Then why did the Entente come to the USA hat in hand saying they were going to lose the war? And if the Americans wanted their loans paid back, they'd better get involved? Wilson ran on "he kept us out of the war" and then immediately turned his coat and got America involved.
And it wasn't the Zimmerman telegram or the Lustitania.
In 1916 the Germans were winning and the Entente were being bled white. The French army mutinied and refused to attack. Without American help (and here I don't mean soldiers on the front) the Entente very well could have been forced to end the war.
I am not a fool as to believe that war is a thing of the past. I know the people do not want war, but there is no use in saying we cannot be pushed into another war. Looking back, Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had "kept us out of war" and on the implied promise that he would "keep us out of war." Yet, five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany.
In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their minds. The 4,000,000 young men who put on uniforms and marched or sailed away were not asked whether they wanted to go forth to suffer and die. Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly?
Money.
An allied commission, it may be recalled, came over shortly before the war declaration and called on the President. The President summoned a group of advisers. The head of the commission spoke. Stripped of its diplomatic language, this is what he told the President and his group:
"There is no use kidding ourselves any longer. The cause of the allies is lost. We now owe you (American bankers, munitions makers, American manufacturers, speculators, American exporters) five or six billion dollars. If we lose (and without the help of the United States we must lose) we, England, France and Italy, cannot pay back this money ... and Germany won't. So....."
Had secrecy been outlawed as far as war negotiations were concerned, and had the press been invited to be present at that conference, or had radio been available to broadcast the proceedings, America never would have entered the World War. But this conference, like all war discussions, was shrouded in utmost secrecy. When our boys were sent off to war they were told it was a "war to make the world safe for democracy" and a "war to end all wars."
Well, eighteen years after, the world has less of democracy than it had then. Besides, what business is it of ours whether Russia or Germany or England or France or Italy or Austria live under democracies or monarchies? Whether they are Fascists or Communists? Our problem is to preserve our own democracy. And very little, if anything, has been accomplished to assure us that the World War was really the war to end all wars.
A Federal Judge dismissed the lawsuit after DNC attorneys argued that the DNC would be well within their rights to rig primaries and select their own candidate.
The Danish government knew about Operation Weserübung and the Nazi invasion in 1940 and agreed in advance to only put up token resistance (for instance the guns on the forts in the Copenhagen harbour all failed to fire that day) in exchange for a peaceful occupation and being allowed to stay in office.
Interesting! Got any sources (in English)? I'm intrigued.
·2 years ago
·2 years ago
·2 years ago
no rly