Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Video: Roosevelt talked to Hitler and Tojo?

posted at 1:10 pm on May 7, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

During Barack Obama’s victory speech in North Carolina last night, he offered an argument about his much-criticized assertion that he would hold talks with America’s enemies without preconditions. Obama claimed that he would only be following in the footsteps of FDR and Harry Truman with this kind of openness. For a history buff such as myself, this sounds more than a little puzzling:

The other side can label and name-call all they want, but I trust the American people to recognize that it is not surrender to end the war in Iraq so that we can rebuild our military and go after Al Qaida’s leaders.

I trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did.

Putting aside the “labeling and name-calling”, leaving a war without winning it is, in fact, surrender. How else would anyone describe it? “Quitting” and “running away” come to mind, but both are synonymous with surrender. Leaving when the new strategy has made great progress in bolstering the elected government in Iraq is especially egregious, but in any case retreating while engaged with the enemy is surrender by any definition of the term.

I’m particularly bemused by the references to FDR and Truman. Both men ended up having to conduct massive wars that outlasted their presidencies, and in FDR’s case in no small measure because Western nations insisted on talk rather than action. While we maintained diplomatic contact with Germany and Japan until Pearl Harbor, FDR did not meet with Hitler and Tojo. And that diplomatic contact didn’t stop war from coming; indeed, it make it much worse than it otherwise would have been, at least in Europe, had the US, UK, and France had taken the appropriate steps to disarm Hitler when he started his Versailles Treaty violations.

Truman met with Joseph Stalin during and after World War II, but that didn’t stop the Soviets from blockading West Berlin or ringing down an iron curtain across eastern Europe, enslaving those nations for almost 50 years. If Potsdam and Yalta are Obama’s idea of successful foreign policy, then he obviously hasn’t studied 20th century history. Talking with implacable tyrants leads to appeasement, which leads to either war or more implacability of the tyranny in question.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

but I trust the American people to recognize that it is not surrender to end the war in Iraq so that we can rebuild our military and go after Al Qaida’s leaders.–BO

Huh? That’s what we DID (and are DOING), in IRAQ. Sheesh, what a maroon.

kirkill on May 7, 2008 at 1:13 PM

Absolutely Clueless

chief65 on May 7, 2008 at 1:14 PM

There were secret talks between the Japanese and US late in WWII. The Japanese wanted to surrender on their own terms and dictate the peace.

We held talks via switzerland as I recall. Finally FDR warned the Japanese that if they didnt surrender unconditionally they would face “Terrible” consequences and Hiroshima happend.

SO is Obama arguing that he will like FDR use the A bomb and “never bat an eye ?”

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:15 PM

I’m confused. Is he saying it’s OKAY to talk to people who are like Hitler and Tojo? Really? Has he been taking History lessons from the insipid documentaries on the History Channel?
I still say Obama is this generation’s Neville Chamberlain and that ain’t a compliment.

mjk on May 7, 2008 at 1:16 PM

but that didn’t stop the Soviets from blockading West Berlin or ringing down an iron curtain across eastern Europe, enslaving those nations for almost 50 years.

Ed you forgot to say, “In which Russia, aka the old ‘Soviet Union’, still wishes they had a grasp on these countries.”

B.O. is the worst thing to happen to the United States, and people are to blinded by ignorance to understand.

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 1:16 PM

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

TheBigOldDog on May 7, 2008 at 1:16 PM

The Wimp Factor is strong in this one.

ReubenJCogburn on May 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM

History must be an elective to liberals that few choose to take

Defector01 on May 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Kennedy did talk with the soveits over the Cuba missile crisis but Obama and the libs always conveinently eave out that the Bay of Pigs happened under Kennedy’s watch. He launched an invasion with the idea of “Regeme” change in Cuba and backed down at the last minute that would later create the Cuban Missilie Crisis because Kennedy was seen as too weak by the Kremlin.

You are 0 for 2 there Barry.

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM

If Bush had said something as stupid as that it would lead on all the networks, the front page of the New York Times, and would be a 10 minute bit on the Daily Show.

Mr. Excitement on May 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Great writing Ed!!

ChefJeff on May 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM

SO is Obama arguing that he will like FDR use the A bomb and “never bat an eye ?”

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:15 PM

Do you really think he would use a “bomb” on anyone but the U.S.A.?

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 1:18 PM

If this man becomes President, I hope he does talk to Imadonkeybanger and walks away thinking he’s made real progress, then they can make an ass out of him when they don’t honor anything they agreed to.
This dude is way to naive to be President.

Geronimo on May 7, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Would Obama have supported Truman or Henry Wallace in ‘48?
Funny, 35,000 GIs died in his dialoguewar.

mymanpotsandpans on May 7, 2008 at 1:20 PM

Do you really think he would use a “bomb” on anyone but the U.S.A.?

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 1:18 PM

Beware of fake “patriots” whose only true world veiw is tha they blame fellow citizens for the problems of the world.

The left hates America because we stand up for ourselves and dont let others run over us.

The left never really get “It” that the reason that the world whines about us is that they want us weak and pliable to do their bidding. They want a pliant America for their own world schemes.

I hear too many on the left argue about “Ugly Americanism” and far too willing to turn a blind eye when China or any other nation acts in its own self interesst and against US interests. Its our fault for keeping them from keeping the US down.

Stupid.

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:22 PM

There were secret talks between the Japanese and US late in WWII. The Japanese wanted to surrender on their own terms and dictate the peace.

The Japanese ambassador was talking to Roosevelt up till, when, December 3, 1941?

mymanpotsandpans on May 7, 2008 at 1:22 PM

SO is Obama arguing that he will like FDR use the A bomb

Truman.

mymanpotsandpans on May 7, 2008 at 1:24 PM

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM

I remember reading that The Cuba missile crisis happened in large part because Kennedy performed very poorly in his meeting with Nikita Khrushchev. Khrushchev thought Kennedy was weak and could be pushed around.

TheBigOldDog on May 7, 2008 at 1:24 PM

…then he obviously hasn’t studied 20th century history.

Well, no, because he’s a CONSTITUTIONAL scholar, duh. And there’s only so many minutes in a Messiah’s day. You guys think he walks on water or something!

Again with the “Duh”.

tree hugging sister on May 7, 2008 at 1:26 PM

The Japanese ambassador was talking to Roosevelt up till, when, December 3, 1941?

mymanpotsandpans on May 7, 2008 at 1:22 PM

The japanese planned to deliver a declaration of war at 1 PM on December 7th in Washington DC the same time as their planes were bombing Pearl Harbor. SO until that time both the US and Japan were still talking peace.
However because of secrecy the japanese ambassidors translated the declartion in code themselves and took too long to do it. Japan actually declared war AFTER Pearl Harbor had been bombed.

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:26 PM

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:22 PM

William you don’t have to warn me. I have seen it everywhere I go.

Re-joining or re-enlisting in the military I have lost half of my friends, one in which spit on me. I have some good friends who understand and wishes they could join me, that are if not more so, as patriotic as I.

Patriotism isn’t something you just talk about, it is a way of life and a way of thinking. No if, and’s or but’s about it.

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 1:27 PM

I remember reading that The Cuba missile crisis happened in large part because Kennedy performed very poorly in his meeting with Nikita Khrushchev. Khrushchev thought Kennedy was weak and could be pushed around.

TheBigOldDog on May 7, 2008 at 1:24 PM

Castro also feared another invasion and pushed for Nukes to prevent it.

Truman.

mymanpotsandpans on May 7, 2008 at 1:24 PM

Truman didnt talk to the Japanese as much as FDR did he just used the bomb put you are right Truman made the call.

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:27 PM

Ah yes, I have a memory like an elephant.

Elie Abel’s book, The Missiles of October: The Story of the Cuban Missile Crisis, was published In 1966. In the book Abel comments on John Kennedy’s meeting with Khrushchev in Vienna.

There is reason to believe that Khrushchev took Kennedy’s measure at their Vienna meeting in June 1961, and decided this was a young man who would shrink from hard decisions… There is no evidence to support the belief that Khrushchev ever questioned America’s power. He questioned only the President’s readiness to use it. As he once told Robert Frost, he came to believe that Americans are “too liberal to fight.’

TheBigOldDog on May 7, 2008 at 1:29 PM

tree hugging sister on May 7, 2008 at 1:26 PM

he doesn’t know the constitution very well no does B.O. or he would have said something more “inspirational”.

And with that said… DUH!

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 1:29 PM

Truman met with Joseph Stalin during and after World War II, but that didn’t stop the Soviets from blockading West Berlin or ringing down an iron curtain across eastern Europe, enslaving those nations for almost 50 years.

Shouldn’t that be “bringing”?

One Angry Christian on May 7, 2008 at 1:30 PM

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:27 PM

Castro’s fears are immaterial. The Soviets risked nuclear war because they thought Kennedy weak and would take no action over the missles. That’s the point. That’s why talking does not always lead to beneficial results. What do you think most of the world’s leaders are going to think when they sit down across the table from Barak and Michelle?

TheBigOldDog on May 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM

The only negotiations with any entity of the German nation was between SHAEF and the Wehrmacht during the campaign in France. The Wehrmacht was willing to deliver Hitler’s head on a plate for the promise of stopping Russia. Rightly the JCS and SHAEF turned them down flat. (See Eisenhower At War).

Japan attempted talks (usually through Russia) but the unconditional surrender position of the U.S. never changed.
Only at the end of the war did the MacArthur plan win over the bomb them to hell plan. It had nothing to do with talking to Japan. It had to do with what was best for the U.S. in the post war period.

To Obama, like Carter, there are no lines in the sand. Everything is negotiable, even a murderer’s right to murder.

Limerick on May 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM

NRO

The Cuban Missile Crisis was exacerbated by Bobby Kennedy’s own back channel to the Soviets, a friendly KGB officer named Bolshakov. Bobby met with Bolshakov regularly; viewing the meetings as a means of circumventing the unwieldy diplomatic process of negotiating directly with Krushchev. Bolshakov, in turn, used the channel to deceive the Kennedy brothers and to circumvent the unwelcome caution of their advisers. Among his deceptions was reassuring Kennedy that Krushchev had no intention of placing missiles in Cuba — until the missiles were in place.

Another dupe of Communist back channels was FDR’s personal assistant, Harry Hopkins. The clueless Hopkins secretly corresponded with a Soviet spymaster named Ishkak Abdulovich Akhmerov because he thought he was a direct link to Stalin. Akhmerov called Hopkins an “agent of major significance,” albeit an “unconscious” one. (Some doubt still lingers about how “unwitting” Hopkins really was.)

In assessing the damage Lindauer might have done it is worth considering another prewar incident from Roosevelt’s administration. Roosevelt’s friend, E. Stanley Jones, a well-known Methodist preacher, offered to carry messages back and forth between Roosevelt and a Japanese diplomat, Hidenari Terasaki. Terasaki implored Roosevelt to appeal for peace directly to the emperor. He also begged Roosevelt not to mention his name owing to the risks Terasaki ran by his secret peacemaking correspondence.

Roosevelt assured Jones that Terasaki’s secret was safe, and the next day he discussed with his Cabinet the idea of an appeal to the emperor. The telegram was never sent, but Roosevelt took the message to mean the Japanese were disorganized and “running around like wet hens.” That was on December 2, 1941.

If Terasaki was trying to sow complacency and doubt about Japanese intentions while preparations for Pearl Harbor were underway, then he succeeded. And as chief of Japanese Intelligence for the Western Hemisphere, that is exactly what he was trying to do. Roosevelt — and his staff — lost valuable time worrying about Terasaki’s disinformation. Without that distraction, someone may have had time to piece together the ample information America had gathered about the impending attack.

What happened to these dupes of foreign agents? Nothing much. Stanley Jones continued a successful career as a respected worldwide evangelist. Harry Hopkins was remembered fondly as “one of the 20th century’s best government figures” by Wall Street Journal columnist Al Hunt, even after the news of his collaboration broke.

mymanpotsandpans on May 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM

Let’s chip in and buy Obama a nice umbrella.

forest on May 7, 2008 at 1:33 PM

Barry’s intelligence is on par with his liberal moron electorate.

That is to say, waaaaaaay down there…

Barry Obama, the first Affirmative action Presidential candidate.

benrand on May 7, 2008 at 1:33 PM

I listened to his speech last night, and his vision of what he thinks he is capable of doing is chilling.

He’s nuttier than I ever dreamed. He makes Wright look humble.

Hening on May 7, 2008 at 1:34 PM

the first Affirmative action Presidential candidate.

Afraid so…….

Hening on May 7, 2008 at 1:34 PM

FDR was also secretly in discussions with Churchill regarding how the US could help the war effort, in spite of the fact that he was telling the American people something else because the people did not want to go to war.

Defense Guy on May 7, 2008 at 1:36 PM

Does anyone have a reference for FDR/Truman talking with the Japanese during the war? As I remember it Tokyo contacted the USSR, which never passed it on to us. We knew about it because we pwnd their codes, but there was no dialog. This has since been transformed into backchannel negotiations by revisionists claiming the nukes were mean because the Japs were trying to give up. Am I missing something?

exception on May 7, 2008 at 1:36 PM

Just another example of how today’s Democrats do not get national security and just who our enemies are.

katieanne on May 7, 2008 at 1:37 PM

Afraid so…….

Hening on May 7, 2008 at 1:34 PM

Lets hope not.

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 1:37 PM

I cannot prophesy. I cannot tell you when or where the United Nations are going to strike next in Europe. But we are going to strike–and strike hard. I cannot tell you whether we are going to hit them in Norway, or through the Low Countries, or in France, or through Sardinia or Sicily, or through the Balkans, or through Poland–or at several points simultaneously. But I can tell you that no matter where and when we strike by land, we and the British and the Russians will hit them from the air heavily and relentlessly. Day in and day out we shall heap tons upon tons of high explosives on their war factories and utilities and seaports.

Hitler and Mussolini will understand now the enormity of their miscalculations–that the Nazis would always have the advantage of superior air power as they did when they bombed Warsaw, and Rotterdam, and London and Coventry. That superiority has gone–forever.

Yes, the Nazis and the Fascists have asked for it–and they are going to get it.

I believe this is the conversation FDR had with “our enemies.” He even broadcasted it so everyone could hear it during his State of the Union address of 1943.

moonsbreath on May 7, 2008 at 1:39 PM

Kennedy did talk with the soveits over the Cuba missile crisis but Obama and the libs always conveinently eave out that the Bay of Pigs happened under Kennedy’s watch. He launched an invasion with the idea of “Regeme” change in Cuba and backed down at the last minute that would later create the Cuban Missilie Crisis because Kennedy was seen as too weak by the Kremlin.
You are 0 for 2 there Barry.
William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM

This is the sin that few talk about. Kennedy was viewed (rightly) as a weak president and it was because of this perception that the world became a more dangerous place.

Moreover, the Missle Crisis was resolved (in part) when we agreed to remove nuclear missles from Turkey and Italy.

The beatification of Kennedy is one of history’s jokes.

While I strongly dislike Hillary, I would take her over a political novice like Obama any day. The election of Obama would mean as a nation we are internalising more perceived risk. Few doubt that if push came to shove that Hillary would deal strongly with bad people. I don’t think the same could be said about Obama.

moxie_neanderthal on May 7, 2008 at 1:41 PM

I blame the TOM HANKS video where Hanks compares the Obamassiah to FDR, Truman, and JFK.

I think the Obamassiah has taken that ball from Hanks and now he’s running with it… and he’s going to milk it like a cattle tycoon dairy farmer going for a bucket record.

Standby for further delusions of grandeur with self-comparisons to Mahatma Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself once Martin Sheen, Tim Robbins, and Susan Sarandon produce and release their celebrity MySpace videos.

SilverStar830 on May 7, 2008 at 1:41 PM

I guess writing “suck this” on the 2 nukes we dropped on Japan could be considered “Truman talking to our enemies”.

Chuck Schick on May 7, 2008 at 1:43 PM

To Obama, like Carter, there are no lines in the sand. Everything is negotiable, even a murderer’s right to murder.

Limerick on May 7, 2008 at 1:32 PM

Well put and on point given Obama’s relativist views vis a vis his friendships and associations.

moxie_neanderthal on May 7, 2008 at 1:45 PM

Can we please, please talk about what Obama said here instead of Ayers and Dohrn? This is a substantial issue. It’s why Obama must not be president if we can help it. Ayers and Dohrn are the type of silly little sideshow that put people off from the Republican Party.

thuja on May 7, 2008 at 1:47 PM

I don’t know which Roosevelt Obama talking about, but they both fought wars against American enemies and won. Kennedy told the Russians to get the missiles out of Cuba or prepare to be nuked. And Truman dropped two atomic bombs on Japan. Yeah, these guys “talked” to the enemy alright.

Maxx on May 7, 2008 at 1:48 PM

I cant wait til the MSM asks him about this it’s gonna be… oh, right.

Dash on May 7, 2008 at 1:49 PM

Heck, he’s not even elected President and B.O. is already rewriting history?

It took Bubba Billy getting into the first two years of his second term before he got into that!

pilamaye on May 7, 2008 at 1:51 PM

How can so many white people be so fvckin’ dumb??????

Andy in Agoura Hills on May 7, 2008 at 1:51 PM

How can so many white people be so fvckin’ dumb??????

Andy in Agoura Hills on May 7, 2008 at 1:51 PM

So much to blame, so little time.

I say start from the beggining… Parents and teachers.

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 1:53 PM

I’m getting the impression from Barry that he really is not that bright, nor is his wife.

They may have nice pieces of paper on the wall, but grade inflation surely was involved.

Wouldn’t want to hurt Michelle’s fragile self-esteem.

Not only an affirmative-action candidate, but one with self-esteem issues.

Gotta love the fruits of liberalism.

benrand on May 7, 2008 at 1:53 PM

he doesn’t know the constitution very well no does B.O.

Well, duh!

tree hugging sister on May 7, 2008 at 1:54 PM

What some on here don’t realize, is that this is the MSM/Lefts tactic for quite some time…

Its called revisionist history.

Prime Example? Viet Nam. When we left Viet Nam, North Viet Nam had essentialy surrendered and stopped their overt aggresion to the south. Linebacker II had prooven that we could and would destroy the North, and they caved.

It was two years later, AFTER the Dems in Congress passed a Law saying that we could no longer spend any money supporting South Viet Nam, that the North invaded. Without American air support the South fell.

The MSM and Left have painted what was a Victory, and then a giving up on an allie, as an American Military loss.

Just as Barry is trying to do in Iraq…. we are winning, and he is willing to give away victory.

PS: One of Bin Laden’s writings states that the American collapse in Viet Nam is one of the driving forces behind the idea that America is decadent, and that the Jihad has a good chance.

Romeo13 on May 7, 2008 at 1:56 PM

I have just found an e-mail from Team Obama’s rapid response team discussing their top 3 possible explanations for the “FDR met with Hitler and Tojo” gaffe:

3) “Senator Obama was speaking metaphorically about FDR’s State Department engaging with both Japan and Germany to find diplomatic solutions. Diplomacy is sorely needed in a time when our nation is tired of war and desperately needs a change.”
2) “Our speechwriters found the information regarding FDR’s meeting with Hitler and Tojo on Wikipedia. We all had hope it was accurate but in the end, we had to make a change because that’s what the American people want: A hopeful change.”
1) “Karl Rove.”

ScottMcC on May 7, 2008 at 1:57 PM

There were secret talks between the Japanese and US late in WWII. The Japanese wanted to surrender on their own terms and dictate the peace.

We held talks via switzerland as I recall. Finally FDR warned the Japanese that if they didnt surrender unconditionally they would face “Terrible” consequences and Hiroshima happend.

SO is Obama arguing that he will like FDR use the A bomb and “never bat an eye ?”

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 1:15 PM

FDR was dead in April of 1945, significantly before completion of the Manhattan project (July 1945).

I believe you’re referring to the Potsdam Declaration issued in July of 1945 by Harry Truman which promised “prompt and utter destruction” if Japan did not unconditionally surrender. And Harry Truman made the decision to drop the bomb, not FDR.

spmat on May 7, 2008 at 1:58 PM

Brave Sir Barry ran away.

My collie says:

Where are those Holy Grail troubadours when ya’ need them?

CyberCipher on May 7, 2008 at 1:59 PM

His eagerness to talk to scum would explain how he came to pal around with his racist preacher/mentor and his terrorist colleagues….

Master Shake on May 7, 2008 at 2:01 PM

Standby for further delusions of grandeur with self-comparisons to Mahatma Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, and our Lord Jesus Christ himself once Martin Sheen, Tim Robbins, and Susan Sarandon produce and release their celebrity MySpace videos.

SilverStar830 on May 7, 2008 at 1:41 PM

Now, if he would just compare himself to Karl Marx it might be believable.

chewydog on May 7, 2008 at 2:02 PM

They will and do state anything at anytime. The lack of principles to lie, rewrite, thumb your nose at criticism, and then when it gets bad, blame someone else.

Squarestate on May 7, 2008 at 2:02 PM

B.O. is the worst thing to happen to the United States, and people are to blinded by ignorance to understand.

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 1:16 PM

Indeed. America as we have known it since our inception will cease to be after BHO and his ilk are in power for a while.

Grafted on May 7, 2008 at 2:03 PM

…but of course, that is exaclty what liberals dream about.

Grafted on May 7, 2008 at 2:04 PM

How can so many white people be so fvckin’ dumb??????

Six question marks. One for each IQ point.

mymanpotsandpans on May 7, 2008 at 2:05 PM

There would be one positive to an Obama presidency…….

It would give volumes and volumes of material for the late-night comedians.

subbottomfeeder on May 7, 2008 at 2:08 PM

Obama doesn’t need to convince Amerikkkans that pulling out of Iraq is not a surrender. He needs to convince the Muslim world that it is not a surrender.

Only problem is, they won’t fall for it.

Riposte on May 7, 2008 at 2:09 PM

Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

TheBigOldDog on May 7, 2008 at 1:16 PM

What about those that cannot grasp the concept altogether? He’d take us to new, exciting and unexplored depths.

TexasDan on May 7, 2008 at 2:11 PM

Brave Sir Barry ran away.

My collie says:

Where are those Holy Grail troubadours when ya’ need them?

CyberCipher on May 7, 2008 at 1:59 PM

In the frozen land of Nador, they were
forced to eat Robin’s minstrels … and
there was much rejoicing …

db on May 7, 2008 at 2:12 PM

Obama believes he can change history.

This is in referrence to the past.

Shy Guy on May 7, 2008 at 2:12 PM

Well, duh!

tree hugging sister on May 7, 2008 at 1:54 PM

Maybe I misread you wrong. If so, sorry. Not like I can tell how some people are via text.

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 2:15 PM

FDR talked to our enemies: Joseph Stalin, Harry Dexter White, Harry Hopkins…

Akzed on May 7, 2008 at 2:16 PM

If Potsdam and Yalta are Obama’s idea of successful foreign policy, then he obviously hasn’t studied 20th century history.

Those that forget the past are doomed to repeat it. Obama is clueless, naive, and his views and agenda are dangerous to our security, not to mention he doesn’t have the foreign affairs experience or understanding needed especially at this dangerous and volatile time in our history!

Couple the above with the fact (based on his associates, Rev. Wright, Ayers, et al) we don’t know for sure to who or where his allegiance lay and how he truly feels about America, although we have gotten a fairly good glimpse lately of what his agenda is and where his allegiances are based on the company he keeps.

Bottom line is if Obama is elected our next POTUS our nation will be in deep Shiite!

Liberty or Death on May 7, 2008 at 2:17 PM

You sir, are not Roosevelt or Truman…

d1carter on May 7, 2008 at 2:18 PM

trust the American people to understand that it is not weakness, but wisdom to talk not just to our friends, but to our enemies, like Roosevelt did, and Kennedy did, and Truman did.

The question is not how we understand a willingness to talk, but how our enemies understand it. Radical islam sees negotiation as an admission of weakness. For example, when Israel, as part of negotiations with the Palestinian Authority, offered of 96% of the West Bank and Gaza for a Palestinian state, the response was a torrent of suicide bombers.

Bigfoot on May 7, 2008 at 2:25 PM

It is gonna be a grand day when Michelle Obama breaks that champaign bottle over the bow latest U.S. Navy ship to combat terrorism…..the U.S.S. MealsOnWheels. That’ll show em’!

Limerick on May 7, 2008 at 2:27 PM

Everyone should now know what BO means when he speaks of “change”. His knowledge of American Presidential politics and decision making is grounded in the view of hard left America.

Yes he will talk to our enemies and yes we will feel the blowback from those talks.

I saw saw this speech last night in real time and was left scratching my head in wonder of his grasp of history. It now seems like BO prefers the re-write version in lieu of stubborn facts.

swami on May 7, 2008 at 2:28 PM

FDR did actually meet with political enemies in hammering through the New Deal and as the war progressed. Exactly how many times has Obama offered to meet with Preident Bush over the past three years? I believe the answer lies somewhere between -1 and 1.

scatbug on May 7, 2008 at 2:28 PM

Bottom line is if Obama is elected our next POTUS our nation will be in deep Shiite!

Liberty or Death on May 7, 2008 at 2:17 PM

Start buying cold weather seeds, exra water and a really neat fire starter… just in case!

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 2:36 PM

It is gonna be a grand day when Michelle Obama breaks that champaign bottle over the bow latest U.S. Navy ship to combat terrorism…..the U.S.S. MealsOnWheels. That’ll show em’!

Limerick on May 7, 2008 at 2:27 PM

Better make that Halal meals on wheels.

forest on May 7, 2008 at 2:37 PM

I guess writing “suck this” on the 2 nukes we dropped on Japan could be considered “Truman talking to our enemies”.

Chuck Schick on May 7, 2008 at 1:43 PM

Heh, why yes that would be considered “talking to our enemies” and should be the ONLY talking we do with our enemies until they unconditionally surrender!

About the only thing Obama would drop on our enemies would be notifications of our surrender and flowers! The guy doesn’t have the clankers to be POTUS especially at this time in our history with so much at stake!

As someone once said (can’t remember who) appeasement is merely fear disguised as peace!

Liberty or Death on May 7, 2008 at 2:40 PM

He has a history of doing just what he said.

He’s reached out to the disenfranchised, the preachers of hate and division. He’s spoken with terrorists, broken bread with them and worked hard to bring them all into the Democratic Party democratic process.

moxie_neanderthal on May 7, 2008 at 2:48 PM

If anyone can sit down and have a talk and a meal with people who hate our country and mean it harm, it is Barak Obama!

moxie_neanderthal on May 7, 2008 at 2:49 PM

Start buying cold weather seeds, exra water and a really neat fire starter… just in case!

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 2:36 PM

Heh, thanks upinak, I’ll be sure to bookmark the site as the way things are going we’ll all need some survival gear!

Liberty or Death on May 7, 2008 at 2:49 PM

Faking history to find your needs 101.

- The Cat

MirCat on May 7, 2008 at 2:52 PM

Find = Fit

MirCat on May 7, 2008 at 2:52 PM

A combination of Neville Chamberlain and Jimmy Carter is not the foreign policy combination you want in a world leader, but if Obama is elected president, we’ll just have to watch him get his eyes opened just like those two, after damage already has been done (and when failure to act would threaten his 2012 re-election chances, in the same way he didn’t do anything about Rev. Wright until it threatened his primary hopes).

But I suppose Barak’s World War II history could have been worse — He could have said Germany bombed Pearl Harbor. Then we’d have to start calling him Senator Blutarsky.

jon1979 on May 7, 2008 at 2:53 PM

Roosevelt talked to Hitler and Tojo?

If by talking, he means we bombed them senseless until they gave up.

ThePrez on May 7, 2008 at 3:14 PM

Abandon Iraq, and oil goes to how much a barrel?
Let Iran get a nuke, and oil goes to how much a barrel?
Tell oil companies you’re going to take away their profits, and what will they do to the price of oil?
Put MORE pressure on Saudi re the GWOT, and what happens to the price of oil?

Let’s see, it’s on course to be $150 a barrel by Innauguration Day (if not more). How much will food cost to grow (combines don’t run on ethanol), to transport (BJ McKay’s truck does’t run on banannas), to prepare (is that a gas burner baking my Cheez-Its or are they baked in a solar oven), to transport to the distributor, to transport to the store, and to transport home (not a joke if you have an SUV that gets 18mpg with a grocery store 9miles from home at $5 a gal)?

These questions and more will be answered by President Obama…

..no?

scottm on May 7, 2008 at 3:19 PM

The problem with the Dems is that they don’t see the thugs we are fighting in Iraq as the “enemy.” Therefore, they don’t believe that withdrawing from Iraq is a surrender. Of course, our enemies will certainly view it as surrender, and it will embolden them. In the second year of Obama’s term, he will have to attack Iraq after AQI or JAM launches a terror attack in the U.S. Of course, he will prefer the Clinton strategy. He will lob a couple of million dollar cruise missiles at empty tents and empty buildings. This will convince the Muslims that we are the cowards they thought we were before 9/11. And all hell will break lose. The man is naive and dangerous.

fleiter on May 7, 2008 at 3:27 PM

Heh, thanks upinak, I’ll be sure to bookmark the site as the way things are going we’ll all need some survival gear!

Liberty or Death on May 7, 2008 at 2:49 PM

Are you kidding! If you need anything, let me know. I am the survival gear queen! What I don’t have is that neat fire starter that Les had on Survivorman for the Alaska edition. I can’t find it! But what it is, is a pressure starter. You put a bit of dry wood into a cylinder, put the cylinder into it’s own holder and with a hard push or slap (depending on how wet the wood is) you have a ember via the pressure, air and how you hit the top. VERY cool! I will let you know if I find it.

upinak on May 7, 2008 at 3:29 PM

McCain wins in a landslide.

RobCon on May 7, 2008 at 3:29 PM

History must be an elective to liberals that few choose to take

Defector01 on May 7, 2008 at 1:17 PM

Actually, it’s being rewritten in the schools. These ignorance issues will only increase while U.S.A.’s schools continue teaching the relativism and historical revisionism.

Long live classical education!

shick on May 7, 2008 at 3:38 PM

An important read is the Japanese defense plans for the Japanese Homeland called KETSU-GO. They planned to kill as many American servicemen as possible to still win the war.

http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/arens/chap4.htm

OPERATION KETSU-GO

The sooner the Americans come, the better…One hundred million die proudly.

The strategy for Ketsu-Go was outlined in an 8 April 1945 Army Directive.(4) It stated that the Imperial Army would endeavor to crush the Americans while the invasion force was still at sea. They planned to deliver a decisive blow against the American naval force by initially destroying as many carriers as possible, utilizing the special attack forces of the Air Force and Navy. When the amphibious force approached within range of the homeland airbases, the entire air combat strength would be employed in continual night and day assaults against these ships. In conducting the air operations, the emphasis would be on the disruption of the American landing plans. The principal targets were to be the troop and equipment transports. Those American forces which succeeded in landing would be swiftly attacked by the Imperial Army in order to seek the decisive victory. The principal objective of the land operation was the destruction of the American landing force on the beach.

The intent of Ketsu-Go was to inflict tremendous casualties on the American forces, thereby undermining the American people’s will to continue the fight for Japan’s unconditional surrender. This intent is clear in a boastful comment made by an IGHQ army staff officer in July 1945:

We will prepare 10,000 planes to meet the landing of the enemy. We will mobilize every aircraft possible, both training and “special attack” planes. We will smash one third of the enemy’s war potential with this air force at sea. Another third will also be smashed at sea by our warships, human torpedoes and other special weapons. Furthermore, when the enemy actually lands, if we are ready to sacrifice a million men we will be able to inflict an equal number of casualties upon them. If the enemy loses a million men, then the public opinion in America will become inclined towards peace, and Japan will be able to gain peace with comparatively advantageous conditions

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 3:51 PM

This from a graduate of an “elite” ivy league school. He definitely was not on the debate team.

right2bright on May 7, 2008 at 3:57 PM

If you’re going to emulate a president for their foreign policy prowess, Roosevelt is not the best choice. Remember, Roosevelt did not even declare war on Germany after Pearl Harbor was attacked by Japan . . . he waited for Germany to declare war on us. Roosevelt was dragged screaming and kicking into WWII.

rplat on May 7, 2008 at 5:21 PM

And that diplomatic contact didn’t stop war from coming; indeed, it make it much worse than it otherwise would have been, at least in Europe, had the US, UK, and France had taken the appropriate steps to disarm Hitler when he started his Versailles Treaty violations.

With what armies? With hindsight stopping Hitler early would have been the right thing, but Great Britain and the United States had militaries that were in weakened states and populations that wanted to avoid a sequel to the Great War.

dedalus on May 7, 2008 at 5:34 PM

Of course, our enemies will certainly view it as surrender, and it will embolden them.

fleiter on May 7, 2008 at 3:27 PM

Embolden? I’ve always thought that bin Laden and other Islamic fundamentalists already had their hatred meters dialed up to 11.

dedalus on May 7, 2008 at 5:38 PM

With what armies?

In 1936, when Germany broke its treaty and remilitarized the Rhineland, the French army was vastly superior to the Germans. Hitler bluffed, and the French folded, under pressure from Britain. In 1939, the French and the British could have ended the war by attacking Germany while their forces attacked Poland. Poland and everyone else expected them to do just that.

In fact, France had a larger army in 1940 than Germany, too. It didn’t help. Read William Shirer to find out why.

Ed Morrissey on May 7, 2008 at 5:45 PM

Marxist revisionist history. Obama didn’t read the same history books I did. Maybe he ought to watch History Channel and get a clue.

katieanne on May 7, 2008 at 5:47 PM

With what armies? With hindsight stopping Hitler early would have been the right thing, but Great Britain and the United States had militaries that were in weakened states and populations that wanted to avoid a sequel to the Great War.

dedalus on May 7, 2008 at 5:34 PM

the 30’s were one of the few periods of isolatinism in the US, the whole “America First” thing. the consenus was isolationism was the way to go, we snapped out of that after 9/11 and haven’t gone back, though flirting with it now amazingly.

today, we do have an army to take on our enemies, just don’t have the will to use it and assert ourselves.

jp on May 7, 2008 at 5:54 PM

In 1936, when Germany broke its treaty and remilitarized the Rhineland, the French army was vastly superior to the Germans. Hitler bluffed, and the French folded, under pressure from Britain.

People dont realize that Germany didnt have control of the Rhur the largest industrial part of Germany until they marched in 1936 and the French let them. The Treaty of Versalles prohibited German use of the Rhur.

Flash back to 1993 and Iraq and watch as Saddam attempted to rebuild his armies. The ONLY thing that prevented him was sanctions and the US military keeping him weak. Hitler in 1936 to 1939 built a war machine that almost conquered all of europe. Saddam had the French and Russians trying to remove sanctions that would have allowed Iraq to rearm with even more modern weaponry. Operation Iraqi freedom was as much a necessity as an effort to remove Hitler in 1936 could have been.

William Amos on May 7, 2008 at 5:56 PM

If Potsdam and Yalta are Obama’s idea of successful foreign policy, then he obviously hasn’t studied 20th century history.

Don’t be ridiculous, Ed. He was an affirmative action admission to Columbia, so he wouldn’t know shit about U.S. history before entered that communist enclave, and he sure as hell wouldn’t learn U.S. history there, where it is taught in a Bizarro World atmosphere.

And then he attended Harvard. Nuff said.

Jaibones on May 7, 2008 at 6:07 PM

If history is inconvenient, you simply re-write it!!

landlines on May 7, 2008 at 6:10 PM

Comment pages: 1 2


You must be logged in to post a comment.