The World Takes Advantage of American Isolationism | BETWEEN TWO WARS | 1933 part 3 of 3

The World Takes Advantage of American Isolationism | BETWEEN TWO WARS | 1933 part 3 of 3


In 1933, more than a decade of American isolationism,
pacifism, and non-interventionism has allowed other major powers to use a military power
vacuum to reshape the status quo post Great War. Because, you know, when the cat’s away,
the mice will dance on the tables. But no longer it seems, as US President Roosevelt
now puts American remilitarization back on the agenda. Welcome to Between-2-Wars a chronological
summary of the interwar years, covering all facets of life, the uncertainty, hedonism,
and euphoria, and ultimately humanity’s descent into the darkness of the Second World War.
I’m Indy Neidell. Though the fighting of World War One ended
in 1918, the armament factories of the victorious belligerents didn’t stop working. While the
German High Seas Fleet is scuttled, the US, UK, France, Italy, and Japan are drawn into
a Naval Arms race that risks shuffling the newly established power balance of the world.
The US have planned to have 50 modern battleships by 1919, though this doesn’t happen. Japan
orders 16 new capital ships. Even Britain, already the owner of the world’s most powerful
fleet, keeps ordering new vessels. But the public has had enough of war, enough
of the expenditures, and American public opinion heavily favors isolationism. Moreover, many
believe that it was the pre-ww1 arms race that caused the conflict to escalate as it
did, so new measures to prevent this from ever happening again are now in the making. So in 1921, representatives of Britain, France,
Japan, and Italy travel to Washington to discuss global naval disarmament. President Warren G. Harding – who does see
an arms race as one of the major causes of the war, is afraid that American naval armament
might not only strain US resources, but will also lead to a future conflict with Japan
or even Britain in the Pacific. The Washington Naval Conference puts these fears to rest.
Under American pressure the five powers agree to limit the number of capital ships- battleships,
battlecruisers, and air-carriers. The US and Britain are allowed an equal amount
of tonnage for their capital ships. Japan is entitled a slightly smaller navy, the same
as France and Italy. The amount of smaller vessels below 10,000 tons is not limited.
Any ships above the limit set are to be destroyed, and construction of new ships is to be halted.
No new ships can be constructed for the next 10 years. Just to be safe, the US, the UK,
and Japan also explicitly agree to leave the status quo in the pacific as is. And with
the stroke of a pen or five, the anticipated naval arms-race is neutralized. But the Navy isn’t the only branch of the
US military subject to change. The Army and National Guard are also reformed. The 1920 Defense Act moves away from maintaining
a large standing army and toward a small defense force with an option of mass mobilization.
The Regular Army and the National Guard are extended with a new branch; the Organized
Reserves. The US Army will be downsized to no more than 130.000 men in 1922. The Army
will also be responsible, though, for training the National Guard and the Organized Reserves. American pacifist efforts increase throughout
the 20s. In 1928, President Calvin Coolidge signs the Kellogg-Briand Pact in Paris declaring
a “frank renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy”. In other words, war
is outlawed as a tool of geopolitics. 31 countries, including Japan and Germany, sign the pact
before it goes into effect in 1929. This treaty is revolutionarily in its idealism, and the
US negotiator – Secretary of State Frank Kellogg – will win the Nobel Peace Prize a year later.
In 1930, The London Naval Treaty is signed, again restricting shipbuilding for the world’s
great powers and imposing strict regulations for submarine warfare, such as their total
displacement tonnage and gun sizes. And if you see it form a global conflict perspective,
and not just localized, the 1920s have been a time of comparable peace – unquestionably
in part because of naval treaties. So the US feels validated in its isolationist
stance, and it continues into the 1930s. And as the Great Depression begins, American Politics
are focused ever more on domestic issues to repair the ailing economy. In Latin America, the Monroe Doctrine gives
way to the 1933 ‘Good Neighbor Policy’. The Monroe Doctrine, established in the 1820s,
made the US the protector of the Americas against European colonialism and anything
that might interfere with US interests in the western hemisphere. It resulted in multiple
interventions or even invasions of places the Dominican Republic or Haiti. Following
the ‘Good Neighbour Policy’, though, the United States vows to no longer intervene in Latin
American domestic issues. The rising tensions in In Europe and Japan
that follows the rise of new militarist governments causes Americans to become even more isolationist.
America is not keen to enter yet another devastating war far from home, and when Japan invades
Manchuria in 1931, America does little. President Herbert Hoover issues the Stimson Doctrine,
which rejects recognition of any territory acquired by military force as legitimate.
It leaves Japan fairly unimpressed. Instead it interprets this as the US not willing to
take its responsibility to protect the status quo in the Pacific. So instead of a threat,
Japan sees an opportunity. This isolationist attitude has a significant
effect on military spending, and thus on the shape of the military in general. By the 1930s, the US army is still roughly
the same size as it was in 1922, mostly using WW1-era equipment and weapons. In general,
the military is low on the political priority list. With public favor of a pacifist and
isolationist foreign policy, the army doesn’t enjoy tremendous public support. As a result,
cut after cut in funding has left the US Army – like the navy – in a pretty dire state
by the time Roosevelt takes office in 1933. But one of Roosevelt’s first acts is the foundation
of the Civilian Construction Corps (CCC), designed to provide jobs to around 3 million
unemployed American men between the age of 18 and 25. The army runs the CCC Camps, though
FDR publicly states that it is not a military project. But the mobilization is carried out
exceptionally quickly, which gives Army officers valuable experience in speedy mobilization. And such experience might come in handy soon,
as some of the former signatories of the Washington Pact and London Treaty refuse to renew them. Since the signing of the Naval Treaties, the
international political and economic landscape has changed. Under new fascist or militarist
regimes, many countries begin beefing up their armies and expanding their navies. The US
does little, nearly nothing to intervene. But Roosevelt does grow increasingly worried
as Japan starts commissioning new ships. This does challenge the status quo in the pacific
and threatens US trade interests in the region. That fear is confirmed by the American ambassador
to Japan, who telegraphs to Roosevelt that “The Japanese fighting force considered the United
States as their potential enemy . . . Because they think the United States is standing in
the path of their nation’s natural expansion”. See, during the entire Hoover administration,
not a single ship, not even within the treaty allowances had been commissioned. In 1934,
the US Navy has 372 ships, 288 of which – around 75%, are in dire need of replacement. Many
of them are outdated WW1-era destroyers that are no match for a modern naval vessel. And
though Roosevelt might be worried, Congress refuses his proposals for naval rearmament.
Many politicians are still advocating isolationism, and the budget is already seriously stretched
because of the Great Depression. In 1934, Japan completes the first part of
its naval rearmament program – the Circle Plan – activating 39 new warships. An additional
48 warships will be completed by 1937. To a lot of people, it is clear that Japan is
preparing its navy, not just for war, but for full control over the Pacific. During
negotiations for a Second London Naval Treaty, Japan bluntly walks out when the US and the
UK are unwilling to allow Japan to have as many capital ships as they already have. Instead,
the Japanese announce that by the end of 1936 – when the Washington Naval Treaty expires
– they are no longer bound by any naval treaty limiting their naval construction. The US, France, and Britain do sign the Second
London Naval Treaty in 1936, and this gives Japan a head start for some hypothetical arms-race.
But precisely for this reason, Roosevelt has no interest in upholding it. The treaty has
a backdoor, so the US can increase its navy if Japan continues to threaten the status
quo in the pacific. Now, this is excellent PR for Roosevelt since to the public, he appears
to be a frontrunner for naval limitations and an advocate for peace and non-interventionism
– which becomes crucial as the 1936 elections come ever closer, but in reality he has opened
the door to rearmament. Roosevelt’s ally Carl Vinson, Congressman
from Georgia and avid naval rearmament advocate since the 1920s, now asks Congress for a 3.3$
billion public works program to fight unemployment. As soon as the bill is approved, Roosevelt
slices 237$ million off for construction of 30 new warships. The isolationist majority
in Congress angrily denounce Roosevelt, but he simply replies that he is creating nothing
but desperately needed jobs. Privately, Roosevelt sighs with relief, and tells his Secretary
of the Navy, Claude Swinson: “Claude, we got away with murder that time”.
But don’t think that most Americans are oblivious to the Japanese threat. In 1934, Vinson proposes
a new naval act in Congress. This bill, dubbed the Vinson-Trammel Naval Act, aims to gradually
replace old ships and build new ones, but still within the restrictions of the Washington
Naval Pact from the 1920s. 102 new vessels are to be built and commissioned over the
next eight years. The idea is that when construction is completed, the US Navy would be able to
withstand the Imperial Japanese Navy. But make no mistake, the US is nowhere near being
the powerhouse that they need to be to rule the waves. The first of their new capital
ships will only finish production well into the second half of the 1930s, while Japan
is already way ahead with its Circle Plan. As global tensions continue to rise, the army
also gets funds to modernize and expand its numbers slightly, starting in 1935. Horses
are replaced by motorized vehicles, new light M1 tanks and medium-sized M2 tanks are introduced
and incorporated in the infantry. The bolt-action M1903 Springfield rifles are replaced by semi-automatic
M1 Garand rifles, a significant advantage over any other countries still using bolt-action
rifles. Roosevelt bases his strategic doctrine on
the’ Fortress America’ concept rather than a war overseas, which he and especially Congress
wants to avoid at all costs. Some 50.000 men- a third of the army at this time, are deployed
to coastal fortifications and artillery positions as a second line behind the US Atlantic fleet,
America’s primary defense. In the ‘Protective Mobilization Plan’ of 1937, the National Guard
are to be incorporated into the army in the case of war, bringing effective wartime army
personnel up to 400.000. Mass mobilization could potentially add millions to that number,
of course. So here we are – as 1935 comes around the
US Army is growing and a Naval Arms Race in the Pacific seems unavoidable. The Japanese are still working on their circle
plan as the Americans try to catch up. But the Americans are late to the party, and public
opinion still heavily favors isolationism. Which begs the question: ‘Is it all too little
too late?’ As the Second Sino-Japanese War breaks out in 1937, which we’ll cover in a
future Between Two Wars episode, an American gunboat – the USS Panay – is on patrol in
the Yangtze River. 12 Japanese planes attack the boat, sinking it and causing 46 American
casualties. Roosevelt and Congress are furious. Japan claims that the pilots “didn’t see”
the US flags on the gunboat. They apologize and pay an indemnity to the United States.
Roosevelt is far from satisfied but is held back by the non-interventionists. He can only
issue a public condemnation of the Japanese. But this is a turning point. The Japanese
are not playing games and Roosevelt knows it. A second Vinson-Trammel act in 1938 aims
to beef up the army by 20%, and the Two-Ocean Navy act creates plans that could increase
the US Navy by 70% by 1940. Yet at this time it still seems unlikely that
they will ever be used. The US remain fiercely isolationist. In August 1935, the Congress
passes its first neutrality act, banning all export of arms and munitions to belligerent
nations. Roosevelt is not in favor of this. See, this restricts him so he cannot aid friendly
countries like France and Britain if they’re in need, and he even considers vetoing it.
But when Mussolini invades Abyssinia, FDR wants to prevent Italy from getting American
arms, which prompts him to sign the act after all.
The law also specifies that US citizens who are traveling to belligerent nations do so
at their own risk and that they cannot expect the US to intervene on their behalf. In early
1936, the act is renewed for another 14 months and expanded by banning loans and credit lines
to belligerent nations. Later amendments even ban all American citizens from traveling on
belligerent ships and forbid US ships from transporting any arms at all. There are some
backdoors though, through which allied nations can be supported. Belligerent nations are
allowed to buy American materials “not considered to be an implement of war”, like food and
oil, provided they are exclusively using their own ships and paying with cash on location.
This is clearly meant for Britain and France, who have the money and can safely cross the
Atlantic at will. This is the’ cash-and-carry’ system that I talked about on our World War
Two channel, and at least gives Roosevelt some cards to play with. With a clever maneuver, Roosevelt prevents
Japan from using the ‘Cash and Carry’ provision in the Second Sino-Japanese War. This is considered
partisan by FDR’s political enemies, who fear that Roosevelt is taking sides in a foreign
conflict with god knows what agenda. When the cash-and-carry provision’s term expires
in early 1939, Congress blocks its renewal, even after the German annexation of Czechoslovakia and
the outbreak of war in September. It isn’t until November 1939, when US public opinion
begins to sway towards the Allies, that FDR can renew and expand the cash-and-carry provision.
From then on, the cash-and-carry provision will include all materials, including the
‘war materials’ that weren’t allowed under the Neutrality Acts of 1935 and Cash and Carry
act of 1937. You could argue that US neutrality ended for
all practical purposes in 1937, when the cash-and-carry provision was introduced, designed by Roosevelt
specifically to aid France and the UK. Roosevelt is starting to pave the way for a US intervention
on the Allied side in case of war. However, years of pacifism, isolationism and non-interventionism
had caused the US Navy and Army to lag behind. Japan, Germany and Italy already start remilitarizing
in the early 1930s, and after Japan begins to wage war in 1931 and again in 1937, they
find themselves virtually unopposed by other major powers. The Japanese horizon gradually
expands, and new lands in the pacific seem up for grabs. Who would even dare to stop
them? The US? Well, the US is not ready for that, and it will have to make a considerable
effort if it will ever stand a chance to maintain dominion of its Pacific Interest. But in 1933,
pretty much everyone feels that Japan is land far, far away form any US harbor, right? If you’d like to know more about how the
US turned away from the world right after the First World War, check out our first episode
about US isolationism right here. Our Patron of the week is Torstein Fjukstad. Do like
Torstein and join the TimeGhost army at patreon.com or timeghost.tv. Subscribe, click the bell… And as conservative pundit Stephen Colbert
once said: ‘If our Founding Fathers wanted us to care about the rest of the world, they
wouldn’t have declared their independence from it.’

100 thoughts on “The World Takes Advantage of American Isolationism | BETWEEN TWO WARS | 1933 part 3 of 3

  1. This episode is very much about the global ramifications of the US's foreign policy. American inaction and isolationism left room for other nations to develop imperialist ambitions. There are of course a lot of other factors that influenced the rise of expansionist and militarist governments in Europe and East-Asia, many of which are explained in our other Between Two Wars episodes. In no way does this video have any connection to current-day events or our opinion on them. This is what happened, our future episodes will be about what followed. We're historians and that's all we want to do here.
    Cheers,
    Joram

    RULES OF CONDUCT
    STAY CIVIL AND POLITE we will delete any comments with personal insults, or attacks.
    AVOID PARTISAN POLITICS AS FAR AS YOU CAN we reserve the right to cut off vitriolic debates.
    HATE SPEECH IN ANY DIRECTION will lead to a ban.
    RACISM, XENOPHOBIA, OR SLAMMING OF MINORITIES will lead to an immediate ban.
    PARTISAN REVISIONISM, ESPECIALLY HOLOCAUST AND HOLODOMOR DENIAL will lead to an immediate ban.

  2. I think many of today's isolationist politicians in the US would be wise to draw conclusions from the ramifications of this policy in the 1920s and 1930s

  3. Maybe due to the length of the show this fact was not mentioned, but the Japanese continued to feel slighted at their treatment as an Ally in regards to treaties after the First World War. This mistake by the major powers twenty years earlier factored greatly in the Japanese decisions remarked upon in this episode. In your defense, I know you mentioned it early on in this series or in the final episodes of the WW1 series. It just seemed like you missed an opportunity to illustrate where the politics of 1918-1919 (And those of the Washington and London Naval Treaties) came back to bite the major powers in the tail with respect to the Japanese treaty decisions in the 1930's. Japan wanted to be viewed as an equal on the world stage.

  4. 1920s was also relatively peaceful due to WW1 post war exhaustion. however there was widespread heavy fighting in China which was a weapons sink for arms sellers around the world, the great powers and arms dealers made a LOT of money in the 20s and 30s selling surplus WW1 weapons to Chinese warlords and revolutionaries.

  5. Hey Indi, Stockholmare and other staff. Now you made me really excited about maybe getting a bio pic about George Marshall and some talks about the purges he enacted on the US general staff. Love your work. Keep it up! -Merry Gothenburger

  6. The US is always late to the party, but when we get there we have all the snacks and fireworks! I kept looking at your chair Indy and couldn't help but think it belongs in a house in Texas, then I had an epiphany, you take the boy out of Tx, but can't take the Tx out of the boy. <grins> Thanks for another superb episode.

  7. We fought the wrong enemy in WW1; If were the president at the time- I would've jointed the central powers to fight the allies and absorb Canada into the united states.

  8. Actually US isolationism made it into a superpower because it can enter the war after everyone bombed each other to stone age while selling supply, ammo and weapons to both side. It's a win win.

  9. Hirohito: "Please dont wake the sleeping giant, please dont wake the sleeping giant, please dont wake the sleeping giant, please…"
    Tojo: "I woke the sleeping giant."
    Hirohito: "Fuck!"
    Japan: Gets nuked
    Tojo: surprised Pikachu face

  10. American isolationism is so frustrating. Imagine if only the Americans (and the British and the French) would have finished the job after WW1 by defeating the Bolsheviks, a lot of future events would have been avoided. Perhaps WW2 would have been avoided.

  11. Today we can difficult imagine that there are politicians who really care about their country.
    Abusing a law and searching for loophools to do good for a country is way better then abusing a law and searching for loophools just to benifit personally of it.

    When the US stayed srictly neutral and Japan didn't attack the US, Or the US kept ist monroe act the entire History of the world could be very different as we know it today.

  12. Not to be pedantic, but I will I guess; Stephen Colbert is more satirist than pundit, especially in context of the quote. That is from his Colbert Report show, where he plays a over the top right wing wind bag.. Love all the content on your channels. Great stuff.

  13. It seems that some opponent would need to be provoke USA pretty hard so that public opinion and congress could turn "mass build" phase, no matter the cost. But who would possible do something like that?

  14. When the cats away the mice will…. dance on the table.

    Darn it, I thought it was gonna be roll the dice. See, told you I was bad at the guessing game.

  15. American isolationism was better than American imperialism, which pretty much ruined the entire western world and many countries such as Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, countless South American countries, etc. Americans stick their noses in other people's business and it always makes things worse. It's also worth noting that Roosevelt took America into WW2 with many initiatives of his own which weren't approved by congress. Tbe time of American Isolationism actually was the Golden Age of American policy…These moral politicians are completely at odds with the corrupt modern American politicians of the post WW2 period. You really get the feeling that Americans politicians back then were genuine American Christians motivated by a higher American moral standard. Gone today. This was the America admired throughout the world and immigrated to. Not the monster of America today, that invades countries, manipulates currencies, destroys nations.

  16. That last quote was by Stephen Colbert: https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/44606-if-our-founding-fathers-wanted-us-to-care-about-the

  17. I did not know about those arms-limiting treaties. So sublime in principle yet ineffectual in practice. Still worth the effort… I hope. Can we ever populate this globe as a rational species without warfare?

  18. Then Europe yells at the US to increase our military spending.

    Now Europe makes fun of the US for having a massive military and being “warmongers” while refusing to spend money on their own defense and expecting the US to do all their fighting for them.

    How the world has changed.

  19. Did Japan in fact comply with any treaty limitations on the size of its imperial navy, ever, even before withdrawing from the League of Nations in 1934, renouncing its treaty obligations and withdrawing from the Washington Naval Treaty?

  20. I never really knew any background on why Japan would attack the US, and now it makes so much more sense! Keep up the awesome work on this channel guys, you're all so passionate and dedicated and deserve all the support you get and so much more!

  21. I have speculated that the US economic downturn had as much to do with Japanese and German adventurism as its lack of military power – thoughts?

  22. 7:00 Hold on there, "Indy," you've been abroad far too long! As I recall, the CCC is/was the "Civilian CONSERVATION Corps," which extended public works to national forests, erosion control, etc. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Conservation_Corps

  23. Extremely Impressive, I totally liked it!, See this New Album 'Monish Jasbird – Death Blow', channel link www.youtube.com/channel/UCv_x5rlxirO-WKjLIyk6okQ?sub_confirmation=1 , if you like to 🙂

  24. On a side-note regarding the Washington Naval Agreement; many gigantic new-generation capital ships were already under construction (and some almost finished) when the treaty was signed and these would fall under the "stop construction immediately" category. They were however given the option of converting the unfinished ships into aircraft carriers. These (particularly the Lexington class, Akagi and Kaga)would be tremendously larger than any previous Carrier and instrumental in the development of new naval air doctrine, better naval aircraft and ultimately, the discovery of the modern aircraft carrier as the new primary offensive force of a fleet in lieu of the Battleship.

    Those carriers would serve actively in WW2 and the best(arguably) carriers going into WW2 (the Zuikaku class and the Yorktown class) were a direct result of the lessons learned from those ships that only came into being as carriers due to the Washington Naval Agreement.

    P.S.: I chose to ignore the RN here not because their carriers were inherently worse, but because they were built to a completely different operational environment. It is important to understand that Carriers in the rougher and more confined seas of the Atlantic and North Sea had a completely different design ideology from those used in the vast uninterrupted reaches of the much calmer Pacific.

  25. Ah, pacifism. The philosophy of nonviolence, historically practiced by those that rely on the killing and dying of others in the defense of their privilege to practice that philosophy.

  26. America's lack of preparedness for WWII could have been much worse than it was. Indeed, the limited rearmament, military expansion, and support to future allies just barely squeaked through Congress all the way into 1941. As Winston Churchill purportedly once said, "Americans will always do the right thing, only after they have tried everything else."

  27. The Washington Agreement was really the first big Arms control agreement and its results were predictable: democracies that answer to their people followed the terms and dictatorships did not. It was the same for the UN's Chemical and Biological weapons convention of 1971: democracies followed its terms and the dictatorships were already breaking it as they were signing it. It will be the same with land mines, napalm, White phosphorus or cluster munitions: if you ban them, you can be sure the other side will have them.

  28. My dad had joined the National Guard. Set to guard the warehouse district of the Monongahela side wharfs (with a billy club and an empty Model 1911), he stood ankle deep during the '36 flood. When we went to war, his unit was mobilized and he stayed the course, entering as a sergeant, and exiting as a Captain. A PTO veteran.

  29. I hope lessons of this episode in history will be heard by those who think isolationism is our path forward. I wonder what great evils will arise from the US stepping back in the M.E.

  30. Another excellent Time Ghost production! Really fascinating to see what a different place the USA is during the interwar years in regards to its relationship to military power and spending. Although I think eventually (and perhaps inevitably) it was good that we entered the war, I cannot say that all the isolationist sentiment were entirely unjustified.

  31. I think one major take away from this episode (if you accept the spoilers that we know what happened over the next 20 years) is just how underappreciated and underdeveloped was the incredible potential of the United States. These other nations, Japan, Germany, etc had decades of a head start militarily and yet the United States managed to exceed them all combined in production in under 8 years. It's mind boggling.

  32. I didn't know if I'd still be around by the end of "The Great War" series.
    Still alive and well, baby.
    Sally forth and carry on smartly, you good bastards.

  33. i guess you cant legislate peace any more then you can legislate safety.
    the germans did avail themselves of cash and carry via their submarine fleet including their commerce subs such as the deutchland. you can read more about it in the book "iron coffins" by by. Herbert A. Werner.

  34. I learned a lot from the MHV video about naval ship classes about the Washington and London Naval Treaties. https://youtu.be/QirKwoPkGi0

    Some highlights off the top of my head:

    – France was particularly dismayed by being given parity with Italy, which was elated. France had two coastlines to defend and its main Mediterranean rival only had the one and came out technically on top. For its part, Italy walked in with very little and came out with a big win.
    – Cruisers were given two classes: light and heavy, though this has nothing to do with tonnage or armour, just gun size. Almost all the signatory powers would cheat this though. Japan overloaded its cruisers with more than they could handle (cheating unintentionally), while France was the only signatory to design its cruisers to the best treaty standard. Italy did the smart thing and just cheated intentionally.
    – All the ship designations date from the Washington treaty, with the curious "CV" meaning aircraft carrier. Apparently, it stands for Cruiser Voler (from the French word "to fly").

    If any of this is wrong, blame my spotty memory.

  35. 4:11 "Lucky" for him, Kellogg didn't get to see that optimism's bitter end, two years after his death. I can't ever fault a man for trying for world peace, and I think it makes his achievements more admirable when considering he dropped out of school at 14! I have to wonder how he viewed the "gathering gloom" of the mid-1930s.

  36. Yo Indy you are pronouncing the name of the M1 wrong – my Dad was in the 28th Infantry Division in WW2 – he always called it a – “grand”

  37. 1930s American public: Japan? Who's Japan? That's the name of somebody's kid, right? Well, who cares!

    Is this when Americans started sitting in the back row during History class, or what? 🙄

  38. With respect to the Japanese "Circle Plan", does that refer to how the word "Maru" means both "Ship" and "Circle" in Japanese?

  39. I would recommend a thorough comparison of isolationist thought in the 30's and isolationist thought in the 2020's. It was a common conception that a Pacific and Atlantic Ocean was an effective buffer from aggressions. Also, the American economic system was self sustaning, needing little or no raw material trade. Isolationism could be a valid protective system, keeping foreign catastrophe from bleeding into the Americas.
    The current isolationism is a belated recognition that there is no protection from foreign aggression. See 9/11. Also, any attempt to preempt aggression from overseas is ineffective and highly expensive . See Afghanistan. If you are to prevent aggression against the US, it must take the form of overwhelming destruction of an enemy 'state.' Once it is destroyed, let the competing factions war with each other and forget about the Great Satan.
    This is a brutal prescription. But it is difficult to sacrifice US citizens, your sons, brothers, daughters and sisters to a hopeless struggle that condemns the country to endless war.
    And if your "allies" are shiftless opportunists who only seek to place US troops between themselves and their opponents, there is no need to spill the blood of our warriors to save theirs.
    Comment?

  40. The actions of the US at this point feel somewhat similar to Britain's actions before the first world war as they were the major world power at the time and I wonder how significant a cause of world conflict the major global powers persuing a policy of isolationism was.

  41. I want a link to the archive you get yoir videos from. You might be british or american and used to get all sorts of information and for free. Im german in Germany. They are still socialists and like to tell me what to think. I bet i can find a video about Hitler dining in the US in the middle of WW2. Strange world, indeed.

  42. Shows you what kind of idiot Stephen Colbert is. Our Founding Fathers did NOT declare our independence from the rest of the world. They declared our independence from the United Kingdom. And even then it was in the context of self rule. Not isolationism. It allowed the USofA to decide when we would intervene in world affairs instead of the crown deciding for us. Of course Colbert preaches this while complaining about pulling troops out of Syria.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *