Interesting prespective

Help Support CattleToday:


Well-known member
Dec 28, 2003
Reaction score
MO Ozarks
This takes the "Meet the Press" questions of today and places them in a fictitious interview with FDR. Certainly is thought provoking about our media elite. Meet the Press-January 1945

Moderator: Mr. President, thank you for joining us. I must say you look a bit tired.
FDR: Glad to be here and I would have to say that I am tired. It has not been easy these past 13 years.
Moderator: People have been asking some tough questions about this war, the first one being whether we knew about Pearl Harbor before hand and whether we could have done something to prevent it.

FDR: We certainly knew that the Japanese military was aggressive and threatening us, but we did not have enough information to conclude that the IJN would attack as Far East as Hawaii. That said we had issued numerous warnings to military commanders in Hawaii. In retrospect they made some wrong decisions. The fleet should not have been at pier side while negotiations with the Japanese were going on and AAF planes should have been dispersed, but these conditions existed because of what we thought might occur. The IJN tactics were as much a surprise as the attack itself.

Moderator: What do you say to those who think that we pushed the Japanese too hard, that our economic imperialism in the Pacific forced Japan to attack?

FDR: You're kidding, right?
Moderator: I am just quoting what others are saying.
FDR: Japan was bent on conquest. Our abdication in the Pacific would only have allowed the evil of Japanese Imperialism to afflict others.

Moderator: "Evil?" Isn't that simplistic?
FDR: Yes, but the truth doesn't have to be complex. In fact most basic truths are simple.
Moderator: What about those who say that what you really wanted was a war with Germany? Your actions with lend lease, your close association with the British Prime Minister - someone many have labeled a war monger - and your agreeing with Churchill that Germany not Japan should be the primary target of the Allies in this war would all indicate that Peal Harbor was just an excuse to attack Hitler.

FDR: Just quoting others again are we?
Moderator: The quotes are accurate. I can show you the sources if you wish. They come from much respected leaders and experts.

FDR: I do not think I needed to invent excuses for a war with Germany.
Moderator: But many of these same experts point out that Hitler is a result of Versailles. Our interference and degradation of Germany helped bring the Nazis to power so aren't we to blame.

FDR: That's absurd.
Moderator: Are these questions hitting home Mr. President?
FDR: They are not even hitting the barn, which is why it is so difficult to take them seriously.
Moderator: Are you refusing to answer the question? Do you have something to hide?
FDR: I can answer it. An evil regime, like an evil person always has an excuse to do evil. The rapist will blame the woman's manner of dress or his mother's treatment of him, but the fact is he is first the rapist. The excuse comes later and allows him to live with what he has done. We are in a war in which 40 to 60-millions will die because no one did anything about Herr Hitler when he was nothing more than the leader of a street gang.

Moderator: "Gang leader;" more inflammatory rhetoric Mr. President?
FDR: I should think that one of the least objectionable titles he has earned.
Moderator: Mr. President, is this kind of talk helpful? This is the kind of thing that has alienated some of our allies such as Spain, Argentina and Vichy France. Our current so-called allies all have something to gain from Hitler's defeat. Britain, Poland, Norway and Czechoslovakia all have an axe to grind. Czech partisans even killed Reinhardt Heydrich. The result was a campaign of murder by the SS. How can you condone that?

FDR: This is a war, not a diplomatic negotiation.
Moderator: Let's turn back to the Pacific for a moment. The cost is staggering. At Tarawa 800 American Marines died and nearly 3,000 wounded taking an island of 285 acres - was it worth it?

FDR: Their lives will be wasted only if we fail to win.
Moderator: Let's talk about Japanese resistance. Using Tarawa again, there were only 17 POW's out of a garrison of nearly 5,000. What makes them hate us so much that they are willing to kill themselves? In Saipan, whole families have committed suicide rather than fall into American hands. We are now seeing the Kamikazes with men willingly flying to a fiery death to kill Americans. How do you explain that?

FDR: How does one explain the willingness of people to die for evil or kill for evil? We know there are young men stationed as guards in concentration camps who are killing women, children by the tens of thousands. A few years ago these same guards might have been delightful dinner guests or people we might have enjoyed to have along on an outing. It is not so far from being willing to kill to being willing to die if that is what you have been made to believe. One need not account for how these people have come to do evil until after they are stopped. When evil is allowed to grow strong then one comes to where we are today, engaged in a terrible conflagration.

Moderator: That is an excellent segue to my final question. Mr. President, with nearly a quarter of a million American dead aren't you afraid that history will remember you as butcher?

FDR: Only if you get to write the history.
This was very well done. I'm certainly no fan of FDR. However, he was a man of sterling character, impeccable judgment and unquestionable patriotism compared to the so-called leadership of his party these days. For many decades the Democratic party has been long on government control and spending and short on the ideals and values that made the US great, but today's contemporary Democratic party is utterly bankrupt. The radicals have completely taken over and the lunatics are running the asylum. That's why good people like Sam Nun, Zell Miller, et al have gone home.

I've never voted a straight party ticket in my life but the only thing that has kept me from doing it is that both parties (in this area) have had good people running for local office. Around here it's still possible to have a Democrat holdover who is more conservative and/or capable than the Republican candidate. It's becoming more rare, though.


Latest posts