.com), March 13, 2002.

Poe Poe,

Do you really think FDR would have left that type of incriminating evidence just lying around waiting to be discovered? Of course it is difficult to find, that is the whole point. It was prbably destroyed when the first bomb was falling. FDR covered his butt just like almost every other president I can think of in recent times.

-- Bob in WI (bjwick@hotmail.com), March 13, 2002.

Poe Poe,

Try this site:


-- Bob in WI (bjwick@hotmail.com), March 13, 2002.

Doreen, don't insult. I'm not anal, and it's not a strawman argument. You ascert something for which you have no real proof as factual. You expect me to take it as such on your word. This goes against intelligent debate. You wish me and others who are reading and taking part in this discussion to believe that this particular past president coldly and with great calculation sacraficed over 2000 American lives. Such a huge and incriminating allegation should be substantiated. Our legal system is based on the notion of the necessity of evidence/proof. Doesn't this case warrant the same. Also for future reference disagree without being disagreeable. Name calling reduces your credability as a debator.


-- PoePoe (rpd932@yahoo.com), March 14, 2002.

Even the History Channel documentaries on Pearl Harbor implicate FDR with prior knowledge of the attack. They showed more than adequate documentation for that allegation.

My rule of thumb when approaching history is, if it is what they taught in public school, then it must be BS. School never brought forth documentation to prove the truth of their indoctrinational propaganda.

-- Laura (Ladybugwrangler@hotmail.com), March 14, 2002.

Laura, on that point I must agree. Most of what we learned as school children was twisted. I'm being stubborn with Doreen, not anal! I don't want to be believe that an American President would, could or has been so free with other American lives. By the way Doreen, I consulted 2 of the history professors at my local university who seem to concur that Roosevelt had prior knowledge of an impending attack at Pearl Harbor. There was some disagreement or should I say uncertainty as to the level of knowledge he had. Meaning, one thought Roosevelt believed the Japanese incapable of such incredible damage. The other thinks Roosevelt knew the pacific fleet would be destroyed and this precisely was what Roosevelt wanted as it would infuriate Americans pushing the U.S. into the war, and lead to the production of new, modern naval vessels.

What I am trying to say Doreen is Touche!


-- PoePoe (rpd932@yahoo.com), March 14, 2002.

Glad we got that out of the way. Now...

Hi! I'm Doreen.(if that's my real name??:) I have this insane desire to seek the truth about things. Some people call me Polly Anna, some call me Para Noid, some call me Cray Zee, some call me Sadie Lee Wrightlotzathymes, and some just don't call me. I can't convince anyone from my own measly self, but I can point you in a direction and if you have the desire you can research it and see what you think.

As for insulting, I didn't intend to insult you at all. It is just impossible for any single one of us to prove anything historically to anyone else over the internet and that gets frustrating. So...truce?

-- Doreen (bisquit@here.com), March 14, 2002.

OK let's apply a little gray matter to the question of FDR and Pearl Harbour.

1. Japan had been on a program of expansion since the dawn of the century, they had invaded Korea and China and I am not sure how much of the Malay Peninsula. It should have been clear that one day Japan and the US would clash.

2. The US was in a period of 'isolationism', the war had been waging in Europe for some years. Incidently, as far as I know the war to prevent Hitler's invasion of Great Britain had already been fought and won, but that as they say, is another story.

3. The US had an oil embargo imposed on Japan and Japan was hurting.

4. There are pretty good reports that the Japanese Army were the real 'hawkes' and that Admiral Yamamotto when told to attach the US had advised his emporor that although he would fight and win for six months the industrial might of the USA would eventually defeat him, he was proved right.

5. FDR had no satellites to scan the oceans. He would have had information from RDF (radio direction finding) stations of course but these would have been hampered if the Japanese fleet managed a really tight radio silence. It is quite credible that the fleet got to where it did without giving its presence away.

6. The US intelligence should have been at least as good as Admiral Yamamotto's appraisal of the situation and this may have given a feeling that there was no immediate danger from an attack.

My guess is that FDR fully expected an attack from the Japanese 'one day' and that Admiral Yamamotto did his job exceptionally well.

To claim that FDR know the attack would come in Hawaii and at that particular time is just not credible.

The notion that the fleet was left in harbour deliberatly so that it would be destroyed is nonsense in my opinion. If there was knowledge of an attack it would have served the purpose better to have sailed out and met the Japanese. That way there would have still been the public wake-up and a good chance that at least some of the Japanese fleet would have been destroyed.

There are only two valid philosophies in this life, "The Great Conspiracy" and "The Great Cock Up". As far as the US were concerned Pearl Harbour demonstrated the validity of the latter.

-- john hill (john@cnd.co.nz), March 14, 2002.

IMHO several people were to blame for the attack on Pearl Harbor.

First off according to a War Department press release issued in October 1941 the US were going to strengthen Phillippines by replacing obsolescent aircraft with modern combat planes. The planes referred to were held up in California because of a lack of spare parts. The planes originally were to reach Pearl Harbor the morning of December 7th.

Another reason was that American prewar appraisals of the Pacific situation were just outright wrong. Neither the Army nor navy thought that P.H. was threatened,their reason was it would be too hazardous for the Japanese. Geroge Marshall believe Panama Canal was in greater danger than P.H. Then there was several other advisors who quoted as saying that Japanese aircraft did not have the compacity to fly that far. Nipponese planes could only reach the islands from carriers.

Overall most of all the war advisors who were suppose to be in the know,blew it. From Eisenhower to MacArthur and all in between no one thought that Japan would strike P.H...

Except George Patton,in 1937 he wrote a paper called "Surprise" which predicted a Japanese attack on Hawaii.

-- TomK(mich) (tjk@cac.net), March 15, 2002.

To Poe Poe

Why should the US support Israel? Because the Israelites are 'God's people' you say? Believe that if you like, believe that these people are somehow more special than others because somewhere in the Old Testament it says that they are. But your belief doesn't make the assistance in the slaughter of thousands any more valid. Believe inherent superiority to all other races if that belief doesn't hurt anyone else. But the people who are responsible for sending the weapons that kill many Palestinians are guilty of causing their death. Funny how everyone uses the bible to suit themselves. People somehow seem to ignore the 'thou shalt not kill' (it wasn't explicit in saying 'thou shalt not give lots of money and weapons for one group of people far away to make it easier to kill another group of people far away just because it suits thee.

The US remains the only country that is completely biased towards Israelites when it comes to the Israel-Palestine conflict. Most other countries and organisations concerning themselves with the conflict want peace. The US should do the same. Don't advocate war, support peace.


ps - i am investigating the controversy surrounding whether Roosevelt knew about the awful attack on pearl harbour for my history unit. I've found out that most historians dismiss the idea but if anyone has any more information and good sites on the topic, please tell me. To be honest, if it was incompetence and FDR didn't believe Japan would dare to attack, then I don't blame him. Japan starting the Pacific war was, besides being morally wrong and reprehensible, the stupidest thing they could have done. US was obviously much stronger, Japan depended on the US for many resources.

-- kumiko b. (littlemisskumiko@aol.com), January 28, 2004.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ