Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion
FAQ Calendar Arcade Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-12-2004, 03:42 PM   #11
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
Well, I'd like to know how much Pearl Harbor was used for advertisement come re-election time. That would explainify a lot to me re: expected decorum.
__________________
Timber Loftis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2004, 04:53 PM   #12
Ronn_Bman
Zartan
 

Join Date: March 11, 2001
Location: North Carolina USA
Age: 58
Posts: 5,177
That Roosevelt was one more war mongeror, riding his party's dun-key as far as it would take him.

Ever heard the one about FDR and his party faithful just salivating over the opportunity to go to war despite the fact that there was no need?

That the war was his big chance to become king by running for an unprecedented 3rd term, and then 4th term?

How he never really cared, but simply used the war and it's victims to his advantage for political purpose?

How about the one where he and his co-conspirators knew the attack was coming but purposely did nothing to stop it, and in fact, used their influence to further blind our forces to it in the hopes the attack would be sufficiently devastating to insight the US population?

How about the one where he actually forced Japan to attack us through his political maneuvers with them when all they wanted was to get along?

Do you know how many countries he pissed off with the old we're gonna run the show mentality?

Yep, he was one bad president who left a lot of people looking for Anybody But Roosevelt come election time. Heck they finally had to pass a Constitutional Amendment to keep any other crazy SOB from winning the vote of the people 4 times.

That was one scary dude.

Quote:
Originally Posted By Timber:
Well, I'd like to know how much Pearl Harbor was used for advertisement come re-election time. That would explainify a lot to me re: expected decorum.
My researchification suggests people in general and politicians in particular were a lot more respectful in those days, and that none of the members of 'the greatest generation' would have ever stooped, so low.

Much as during the 50's no one would have ever politicized Korea/The Red Menace, or in the 60's Civil Rights/Vietnam/Assassinations, or in the 70's Watergate/Women's Rights/Billy Beer, or in the 80's some evil empire/the spelling of potato(e), or in the 90's a greedy, imperialistic war for oil/cigar insertions.

Those people realized how serious those issues were and would never allow politics to enter into consideration. Boy, this is sure a different generation we're living in.

[ 09-12-2004, 09:03 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]
__________________
[img]\"http://home.carolina.rr.com/orthanc/pics/Spinning%20Hammer%20Sig%20Pic.gif\" alt=\" - \" />
Ronn_Bman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2004, 05:46 PM   #13
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
Ummm... a little info/facts might help me separate out your sarcasm there, Ronn.
Timber Loftis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2004, 07:37 PM   #14
Ronn_Bman
Zartan
 

Join Date: March 11, 2001
Location: North Carolina USA
Age: 58
Posts: 5,177
Well, I was pointing out some similarities between the past and the present, but there is no ONE definitive site on Roosevelt as you might imagine. Most of those things, though, I'd heard well before the dawn of this new millennium.

Do a Google on 'Roosevelt campaign Pearl Harbor,' and you'll find lots of goodies that just seem so silly and others that seem plausible even though the test of time and the 20/20 vision history offers make them unlikely. Some claims exist from the era and others have developed over the years.

EDIT - Also try Googling 'FDR conspiracy'. There are just so many sites, and so many of them are ridiculous, that it really isn't worth posting individual links.

NOTE - I wasn't being a smart-ass to you, Timber; I was being a smart-ass in general.

[ 09-12-2004, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]
__________________
[img]\"http://home.carolina.rr.com/orthanc/pics/Spinning%20Hammer%20Sig%20Pic.gif\" alt=\" - \" />
Ronn_Bman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2004, 07:53 PM   #15
Ronn_Bman
Zartan
 

Join Date: March 11, 2001
Location: North Carolina USA
Age: 58
Posts: 5,177
Here is one of Roosevelt's fireside chats, given just days before the election in 1940. He certainly wasn't using the war in an election bid.

[ 09-12-2004, 07:54 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]
__________________
[img]\"http://home.carolina.rr.com/orthanc/pics/Spinning%20Hammer%20Sig%20Pic.gif\" alt=\" - \" />
Ronn_Bman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2004, 08:11 AM   #16
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
You know, Ronn, that's some good researchification, but what I DO NOT see in there is where FDR says voting for the other side will result in some catastrophe. In fact, that fireside chat IS much more civil and less partisan than anything we see today. Thanks for the link, but I'm not nearly as convinced as you that he is using the war to say "vote for me."

And, again, my real interest lies in his fireside chats AFTER the war -- and those of the other presidents. Specifically, I'm concerned as to whether or not Pearl Harbor, the only thing really like 9/11, was ever used by an incumbent.

Can there be any doubt that Bush's ads showing the airplanes hitting the towers, etc, are in the poorest taste -- something only a [edited by author] could come up with?????

[ 09-13-2004, 11:45 AM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]
__________________
Timber Loftis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2004, 11:03 AM   #17
Ronn_Bman
Zartan
 

Join Date: March 11, 2001
Location: North Carolina USA
Age: 58
Posts: 5,177
No doubt about ads containing the tower attacks being in poor taste. Thank goodness I haven't seen those.

The Cheney remarks are quite honestly a bit much, too. Straight talk appeals to many, but it is a turn off to others. The truth is the specific nature of that comment is it's main down fall. Is it really that different though than Kerry/Edwards saying the war on terror has gone wrong, and we need them to handle things correctly. Since Kerry would have done everything differently isn't the implication that Bush did everything wrong? Aren't they really saying that they are trying to prevent a catastrophy under another 4 years of the Bush Administration?

Even beyond the issue of symantics, who hasn't heard the argument that Bush has made another attack on America more likely? I've heard this said over and over on the news channels, so why is what Cheney said about Kerry so controversial?

Back on topic, I took a class on US Presidential history back in the day, and it was made clear that FDR used the war as his justification for breaking Washington's self imposed two term limit, which had been honored for nearly 150 years, and that he did campaign on the war. Now in my opinion, this was no big deal. It would have been impossible for him to campaign without addressing the war because it was the most pressing issue of the day. It was also common for his opponents to questions FDR's handling of the war, and the events leading up to the war. After all, you couldn't really say 'FDR is doing a great job with the war, but I still want you to let me have a try at it." It was an interesting class in mud slinging. I wish I'd kept the book.

I don't think you are going to find any of FDR's fireside chats from after the war( ), but to me those made in '40 and '44 would be most pertinent because America's entry into that war was the direct result of Pearl Harbor.

There is no doubt that the things said publicly in those days may have been milder. After all, those were the days when Presidential secretaries sleeping with their bosses wasn't newsworthy.

I don't know if Truman or Ike used Pearl Harbor. Now, one of Ike's opponents during his election run was about his service during the war. What he did, where he did it, etc. Lot's of questions about his actions, while his opponent claimed to have been a better soldier. Now I know you are saying, how could anyone hope to compare war records with Ike and win, but it is really quite simple. No one could compete with his WWII resume, so his opponent attacked him on his service in WWI.

I do know what you are talking about though, and I'll try to find some specifics. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 09-13-2004, 11:40 AM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]
__________________
[img]\"http://home.carolina.rr.com/orthanc/pics/Spinning%20Hammer%20Sig%20Pic.gif\" alt=\" - \" />
Ronn_Bman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2004, 01:01 PM   #18
Ronn_Bman
Zartan
 

Join Date: March 11, 2001
Location: North Carolina USA
Age: 58
Posts: 5,177
This is commentary from a discussion by historians comparing this year's RNC and the similarities between this election year and previous ones.

I wish they'd gone into more detail, but their comparisons where not limited to FDR, though this does begin to give some insight as to whether or not his opposition was willing to use Pearl Harbor against FDR.

Quote:
Another parallel the historians discussed was Franklin Delano Roosevelt's re-election campaign in 1944. Beschloss argued that the parallels were suggestive. Despite tangible successes in the war, Roosevelt was being scrutinized as officials probed the reason the nation had been caught sleeping when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. Thomas Dewey in a speech "suggested that Roosevelt was in some way responsible for Pearl Harbor," which Beschloss pointed out put Roosevelt in a "very risky situation."
Even at that, Dewey hadn't campaigned as strongly on Pearl Harbor as he had wanted to.

Quote:
There are secrets to keep off the campaign trail. Also in 1944, Army Chief-of-Staff George C. Marshall implored Republican presidential nominee Thomas E. Dewey not to make an issue out of Pearl Harbor. Although Dewey believed FDR had compromised the nation's security with respect to the surprise attack, he accepted Marshall's argument that too much talk about the preparedness issue might let the Japanese know that the US. had cracked their diplomatic code. Let us hope that every campaigner will accede to legitimate requests by military personnel, after taking time and thought before deeming them legitimate.
As the article states, he did the right thing by holding his accusations down in the interests of national security. But it was in the interest of national security and not some sense of reverence for those lost or the sanctity of December 7th.



My guess is that the campaign was suggesting he was a 'Gallent War Time Leader'. I still haven't found a particular passage about Pearl Harbor, but you have to remember, closing in on election day '44, there had been nearly 3 years of war for the US resulting in tens of thousands of deaths at the hands of the Japanese. Pearl Harbor was horrific, but the magnitude of that attack was replayed many times even if the surprise was not.

[ 09-13-2004, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]
__________________
[img]\"http://home.carolina.rr.com/orthanc/pics/Spinning%20Hammer%20Sig%20Pic.gif\" alt=\" - \" />
Ronn_Bman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2004, 02:12 PM   #19
Ronn_Bman
Zartan
 

Join Date: March 11, 2001
Location: North Carolina USA
Age: 58
Posts: 5,177
A 1944 Roosevelt "Remember Pearl Harbor" campaign button.

I thought this was going to be it, but as fate would have it, it is a fake. Well, not *exactly* a fake.

It is one of 10 ceramic plaques made by Jack Ruby in 1942. It is even mentioned in the Warren Report(yes that Jack Ruby).
__________________
[img]\"http://home.carolina.rr.com/orthanc/pics/Spinning%20Hammer%20Sig%20Pic.gif\" alt=\" - \" />
Ronn_Bman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2004, 04:05 PM   #20
Ilander
20th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: December 28, 2003
Location: Kentucky
Age: 39
Posts: 2,820
Seriously, what's with the surprise? I knew the attack on September 11th 2001 was going to be a political football on September 12th 2001. I'm not sure why you all are surprised.
__________________

Is that what you really want to say?
Ilander is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
'Election timetable' shamrock_uk General Discussion 0 11-02-2004 07:18 AM
SIG REQUEST THREAD /Sept 2 Spirits forever General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 92 09-03-2004 06:13 PM
election DrowArchmage General Discussion 7 08-08-2004 04:21 AM
Next Module to be announced in Sept!! Ziroc NWN Mod: Escape from Undermountain 6 08-22-2003 11:29 AM
A "Dr. Seuss" perspective on Sept. 11 Sazerac General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 6 09-27-2001 07:35 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2024 Ironworks Gaming & ©2024 The Great Escape Studios TM - All Rights Reserved