U.S. Never Declared War on Nazi Germany? by Kwicko

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Yeah, we're both watching the same TV yet again, eh Mike. I heard about this one, and it's so funny, and shows again the ignorance of people who are willing to stand up and shout falacies--which of course those listening to them never find out the facts about. In today's world, it seems especially prevalent on the right and in the Tea Party, but I'm sure the reverse has been true at other times.

Along with that, and another example:

Quote:
Glenn Beck tells us, Americans reacted to the death of the man who led America back from economic collapse to victory in World War II by claiming with relief, "I'm glad he's dead."

“Am I wrong by saying there was a good portion of people that thought, "Holy cow, I'm glad he's dead. He was turning into a dictator."

Of course, Roosevelt's death on April 12, 1945 brought shock, disbelief and national mourning. And he was wildly popular. His approval rating, which reached 84% in 1942, never dipped below 48% (in 1938). His passing on the eve of victory in Europe stunned Americans, whose approval of him topped 70%.

And with good reason. He had been overwhelmingly elected in 1932, 1936, 1940 and 1944. (He never won less than 36 states and 432 electoral votes.) Even before the onset of World War II, FDR slashed unemployment by more than half and largely restored industrial production and GDP growth.

http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/glenn-beck-on-fdr-in-1945-americ
ans-were-glad-hes-dead/question-1026379/

Of course, from Glenn Beck we’re used to it and expect nothing else. But there have been so many, it seems amazing to me.

"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 8:06 AM

"Damn yokels, can't even tell a transport ship ain't got no guns on it." - Jayne Cobb

I'm pondering something.

Did N. Korea, N. Vietnam, or Iraq declare war on the U.S. first?

--------------------------------------------------
Find here the Serenity you seek. -Tara Maclay

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 8:41 AM

WULFENSTAR

http://youtu.be/VUnGTXRxGHg

Uggh,

This clown, and others, are why Im NOT a Republican.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 9:20 AM

BYTEMITE

Okay, politicians. I'm getting tired of something, so let's get something straight.

Stop invoking Godwin's Law everywhere!

FUCK

In particular to the BRILLIANT congressman in the original post: if the War in Iraq is eventually going to be shown to be the correct course of action, it will NOT be because Saddam Hussein WAS A NAZI! Despotic Totalitarian Genocidal DICTATOR, yes, so I can see why you might be confused, but not a NAZI.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 9:31 AM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Uh, Rahlm, we didn't declare war on THEM either, they were "actions" I believe? So officially, those weren't "wars", remember?

I don't think Iraq was a "declared war" either, was it? We went in to overthrow Saddam, but I don't think we declared war on Iraq. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Yeah, checking it out, I'm right:

Quote:
In other instances, the United States has engaged in extended military combat that were authorized by Congress, but short of a formal declaration of war.

Wikipedia.

The first Gulf war was "Operation Desert Storm", Afghanistan is "Operation Enduring Freedom" and Iraq is "Operation Iraqi Freedom". Vietnam comes under that heading as well.

Korean War comes under the heading: "In many instances, the United States has engaged in extended military engagements that were authorized by United Nations Security Council Resolutions."

We've only "declared" war in five instances: The WAr of 1812, Mexican-American War, Spanish-American War and the two World Wars. Everything else has been an "action" or "engagement" of one form or another.

"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 10:38 AM

The United States has not declared war since June 1942, when we declared war on Romania, Bulgaria, and Hungary.

Per the U.S. Constitution, *ONLY* the Congress has the power to declare war. Congress has not done so in nearly 68 years. What they did in Iraq was chickenshit, an abrogation of their authority and power, in that they surrendered their authority to declare war, and instead "authorized" the President to use military force in Iraq. That way, if it all went swimmingly, they could take credit, and if it didn't go as planned, they could all walk away whistling, saying, "Well, *WE* didn't declare war on Iraq, so it's not our problem..."

It's chickenshit. If war is required, so is a declaration of war. Anything less is pissing into the wind and using your military as nothing more than political pawns and peons.

Mike

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero, Real World Event Discussions

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 10:52 AM

CAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

On December 8, 1941, the U.S. declared war on Japan after the attacks by Japan on the United States at Pearl Harbor. Bound by treaty with the other Axis powers, Germany was forced to declare war on the United States, which it did two days later. This action prompted a swift declaration of war on Germany by the U.S. Congress on December 11, 1941.

Two thoughts:

1) Germany could have chosen to ignore the treaty with Japan. It was not "forced" to do anything.

2) What is the point of declaring war on a country that is already at war with you?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 11:34 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

Like so many things humans do, a declaration of war is a symbol. The moment someone attacks you, an 'act of war' has been committed and a 'state of war' exists. But this is a situation absent of will.

A declaration of war is a nation stating its willful intention to be at war with another power. It is a symbol, but a powerful one.

I believe that nations should feel obligated to make that willful declaration if they are going to commit acts of war in foreign lands.

--Anthony

"Liberty must not be purchased at the cost of Humanity." --Captain Robert Henner

"You can lose a quark you don't girth." -Dreamtrove's words to live by, translated by Ipad

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 12:18 PM

"Damn yokels, can't even tell a transport ship ain't got no guns on it." - Jayne Cobb

*Psst*

Niki, all good things, but.... that's not exactly what I was asking. Read it again. The question was about other nations declaring war on the U.S.

I'm trying to formulate another question based on the answer to that one.

--------------------------------------------------
Find here the Serenity you seek. -Tara Maclay

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 12:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by RahlMaclaren:
*Psst*

Niki, all good things, but.... that's not exactly what I was asking. Read it again. The question was about other nations declaring war on the U.S.

I'm trying to formulate another question based on the answer to that one.

Far as I can find, none of them declared war on the U.S.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 12:51 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cavalier:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

On December 8, 1941, the U.S. declared war on Japan after the attacks by Japan on the United States at Pearl Harbor. Bound by treaty with the other Axis powers, Germany was forced to declare war on the United States, which it did two days later. This action prompted a swift declaration of war on Germany by the U.S. Congress on December 11, 1941.

Two thoughts:

1) Germany could have chosen to ignore the treaty with Japan. It was not "forced" to do anything.

Ah. Semantics. Yes, they were not "forced"; they were "bound", by treaty. Apparently some nations actually do take treaty obligations more seriously than others.

And they actually thought they had a good chance. Which they did, for a while. For all the heroism you see in stuff like "Band of Brothers" and "Saving Private Ryan", the real crucible for Germany was the Eastern front, where they could lose more men in one battle than they lost in the entire war against the U.S.

Quote:

2) What is the point of declaring war on a country that is already at war with you?

Mostly diplomatic. It says that you recognize each other's declarations of a state of war, and that such will likely only be concluded with a surrender of one side, or a truce reached by both sides.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 12:56 PM

"Damn yokels, can't even tell a transport ship ain't got no guns on it." - Jayne Cobb

So, even if the U.S. didn't offically declare war on Germany (even though we did), wouldn't it make sense then; if a country declared war on the U.S., declaration of war against them would be automatic?

--------------------------------------------------
Find here the Serenity you seek. -Tara Maclay

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 12:58 PM

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Can't find anything that says they did. Yes, I misunderstood the question because of the prior posts.

As to your last question; no, I believe Congress has to issue a declaration of war. They would, of course, if we were attacked (as in Pearl Harbor), but we're not "legally" at war unless Congress declares it so.

"I'm just right. Kinda like the sun rising in the east and the world being round...its not a need its just the way it is." The Delusional "Hero", 3/1/10

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 2:04 PM

Yup, Niki's got it. If someone declares war on us, but they are powerless to really DO anything about it (like Somalia, for instance, if they were to "declare war" on the United States) or prosecute a war against us, does it behoove us to automatically declare war on them? Or does it just make us look dickish?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, May 25, 2010 10:00 PM

"Damn yokels, can't even tell a transport ship ain't got no guns on it." - Jayne Cobb

True-be, true-be, true.

The whole "act of Congress declaring war" should (but not necessarily would) give enough time verifiy if the threat is legit. I mean, if you're a Congress person, your job would be on the line if you were wrong. Multiply by 535.

Which is exactly why they want the President to make the declaration. Just pass the buck (blame) to one person. Covering their asses as usual.

Every Congress person who voted to give a President the authority to go to war, broke the law. And in a mob rule way. (Remember the mob that hung Angel in "Are You Now Or Have You Ever Been?"? Just like that.)

War is serious business. As serious as murder.

Under the law, a crime boss ordering a hit is just guilty as the one who pulls the trigger.

And to paraphrase Lilarcor from Baldur's Gate 2:

Oh, sure, get me all excited for nothing. So, we going get out of Iraq soon? How about now? No? How about... now? No? Ummm... now? What about now?

--------------------------------------------------
Find here the Serenity you seek. -Tara Maclay

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 26, 2010 1:29 AM

Rahl: Yup, you've got the gist of it. It's a deadly serious responsibility, and one that should not be passed along willy-nilly. Lives are on the line. Our credibility as a nation is on the line.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 26, 2010 4:07 AM

BYTEMITE

I think in this age of communication and information, people know exactly how much of a threat a country (or group) is if they screw with America.

I think if there's a weak country hostile to America, I think there are ways to go to war with them without declaring war. Such as claiming the soldiers we're sending in are "Peacekeepers." So it's okay!

Lastly, I think there isn't a single fight we've gotten into that didn't have an economic element to the motivation. Don't get me wrong, some wars there really was a lot more to it than that (the World Wars). But if we're sending in troops to a weak country, well... Follow the money, is all I can say.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 26, 2010 7:12 AM

CAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Cavalier:

1) Germany could have chosen to ignore the treaty with Japan. It was not "forced" to do anything.

Ah. Semantics. Yes, they were not "forced"; they were "bound", by treaty. Apparently some nations actually do take treaty obligations more seriously than others.

I think you will find that Nazi Germany was one of the "others".

Many of its actions were in fact in defiance of international law and its treaty obligations.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 26, 2010 7:55 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Cavalier:
Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Quote:
Originally posted by Cavalier:

1) Germany could have chosen to ignore the treaty with Japan. It was not "forced" to do anything.

Ah. Semantics. Yes, they were not "forced"; they were "bound", by treaty. Apparently some nations actually do take treaty obligations more seriously than others.

I think you will find that Nazi Germany was one of the "others".

Many of its actions were in fact in defiance of international law and its treaty obligations.

Many of our own actions still are.

Your point? Are we as bad as the Nazis?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 26, 2010 12:35 PM

FREMDFIRMA

Quote:
Originally posted by Bytemite:
I think in this age of communication and information, people know exactly how much of a threat a country (or group) is if they screw with America.

Very much so, the really annoying part of that is despite it being their supposed job, most bloggers do a better job of intel collection and analysis than the CIA, who seem to spend the staggering amount of money they're paid to do it crapping on their protectees instead.

And it's time we asked some *questions* about that - cause morality aside, there's cost effectiveness, and yanking up the jackboots by the purse strings has proven a damned effective check on their behavior, at every level we've pushed it on.

-F

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, May 26, 2010 1:46 PM

TRAVELER

Took a couple of tries, but I finally found a page in Wiki that gives our history of war declarations other conflicts we engaged in.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_war_by_the_United_States

http://www.imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=28764731
Traveler

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 27, 2010 7:02 AM

CAVALIER

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:

Your point? Are we as bad as the Nazis?

My point is that you appeared to be contrasting the behaviour of the US to Nazi Germany when you claim that it declared war because its treaty obligations "forced" it to.

In other words, you appeared to be intending to imply that the US is worse than Nazi Germaany.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 27, 2010 7:18 AM

KANEMAN

Well, we did declare war on Japan. I would say that Japan being allies with Germany and Italy. It was declared on them as well....Just a thought.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Thursday, May 27, 2010 7:48 AM