Re:Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars
by hackuser on Wednesday April 19, 2017 @08:38PM
(#14153042)
I've heard that too, but how did the draft, Lend-Lease, and the build-up get passed through Congress before Pearl Harbor if there wasn't sufficient support?
Maybe the first and third were seen as necessary to protect a neutral country? Or being short of declaring war, they were less objectionable? But I'm just guessing ...
Re:Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars
by jcranmer on Wednesday April 19, 2017 @10:17PM
(#14153448)
> I've heard that too, but how did the draft, Lend-Lease, and the build-up get passed through Congress before Pearl Harbor if there wasn't sufficient support?
Lend-Lease had fairly staunch resistance, as it basically shredded any pretense of neutrality. The draft and the military build-up were supported in large part due to neutrality--the need to have a sufficiently strong military to deter potential aggression (this was the strategy of Switzerland). When FDR extended the draft term from 12 months to 18 months, it passed by a single vote in the House.
Re:Why 1866 Set the Stage for Two World Wars
by bluejekyll on Wednesday April 19, 2017 @09:34PM
(#14153278)
My guess is that most people were already aligned with the Allies, and there was money to be made. I think the arguments for Germany were less of a "let's join Germany" and more of a "let's just not get involved", thereby seeding the European continent to Germany.
But, yes the US had a constant stream of arms being supplied to Britain and Russia during the period before the war.
But, until Pearl Harbor and the Philippines there was no clear pretext for the US to declare war. And had they not attacked, it's not clear that FDR could have gotten congress to declare war. Some of those prominent supporters were significant industrialists like Ford, they would have fought intervention by all means.
After Pearl Harbor, there was no debate.