There is simply no doubt the United States was conducting Economic Warfare against Japan in September 1941, 82 years ago, -- well before Pearl Harbor.

FDR sowed the East Wind and reaped the Whirlwind of Pearl Harbor.

He naïvely thought Japan could be forced to submit meekly with the noose
'round its neck. So did Hull, Hornbeck, Acheson and Ickes as well as
millions of flakey "Liberals" and Isolationists who did not want to fund our
Armed Forces at adequate strength.

FDR's distant [5th] cousin, and wife's uncle, President Theodore Roosevelt,
would not have made that disastrous mistake. TR understood the Japanese
mentalité and respected their military and naval prowess. He had won the
Nobel Peace Prize for his good offices in ending the Russo-Japanese War in
1905.

Even FDR said he "didn't have enough Navy to go around" and the Army was
pitifully small -- smaller than that of Rumania in 1940 -- and smaller than
that of Portugal when World War II began in 1939. Only 174,000 men.

The American Army was still using the United States Rifle, Caliber .30-06,
Model 1903 rifle used by Sergeant York in World War I.

....Penny-wise and pound foolish -- just like many so-called "Progressives"
[often actually Socialists and Communists] and Air-Headed Isolationists when it comes to raising and funding the American Armed Forces both pre-Pearl Harbor and Today.

Si vis pacem, para bellum -- Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus.

And don't provoke another Nation without having your own Armed Forces up to strength.

Why do you think Biden is so pusillanimous when it comes to dealing with the Taliban?

DSH

Lux et Veritas et Libertas

"A vaincre sans peril, on triomphe sans gloire." -- Pierre Corneille
[1606-1684]

"Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
conscientious stupidity."

Martin Luther King, Jr.

On 9/12/23 21:08, D. Spencer Hines wrote:
> There is simply no doubt the United States was conducting Economic Warfare
against Japan in September 1941, 82 years ago, -- well before Pearl Harbor.
>
> FDR sowed the East Wind and reaped the Whirlwind of Pearl Harbor.
>
> He naïvely thought Japan could be forced to submit meekly with the noose
> 'round its neck. So did Hull, Hornbeck, Acheson and Ickes as well as
> millions of flakey "Liberals" and Isolationists who did not want to fund our
> Armed Forces at adequate strength.
>

Spencer, I disagree with you.
Mostly and specificly your use of the term "Economic Warfare".
You posting that the US & FDR's choosing to stop sales of
petrolium to Japan in September of 1941 crosses into what
you consider "Economic Warfare" would then logicly
label the US as the instigator of the Pacific part of WWII.
That is false. Imperial Japan is the cause of War in the
Pacific. They choose WAR.

The term "Economic Warfare" may be clarified with:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic_warfare
"Economic warfare or economic war is an economic strategy
utilized by belligerent nations with the goal of weakening
the economy of other states. This is primarily achieved by
the use of economic blockades.[1] Ravaging the crops of t
he enemy is a classic method, used for thousands of years."

So, that uses the term belligerent, which encyclopedia Britanica
calls,
"belligerency, the condition of being in fact engaged in war.
A nation is deemed a belligerent even when resorting to war
in order to withstand or punish an aggressor."

Belligerency | State Sovereignty, Armed Conflict & Self-Defense

FDR did certainly try to use economic pressure (at that time
the US produced about 50% of the world's petroleum) to
pressure Japan to stop their armed and brutal invasion of China.

Choosing to not trade certain items with other countries
is NOT an act of war.

> FDR's distant [5th] cousin, and wife's uncle, President Theodore Roosevelt,
> would not have made that disastrous mistake. TR understood the Japanese
> mentalité and respected their military and naval prowess. He had won the
> Nobel Peace Prize for his good offices in ending the Russo-Japanese War in
> 1905.
>
> Even FDR said he "didn't have enough Navy to go around" and the Army was
> pitifully small -- smaller than that of Rumania in 1940 -- and smaller than
> that of Portugal when World War II began in 1939. Only 174,000 men.
>
> The American Army was still using the United States Rifle, Caliber .30-06,
> Model 1903 rifle used by Sergeant York in World War I.
>
> ...Penny-wise and pound foolish -- just like many so-called "Progressives"
> [often actually Socialists and Communists] and Air-Headed Isolationists when it comes to raising and funding the American Armed Forces both pre-Pearl Harbor and Today.
>
> Si vis pacem, para bellum -- Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus.
>
> And don't provoke another Nation without having your own Armed Forces up to strength.
>
> Why do you think Biden is so pusillanimous when it comes to dealing with the Taliban?
>
> DSH
>
> Lux et Veritas et Libertas
>
> "A vaincre sans peril, on triomphe sans gloire." -- Pierre Corneille
> [1606-1684]
>
> "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
> conscientious stupidity."
>
> Martin Luther King, Jr.

Good details. Thank you.

I'd suggest for the next time that you omit the cheap shots...

- 'millions of flakey "Liberals"'
- 'so-called "Progressives"'
- "actually Socialists and Communists"
- "Air-Headed Isolationists"

It breaks the flow of an otherwise enjoyable piece of prose.
Well put together but...

(Perhaps... grab nocturnal piss-pot and spit all venom and bile before start typing?)

Vide infra

On Wednesday, September 13, 2023 at 12:08:37 AM UTC-4, D. Spencer Hines wrote:
> There is simply no doubt the United States was conducting Economic Warfare against Japan in September 1941, 82 years ago, -- well before Pearl Harbor.
>
> FDR sowed the East Wind and reaped the Whirlwind of Pearl Harbor.
>
> He naïvely thought Japan could be forced to submit meekly with the noose
> 'round its neck. So did Hull, Hornbeck, Acheson and Ickes as well as
> millions of flakey "Liberals" and Isolationists who did not want to fund our
> Armed Forces at adequate strength.
>
> FDR's distant [5th] cousin, and wife's uncle, President Theodore Roosevelt,
> would not have made that disastrous mistake. TR understood the Japanese
> mentalité and respected their military and naval prowess. He had won the
> Nobel Peace Prize for his good offices in ending the Russo-Japanese War in
> 1905.
>
> Even FDR said he "didn't have enough Navy to go around" and the Army was
> pitifully small -- smaller than that of Rumania in 1940 -- and smaller than
> that of Portugal when World War II began in 1939. Only 174,000 men.
>
> The American Army was still using the United States Rifle, Caliber .30-06,
> Model 1903 rifle used by Sergeant York in World War I.
>
> ...Penny-wise and pound foolish -- just like many so-called "Progressives"
> [often actually Socialists and Communists] and Air-Headed Isolationists when it comes to raising and funding the American Armed Forces both pre-Pearl Harbor and Today.

>
> Si vis pacem, para bellum -- Publius Flavius Vegetius Renatus.
Certe

De Bello Contra Veritatem...

“When you have the large majority of Republican voters believing that the last election was stolen – as they do every time they’re asked, a very large majority of Republican voters believe that Donald Trump won the last election and that he was cheated of his victory – if the assault on truth has reached that level of success, then we’re in real trouble.” -- Salman Rushdie

Let's enlist for the... War On The War On Truth

> And don't provoke another Nation without having your own Armed Forces up to strength.
>

There is a more recent example of this unless you are averse to current news.

> Why do you think Biden is so pusillanimous when it comes to dealing with the Taliban?

There is a more recent example of that unless you are averse to current news. One Biden owns whole; after all, several presidents own the Afghan disaster, with Biden in the tail end only, though lamentably enough.

Sanctions are economic warfare, yet nations don't go to war with surreptitious attacks like Pearl Harbor as the usual reaction. Sanctions are not terribly effective, as we can see, unless the sanctioned state lacks imagination.

--

The current flood of legal news makes it appear as if justice triumphs at last. Optimists we are, basically.

Justice is the indispensable on-going human failure. We can't even tell if it is going in a good direction, with all the authoritarianism around. History makes justice look raw. Because what was true 2500 years ago for Thucydides, when morality was young, remains largely true for us.

"The strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."

>
> DSH
>
> Lux et Veritas et Libertas
>
> "A vaincre sans peril, on triomphe sans gloire." -- Pierre Corneille
> [1606-1684]
>
> "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and
> conscientious stupidity."
>
> Martin Luther King, Jr.