Mon Nov 02, 2009 7:22 pm
+1 on Bill's post.
I have a very interesting pair of old books that I picked up at an estate sale a while back. I think both of them are interesting representatives of the isolationist attitude that was actually more prevalent than many of us realize today. The US was NOT unanimously in favor of going to war, was disillusioned after WWI and if it had not been for the depression, I think a lot more of the young people would've been less eager to go fight. In fact, most of the WWII veterans I've interviewed who were in the service before Pearl Harbor were there because they were looking for work, or wanted to get into aviation.
Back to the books - one is called Smoke Screen, written in 1940, purporting that FDR was moving our country towards a form of national socialism. He actually makes a pretty decent case for his thesis.
The second, which I find even more interesting, is a book called Why Meddle in Europe? - written in 1939. The so-called "isolationists" in opposition had some very valid points, and in my opinion were not primarily racist in their thinking. Remember that the victor's stories written afterward do not always present the loser fairly. I do think there were racists in the isolationist movement, and it's entirely possible that Lindberg was, but on the other hand, it's easy to twist things to favor your point of view as well, especially if you control the media.
Frankly, from what I know of my family history, they were dismayed by the hawkish sector and were quite dismayed by the direction the country was moving, but like everyone else, after Pearl Harbor, got behind the war effort. It wasn't racism that motivated that, but a belief that our country didn't need to go sticking it's nose into other countries business.
Some folks believed that US involvement in WWI had been wrong (actually an interesting and somewhat compelling argument), especially as shown by the effects on the US economy, and considering the origins of the war and it's effects on other nations afterward.
You also have to remember that the full extent of the atrocities the Germans committed were not publicly known until after the death camps had been taken.
Ryan
I have a very interesting pair of old books that I picked up at an estate sale a while back. I think both of them are interesting representatives of the isolationist attitude that was actually more prevalent than many of us realize today. The US was NOT unanimously in favor of going to war, was disillusioned after WWI and if it had not been for the depression, I think a lot more of the young people would've been less eager to go fight. In fact, most of the WWII veterans I've interviewed who were in the service before Pearl Harbor were there because they were looking for work, or wanted to get into aviation.
Back to the books - one is called Smoke Screen, written in 1940, purporting that FDR was moving our country towards a form of national socialism. He actually makes a pretty decent case for his thesis.
The second, which I find even more interesting, is a book called Why Meddle in Europe? - written in 1939. The so-called "isolationists" in opposition had some very valid points, and in my opinion were not primarily racist in their thinking. Remember that the victor's stories written afterward do not always present the loser fairly. I do think there were racists in the isolationist movement, and it's entirely possible that Lindberg was, but on the other hand, it's easy to twist things to favor your point of view as well, especially if you control the media.
Frankly, from what I know of my family history, they were dismayed by the hawkish sector and were quite dismayed by the direction the country was moving, but like everyone else, after Pearl Harbor, got behind the war effort. It wasn't racism that motivated that, but a belief that our country didn't need to go sticking it's nose into other countries business.
Some folks believed that US involvement in WWI had been wrong (actually an interesting and somewhat compelling argument), especially as shown by the effects on the US economy, and considering the origins of the war and it's effects on other nations afterward.
You also have to remember that the full extent of the atrocities the Germans committed were not publicly known until after the death camps had been taken.
Ryan
Mon Nov 02, 2009 10:13 pm
Another one to read is "Of Flight and Life" which he wrote in 1948.
Mon Nov 02, 2009 11:29 pm
There are some that believe that US involvement in WW1 broke the stalemate that had developed. That led to the Treaty of Versailles that treated Germany so shabbily that fascism was able to take hold there as an improvement to the German condition. The result of which of course was WW2.RyanShort1 wrote:Some folks believed that US involvement in WWI had been wrong (actually an interesting and somewhat compelling argument), especially as shown by the effects on the US economy, and considering the origins of the war and it's effects on other nations afterward.
Re: Lindbergh
Tue Nov 03, 2009 7:02 am
Bill Greenwood wrote:The Berg book is very long and through. Also KIDNAP , don't have the author here. There is strong evidence that Hauptman was guilty, (some of the ransom money was found hidden in his garage, as well as wood like the homemade ladder used, etc.) but there are still lot's of areas not fully known. I would not be surprised if others might have been involved but got away. Perhaps Bruno did not reveal their complicity because they promised to care for his wife and child. Lindy said he reviewed the evidence carefully and was convinced and he was not a careless man. The real shame is that the baby was killed by accident when the ladder broke and he fell. Bruno was a Father, would he have returned the baby unharmed? We just don't know. As a Father, I can hardly think of anything worse to happen to a young couple.
[/b]
Not to get off track here, but I always felt Hauptmann was guilty and probably had help. Did the baby die by being dropped when the ladder broke..debatable. Possibly it was a deliberate act as part of the original plan or it happened in the woods when the kidnapper / kidnappers realized the situation was getting "to hot" for them. It is a bizzare case with so many twists and turns that it would be hard to "make it up."
Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:34 pm
I think this topic is getting away from warbird information but, I would like to add my conjecture about the Lindbergh kidnapping before Scott moves this discussion to the Off-Topic section. 
I think the kidnapper intentionally killed the child while he was asleep in the crib. Why? Ever wake up a sound- to -sleep child? I think the kidnapper understood the difficulty of abducting a small child, hold him with one arm and climb down a ladder from a second story window....without making any noise. Also, can you imagine trying to care and feed a small child without be heard or noticed for several days . I think the skull damage was from a hammer blow while the child was in the crib, the body desposed of quickly and I think that was the original plan.
By the way, I tried to post my conjecture on the CAL website but, was denied admission.
I think the kidnapper intentionally killed the child while he was asleep in the crib. Why? Ever wake up a sound- to -sleep child? I think the kidnapper understood the difficulty of abducting a small child, hold him with one arm and climb down a ladder from a second story window....without making any noise. Also, can you imagine trying to care and feed a small child without be heard or noticed for several days . I think the skull damage was from a hammer blow while the child was in the crib, the body desposed of quickly and I think that was the original plan.
By the way, I tried to post my conjecture on the CAL website but, was denied admission.
Fri Nov 06, 2009 10:22 am
Several things are still clear, many years after the events discussed in this thread. The primary impact of Mr. Lindhergh may have been the result of all the attention paid to his solo flight across the Atlantic coupled with his actions promoting Aviation in the USA immediately afterwards - that inspired countless young people like my Dad to be interested in aviation. Those young people ended up serving with distinction in the next war flying in USA a/c from an industry that owed a little something of its existence to all the hoopla surrounding Lindbergh's 1927 flight.
...just a thought...
...just a thought...