Question:
Do you think the U.S. should have entered world war two earlier? why or why not?
beckyy
2009-04-27 19:21:08 UTC
i have to lead a presentation involving whether the u.s. should have joined world war two earlier or not...in your opinion why should they have entered it earlier or not? if you have reasons for both sides that would be great too! i just need some information so i can start picking a side and having an idea about both points of view. thank you SO much for any help!!!!
Eleven answers:
Mike S
2009-04-27 19:40:03 UTC
It is my belief that FDR realized we would eventually have to enter the war but due to political considerations at the time and the fact that the opinion of the average American was one of isolationism he was prevented from doing so without committing political suicide. So he bided his time and aided Great Britain as much as he could within the confines of neutrality. Lend Lease was a result of that as well as actually ordering the US Navy to provide convoy escort to the halfway point in the Atlantic long before the war began for us. Well that's my 2 pfennigs. See if you can do anything with that. Good luck to you on this project.
?
2016-05-24 03:08:35 UTC
If the US had stayed out, I think the European Mainland would be under Germany. The UK would more then likely remain free for quite some time since the German Navy was destroyed. Germany would have hit a point where their expansion would stop and a stalemate would have been met. The question is the USSR. Had Japan not gone to war with the US, they were posed to launch into the USSR when conditions were met by Germany. When Japan got decisively engaged with the US, they couldn't do that anymore. With the USSR, one of two things would have happened without US involvement, either they get split between Germany and Japan or they make a peace and sacrifice a good portion of land if things stalemate. Russia did not fight a two front war. They stopped Germany in a one front war, but it could have gone either way if they had to fight two fronts. Australia with out US help would have been isolated. Japan never intended to invade Australia. They knew it was too far away, too big and too much of a logistical challenge to control. Their goal was to unite Asia and force Europeans out of Asia. They would have stopped at New Guinea once Australia was isolated from the US and the UK. Africa would be the front line I think. The UK would still have influence there, but so would Germany and Italy. The boundary would be drawn there. For the Americas, it would be interesting. The Axis would continue to try and gain influence in South America. It would depend on how involved the US got with the Monroe Doctrine as to how much influence Germany could get.
kozzm0
2009-04-27 20:05:37 UTC
No, not a chance. And it's not as though Roosevelt or Congress had any choice.



During the Depression, there were bitter memories of World War 1, which was like double the US casualties in Vietnam but compressed into only a couple of years. The anti-war movement was huge. Millions of people had been outraged by US entry into what was seen logically as a European war between imperialist countries. They were mostly right, too, the first world war served almost no US interests at all, regardless whether it ended quicker because of US involvement. US involvement also made WW1 end so lopsided that another war was practically inevitable.



Because of the anti-war movement, Roosevelt's hands were tied. Likewise Congress wanted no part of a war. Back then, it wasn't like now where the President can just say, "ok we're going to war, you guys go drum up support and get Congress to authorize it." In those days the Constitution was taken seriously; troops were not sent into major combat, especially overseas, without a formal declaration of war by Congress. And congress would never have authorized the President to wage war without a formal declaration, as has been done for the past 60 years (there hasn't been a war declaration since 1941). Roosevelt himself was very partial to the British, and tried to help them with a "lend/lease" program where he would send them supplies but be pretending not to actually giving them free, which the Germans could have considered a hostile act.



The anti-war movement cut across the political spectrum and all ideologies. There was a powerful pro-Nazi movement in America which the government was very nervous about. The left was generally partial to the Soviet Union but since the Germans didn't attack Russia till around the same time the Japanese attacked the US, they were largely against the war, then when the USSR was threatened, they were divided about it. Being openly pro-war was to risk being stereotyped as a WASP elitist, or as the old-style capitalist/imperialist involved in ww1 who were widely hated. Roosevelt walked a fine line.



There are some who suspect that Roosevelt knew Japan would attack in December 1941, and deliberately manipulated events to make sure the attack would be devastating, but not to the US carriers, and to ensure that the Japanese declaration of war would not be delivered until after the attack. Whether he did or not, the attack on Pearl Harbor was the only thing that could possibly have made Americans accept full involvement. If Roosevelt had tried to enter the war without someone having attacked, it would have seriously backfired on him; any attacks by Germany or Japan would be seen by the public not as an outrage but as a result of Roosevelt's foolishness. War production would not have been nearly as high, and people would have resisted and dodged the draft.



Nowadays of course, the US routinely attacks other countries without making formal declarations of war, and the president doesn't really care what the people think; propaganda is called "media" now, but it's much more effective than it was when it was called propaganda.
SFC M
2009-04-27 19:43:09 UTC
No. The U.S. was very much against the idea of getting involved in another foriegn war at the outset of WWII.



By waiting until the attack on Pearl Harbor, the US government was able to ensure that a large portion of the US population would support the war effort. Also, the military, especially the Army, was not prepared to fight a large, multifront war. Things were so bad that the Army trained with dummy rifles and cannon in the late 30s.





On the other hand, if the US had been involved from 1939, the war might have been somewhat shorter.
darkdavida7x
2009-04-27 19:36:04 UTC
Both World Wars, America tried being neutral for the war. In my opinion, if America entered WW2 earlier, we would have been just as exhausted as the other nations in the war. America did NOT know about the "Final Solution", most German soldiers didn't even know that their own nation was doing that. If America joined the war earlier, some battles would have probably been different. But then again, what if America, instead of entering in Africa, entered in Russia, to help out in battles like Stalingrad first? Some of the Cold War seeds wouldnt have been planted if such a thing happened. What if America attacked Japan first, or if we helped more than just sending a few pilots to England for the battle of england?
Patrick O
2009-04-27 19:35:50 UTC
Well, I'm not going to give a point of view, per say...but here's my opinion.



First off, hindsight is 20/20...knowing what we know now, of course we would've entered earlier. However, we didn't know. At the time, the prevailing philosophy was "isolationist pacifism" basically meaning, you leave us alone, we leave you alone. Keep in mind, this was a generation after WWI, where huge numbers of American soldiers died in a war on foreign soil where nothing was decided by the outcome. Thus, Americans were very wary of getting involved in another "European dispute." Our concern was first for our nation, and secondly for everyone else. Just like we tried to stay out of the wars between England and France in the 17-18 hundreds. That said, we weren't entirely neutral - we were enforcing trade boycotts on Germany, and secretly lending money and supplies to the British.



EDIT: Oh, and as far as the Germans killing Jews...not that it wasn't a terrible event (it was for sure) but the Soviets were killing just as many if not more innocent people...and yet we were allied with them. Why would we choose one over the other? It made a certain sense to just stay out of it and let the two devils fight it out. If the Japanese hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor, it was and would've remained a European/Asian war, with the Brits, France, and the Soviets against the Germans, Japanese, and sort of the Italians.

(Though if Hitler hadn't attacked the Russians, they would've fought for Hitler, and supplied oil and manpower - the two things Hitler needed most, and thus Germany probably would've won the war, as he already had France, and was close to beating Britain. Thus the Axis gained two powerful enemies by betraying in Germany's case an ally, and in Japan's case a bystander. But I digress...)
Ethan
2009-04-27 19:29:37 UTC
Honestly if we would have entered wwII earlier then we actually did, we probably would of lost becuase we were still rebuilding our economy from the depression and by 1941 our economy had drastically improved from 1940 or 1939 and also i think we were trying to play a neutral role for the world during the war, we entered the war at the right time but we mainly entered it because of pearl harbor, hope this is a good opinion, good luck
jeeper_peeper321
2009-04-27 22:30:05 UTC
Nope,



It was a european war



Just why would the US get involved in someone elses war ?



It's not like Britain or France were our allies before WW ll
My Name Sucks Too
2009-04-27 19:27:42 UTC
yes they practically betrayed the whole world in waiting till the last moment.
?
2009-04-27 19:28:41 UTC
Yes, they should have. They knew that millions of people were being killed, and that the Jews were being targeted, they should've done something about it!
Atheist Chuck
2009-04-27 19:28:52 UTC
YES IT SHOULD HAVE. At least one week earlier to attack the Japs before they got us!


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...