TheLiberalForums.com Logo.
Click here to view our online shop!

    SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
The time now is Fri Nov 21, 2008 7:45 pm
TheLiberalForums.com Forum Index
View unanswered posts

Liberal of the Month
Barack Obama
Barack Obama

Sponsors

Submitted Articles
What is a Liberal?
How Liberalism evolved?

 Search 


RomeForums.com Logo

HippieForums.com Logo

TheXboxBoys.com Logo

Sedo - Buy and Sell Domain Names and Websites etracker® web controlling instead of log file analysis
President Roosevelt knew about the Pearl Harbor attack ahead
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TheLiberalForums.com Forum Index -> History
Author Message
lpstong
Mayor's Aide


Joined: 02 Dec 2005
Posts: 51
Location: California

PostPosted: Fri Dec 09, 2005 9:02 am    Post subject: President Roosevelt knew about the Pearl Harbor attack ahead Reply with quote

I watched a documentary on WWII and the Pearl Harbor attack(History Channel). Since it was the anniversary of the attack on December 8. I the documentary it said that the US has codebreakers and that they broke a code from the Japanese fore telling of the attack. This information apparently came across the Presidents desk I think they said march or may of that year. Later historians say that he let the attack happen so that the US had a reason to enter the war justifiably. And that the public would accept his reason of entering the war. They had other historian to debate this about President Roosevelts reasons of entering the war. But the information giving from the codebreakers are factual and can was just recently opened under the freedom of information act.
Back to top
phil
Mayor


Joined: 09 Nov 2005
Posts: 174
Location: Seattle

PostPosted: Sat Dec 10, 2005 2:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

hmmmmmm. Interesting...



P Twisted Evil
Back to top
Xterminator45
Mayor's Aide


Joined: 08 Dec 2005
Posts: 52

PostPosted: Wed Dec 14, 2005 2:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This is supposed to be in the conspiracy section....

I know a little bit about it.

Basically in a nutshell, he knew about it, he let it go, so he could attack Japan and be done with the war.
Back to top
MHJ
Mayor's Aide


Joined: 12 Jun 2006
Posts: 118

PostPosted: Mon Jun 12, 2006 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

There are plenty of Loch Ness Monster documentaries on cable TV too

This is a conspiracy theory that has been floating around since the 1960's and is total nonsense. Read Sean Hannity's Let Freedom Ring where he debunks it. If a producer was making an Pearl Harbor Conspiracy documentary, do you really think he would give up half way into production if evidence that countermanded his stance came to light?
Back to top
bangfor1
Mayor's Aide


Joined: 21 Oct 2006
Posts: 88

PostPosted: Mon Nov 27, 2006 10:30 am    Post subject: True Reply with quote

A good number of historians had talked and written about it and they include Churchill too. And the fact that the Americans didn't not want to have anything to do with the war, in spite of the political leaders persuasion to participate was also true.
Back to top
deportliberals
Congressman


Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 704

PostPosted: Wed May 02, 2007 9:06 am    Post subject: Re: President Roosevelt knew about the Pearl Harbor attack a Reply with quote

lpstong wrote:
I watched a documentary on WWII and the Pearl Harbor attack(History Channel). Since it was the anniversary of the attack on December 8. I the documentary it said that the US has codebreakers and that they broke a code from the Japanese fore telling of the attack. This information apparently came across the Presidents desk I think they said march or may of that year. Later historians say that he let the attack happen so that the US had a reason to enter the war justifiably. And that the public would accept his reason of entering the war. They had other historian to debate this about President Roosevelts reasons of entering the war. But the information giving from the codebreakers are factual and can was just recently opened under the freedom of information act.


Yes...you are corect...as a direct result of fairly recent declassification of WWII documents it certainly appears that FDR was well aware of the location and the very day of the Pearl Harbour attack. One of the declassified documents showed FDR issuing direct orders to the two top commanders at Pearl Harbour ordering them NOT to attack Japanese vessels until they fired first. An absurd order given that we were anticipating a Japaneses attack somewhere.

And, yes, we broke both their diplomatic codes and their naval codes prior to the Pearl Harbour attack...a FACT!! Given that we could decipher all their messages prior to the attack, how is it possible that at the highest levels of our gov't that we were not aware of the Pearl Harbour sneak attack???? Libs don't want to talk about it!!!

The mainstream liberal media has done everything it can to keep this history buried. The only way you can follow the latest developments on this part of our history is to attend the lectures given about this matter. Some very renown historians are giving good coverage on the lecture circuit on this matter.
Back to top
James Rottnek
Mayor's Aide


Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Mon May 28, 2007 2:06 am    Post subject: Why this may have been good? Reply with quote

Some ways that this is good is that it finalised and secured the escape from the Great Depression. Also, there were some documents added to the WWII classifide documents and we don't know which ones. We also committed numerous war criems there. However, these were not tried because the standard definition of a war crime at that point was "anything that the allies think was unhuman that the allies didn't do is a war crime."
Back to top
deportliberals
Congressman


Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 704

PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2007 5:11 am    Post subject: Re: Why this may have been good? Reply with quote

James Rottnek wrote:
Some ways that this is good is that it finalised and secured the escape from the Great Depression.


Yeah...war always helps the economy.

Quote:

Also, there were some documents added to the WWII classifide documents and we don't know which ones.


Let's see your source for this or retract the statement.

Quote:

We also committed numerous war criems there. However, these were not tried because the standard definition of a war crime at that point was "anything that the allies think was unhuman that the allies didn't do is a war crime."



What war crimes? What's your source for this statement?? You're talking about U.S. war crimes in the face of nazi & impereal japanese war crimes where millions of innocent unarmed men, women & children were brutally slaughtered like animals...and your talkin' about U.S. war crimes???
Back to top
James Rottnek
Mayor's Aide


Joined: 28 May 2007
Posts: 65

PostPosted: Tue May 29, 2007 9:53 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The facts for the statement that you want them I can't give you as it was a show on the discovery channel. The war crimes were admitted to by former civilian engineers as they had been told to orchastrate the attack on Toyko to give the most possible deaths. This is one example.
Back to top
deportliberals
Congressman


Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 704

PostPosted: Wed May 30, 2007 4:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="James Rottnek"]The facts for the statement that you want them I can't give you as it was a show on the discovery channel.

If you saw that on the discovery channel then that info is setting out on their web site for you to go get and bring here. Let's see the additional documents were claimed above?!

Quote:

The war crimes were admitted to by former civilian engineers as they had been told to orchastrate the attack on Toyko to give the most possible deaths. This is one example.


What the hell kind of statement is that? First, you say we commited war crimes and then you say only that civilian engineers had been ordered to plan a deadly attack. What does that mean??? Planning an attack during war is now considered a war crime??? Never heard of that before!!! Get a clue...you win wars by killing the hell out of the other guys. He who kills the most wins, period!! Planning an attack to inflict the most damage on any japanese positions during WWII was NOT a firggin' war crime...IT'S CALLED WAR!!! Grow UP!
Back to top
Anonymous Mind
Mayor's Aide


Joined: 31 May 2007
Posts: 56
Location: US

PostPosted: Fri Jun 01, 2007 11:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

So how does war exactly help the economy? Industrial and economical drain aswell as a decrease in population and morale( if you're losing) does not help either side's economy!
Back to top
deportliberals
Congressman


Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 704

PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 11:41 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anonymous Mind wrote:
So how does war exactly help the economy? Industrial and economical drain aswell as a decrease in population and morale( if you're losing) does not help either side's economy!


I say again, read a history book. The 1930s saw worldwide economic dperession. Ginning up for war jump-started many depressed economies, particulary Germany and the U.S. One of Hitler's greatest achievements was the resurrection of the Germany economy building his military...same with the U.S.

Economies grow when there's increased demand be it private or government driven. Making war is a major generator of economic activity for nations with both natural resources and a reasonable industrial base.
Back to top
Strategos
Mayor's Aide


Joined: 01 Jun 2007
Posts: 101
Location: Which solar system do you mean?

PostPosted: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="deportliberalsside's /
Quote:



[qoute]Economies grow when there's increased demand be it private or government driven. Making war is a major generator of economic activity for nations with both natural resources and a reasonable industrial base.


Oh so war does not drain the economy? Please show me a war in which instead of losing troops and and money the world got richer.
If u mean the afterwards of a war, then it is a political advantage over the losing side that benefits the winning side. But no aftermath of a war brought enough proffits to make up for the money spent on the war.
Not Vietnam, Korea, Gulf, WW1, WW2, not the American revolution, not the war of 1812. See a pattern?
"Economic activity" does not mean economic wealth or prosperity.
Back to top
deportliberals
Congressman


Joined: 26 Jan 2007
Posts: 704

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 5:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Strategos wrote:

Oh so war does not drain the economy? Please show me a war in which instead of losing troops and and money the world got richer.


I already did that above, dumbass!!! The world got richer(using your softmoric term) during and after WWII. Go take a look at our economic numbers from 1944 to 1960. Ever hear of the Marshall Plan??? We had such a growing economy during and after WWII that we plowed $billions into German and Japan to help them rebuild their countries and their economies. We could not have done that economy without WWII. Get a firggin' clue.


Quote:

Not Vietnam, Korea, Gulf, WW1, WW2, not the American revolution, not the war of 1812.


Each of those wars brought wealth and expanded our economy. It's obvious that you've never taken a single economics class!
Back to top
Strategos
Mayor's Aide


Joined: 01 Jun 2007
Posts: 101
Location: Which solar system do you mean?

PostPosted: Wed Jun 13, 2007 7:37 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

prove it dumbass!!!!!!!!
Give me proof legit sites, books, links!!!!!

Example for idiots: http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/06/13/congress.spending.ap/index.html

so once you show real proof, and convince otherwise, you are simply an idiot that yells alot trying to make himself look smarter.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    TheLiberalForums.com Forum Index -> History All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Sponsors
Political News
RSS to JavaScript


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group