• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
World war II the last constitutionally declared war… (well, not exactly…)
 

World war II the last constitutionally declared war… (well, not exactly…)

on

  • 586 views

It is often cited by defenders of

It is often cited by defenders of
the Constitution that the last
properly declared U.S. war was
the Second World War.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
586
Views on SlideShare
585
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

https://twitter.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    World war II the last constitutionally declared war… (well, not exactly…) World war II the last constitutionally declared war… (well, not exactly…) Document Transcript

    • World War II: The Last ConstitutionallyDeclared War… (Well, Not Exactly…)Bionic MosquitoApril 120, 2012Freedom Betrayed, by Herbert HooverIt is often cited by defenders ofthe Constitution that the lastproperly declared U.S. war wasthe Second World War. Thereare a couple of facts that arepretty solid for those who takethis viewpoint. On December 8,1941, President Rooseveltasked Congress for adeclaration of war with Japan;on December 11 he asked for adeclaration against Germanyand Italy. Congress approvedthese and thus was war declared.So why question these irrefutable facts? Where is the “not exactly” in these events? I guess itdepends on what the definition of “war” is.Roosevelt took many actions against Germany prior to December 11, 1941. Hoover outlines anddocuments many of these, even stating that these actions were taken for the purpose of bringingabout an attack against the U.S. such that Congressional and popular support would swingtoward direct U.S. involvement in the war. Looking backwards from today’s perspective, some ofthese actions seem trivial when compared to the gross abuses of Presidential power regardingmilitary action. However, in 1941, there were many (including Hoover) who felt the President hadgone far beyond his constitutional authority. With the American people and the Congress greatly opposed to entering the war, our participation appeared unlikely unless some overt act against us was made either by Germany or Japan which would reverse this tide. Certain elements in the Washington Administration seemed to hold this view and undertook measures to bring about such an attack.A series of activities in the Atlantic were sure to be observed by the Germans. The President on July 7, 1941, informed Congress of the landing of American troops in Iceland, Trinidad, and British Guiana, saying:
    • …forces of the United States Navy have today arrived in Iceland in order to supplement, and eventually to replace, the British forces….…on July 11, Nelson A. Rockefeller, then a member of Mr. Roosevelt’s administration,announced the black-listing of about 2,000 Latin-American firms and individuals havingconnections with the Axis. We were not yet at war.Roosevelt justified this deployment by statingthat such positions in the Atlantic must be denied the Germans in order to prevent a Germanattack against the Western Hemisphere (an attack Germany did not have the capability or intent tocarry out). This deployment was opposed by some. Senator Robert Taft protested the occupation,saying “I think the President has grossly exceeded his constitutional authority.”Indeed. If the U.S. was not yet at war, why black-list anyone? Or why not black-list firmsassociated with the Soviets? Or why not black-list associates of all warring factions? To saynothing of the lack of due process in this action (but that is a topic for another day). On August 5, I [Hoover] joined a declaration against the current warlike actions….The statement read as follows [portions excerpted]: Exceeding its express purpose, the lend-lease bill has been followed by naval action, by military occupation of bases outside the Western Hemisphere, by promise of unauthorized aid to Russia, and by other belligerent moves. Recent events raise doubts that this war is a clear-cut issue of liberty and democracy. It is not purely a world conflict between tyranny and freedom. The Anglo-Russian alliance has dissipated that notion. American participation is far more likely to destroy democracy in this country and thus in the Western Hemisphere than to establish in Europe. The hope of civilization now rests on the preservation of freedom and democracy in the United States.On August 9, President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill met off the coast ofNewfoundland. On August 14, they issued what is known as The Atlantic Charter. This charterwas discussed in the Senate Senator Patrick McCarran called it “tantamount to a declaration of war by this country.” Senator David I. Walsh said that it “goes far beyond the Constitutional powers of the President.”Yet others provided support:Others joined in thecriticism. Certainly, if members of the U.S. Senateviewed the agreement this way (rightly or wrongly), itshould not be a surprise if the Germans and Hitler feltthe same.Senator Claude Pepper declared the statement“magnificent” and “the nearest thing to a declaration
    • of world independence I have ever heard.” It strikes me that “a declaration of world independence” is somewhat outside of the bounds of Constitutional authority. This doesn’t faze the good Senator. Such a document as this Charter might also be viewed as a belligerent act by those who hold a different view regarding world independence. What were some of the clauses of this announcement of the Atlantic Charter that cause those who viewed it as an act of war to such an interpretation? Following aresome excerpts: The whole problem of the supply of munitions of war, as provided by the Lend-Lease Act, for the armed forces of the United States and for those countries actively engaged in resisting aggression has been further examined. Lord Beaverbrook, the Minister of Supply of the British Government, has joined in these conferences. He is going to proceed to Washington to discuss further details with appropriate officials of the United States Government. These conferences will also cover the supply problems of the Soviet Union.Discussions regarding providing military supplies to both the British and the Soviets (bothengaged in war with the Germans). This certainly seems like a war-like clause. They [Roosevelt and Churchill] have had several conferences. They have considered the dangers to world civilization arising from…the Hitlerite government of Germany and other governments associated therewith….Following are some of the common principles that underlie this declaration: THIRD, they respect the right of all peoples to choose the form of government under which they will live; and they wish to see sovereign rights and self- government restored to those who have been forcibly deprived of them;SIXTH, after a final destruction of the Nazityranny….Note this does not apply to territoriesconquered by the Soviet Union, only to territoriesconquered by Germany as made clear above.I don’t think Roosevelt was thinking of a winner-take-allsoccer match….
    • In reading these words, it is not difficult to see why some Senators felt that war had been declared by the President, and that he did so without Constitutional authority. Prime Minister Churchill added to the war rhetoric… …on August 24, in a broadcast, proclaim[ing] that President Roosevelt had agreed to join the war, saying: …the President of the United States and the British representative in…the Atlantic Charter have jointly pledged their countries to the final destruction of the Nazi tyranny.Of course, it can be said that much of this is words. Braggadocio is part and parcel of being agreat political leader. Hoover sees much more, and continues: In an address to workers in a Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, steel plant…Rear Admiral Clark H. Woodward, U.S.N. (retired), naval representative on the Federal Board of Civilian Defense, expressed his belief that the United States “will be actively engaged in the war in a short time.” The New York Herald tribune reported the admiral as saying: As a matter of fact, we are already at war, so there is no use trying to fool ourselves about it.But why take the word or a retired Admiral? On September 1, Mr. Churchill asked Mr. Roosevelt to assign American ships to transport two Commonwealth divisions to the Middle East. This was done, and the 40,000 men duly landed.This is getting a little closer to home. Providingmilitary escort to troops headed for battle. Soundswar-like. But there is more: On September 4, the Navy announced that the U.S. destroyer Greer, en route to Iceland with the mail, had been attacked by torpedoes from a submarine, and that the Greer had counterattacked with depth charges. At a press conference the next day the President described it as an attack.Carrying mail, for goodness sakes. What could be
    • more benign than this? It developed that a British plane had advised the Greer of the location of a German submarine. The Greer had searched for the submarine, located it, and trailed it for three and one-half hours until it turned and fired a torpedo. Having thus been “attacked,” theGreer used depth charges until it lost contact.It turns out the President might have been technically correct in his description, but not quite truthful: Even this much of the truth was provided grudgingly. The Senatedemanded to see the log of the Greer, but instead received the above description in a statementfrom Admiral Stark.There is more. Roosevelt commented on another American ship, the Robin Moor: A few months ago an American flag merchant ship, the Robin Moor, was sunk by a Nazi submarine in the middle of the South Atlantic, under circumstances violating long- established international law and violating every principle of humanity….The ship had been carrying contraband, and the passengers and crew were allowed to leave theship.Hoover goes on to list other similar claims by Roosevelt, each a version of “we were minding ourown business when, for no justifiable reason and completely unprovoked, our ships wereattacked.” In each case, as in the examples above, Hoover explains why the President’s statementsare not truthful; in fact the U.S. was taking actions consistent with a nation at war.On September 16, Hoover once again addressed the nation in a broadcast: No one will deny that if we keep up this step-by-step policy it will lead inevitably to sending our sons into this war….It is the ultimate end of this road that must be looked at.In this address, Hoover goes on to outlinemany of the points previously discussed: let thetwo tyrants knock each other out; Hitler cannotcross the English Channel let alone the Atlantic,etc. He continues, regarding the de facto warbeing fought by Roosevelt: …the President’s policy of edging our
    • warships into danger zones, of sending American merchant ships with contraband raises the most critical of all questions. These steps to war are unapproved and undeclared by the Congress….Hoover then outlines an October 17incident with the U.S. destroyer Kearny.The destroyer was convoying shipscarrying munitions to England (againstthe provisions of Lend-Lease). Sheattacked a German submarine, and thesubmarine counterattacked, killingeleven men on board. On October 22, General Robert E. Wood of the America First Committee issued a challenge to the President to go before Congress and ask for a positive vote on peace and war. The President did not make the test.This Committee has been tainted as anti-Semitic, or a Nazi front organization. I do not intend todiscuss these aspects; however it is worth pointing out some background and views of thisorganization. From Wikipedia: The America First Committee (AFC) was the foremost non-interventionist pressure group against the American entry into World War II. Peaking at 800,000 paid members in 650 chapters, it was one of the largest anti-war organizations in American history. Started in 1940, it shut down after the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941. The AFC gained much of its early strength by merging with the more left-wing Keep America Out of War Committee, whose leaders had included such mainstays of America First as Norman Thomas and John T. Flynn. AFC was established September 4, 1940, by Yale Law School student R. Douglas Stuart, Jr., along with other students, including future President Gerald Ford, future Peace Corps director Sargent Shriver, and future U.S. Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart. At its peak, America First claimed 800,000 dues-paying members in 650 chapters, located mostly in a 300-mile radius of Chicago. The America First Committee launched a petition aimed at enforcing the 1939 Neutrality Act and forcing President Franklin D. Roosevelt to keep his pledge to keep America out of the war. They strongly distrusted Roosevelt, arguing that he was
    • lying to the American people. On the day after Roosevelt’s lend-lease bill was submitted to the United States Congress, Wood promised AFC opposition “with all the vigor it can exert.” America First staunchly opposed the convoying of ships, the Atlantic Charter, and the placing of economic pressure on Japan. In order to achieve the defeat of lend-lease and the perpetuation of American neutrality, the AFC advocated four basic principles: The United States must build an impregnable defense for America. No foreign power, nor group of powers, can successfully attack a prepared America. American democracy can be preserved only by keeping out of the European war. “Aid short of war” [a Roosevelt policy at this time] weakens national defense at home and threatens to involve America in war abroad.These statements and positions seem quite consistent with the statements of Hoover throughoutthis book. As against Roosevelt’s regular claims of overt German acts against the United States,on November 5, Arthur Krock of the Washington Bureau of the New York Times said: …in my opinion, Hitler can throw at us both the dictionary and the facts when he says we “attacked” him. Why should the American Government ever have attempted to obscure it?… Yet our government did attempt to obscure it, as the record shows….On November 7, 1941, Admiral Stark wrote to admiral Hart: …The Navy is already in the war of the Atlantic, but the country doesn’t seem to realize it….Whether the country knows it or not, we are at war.When asked by Representative Gearhart if it was because of the actions directed by the Presidentat that time against the Germans that Stark said the U.S. was already at war, Admiral Starkreplied: That is correct. Technically…we were not at war…because war had not been declared, but actually, so far as the forces operating under Admiral King in certain areas, it was war against any German craft that came inside that area.Admiral Stark sees it this way. The U.S. was not at war because Congress had not declared war.But actually, the U.S. was at war before Congress declared war. On this point, Admiral Starkshould be sufficient authority. I will end where I began. Technically, Congress authorized U.S.entry into World War II. In reality, Roosevelt was already fighting the war long before thisdeclaration. It was Roosevelt’s desire to get Germany to take the first significantly overt action, inthe hope that this would move the American people and Congress to back his desire for war. Thisdid not work with the Germans. Hitler, it seems, wanted to avoid providing reason to bring theU.S. into this war. Hoover next turns to Roosevelt’s actions against Japan. Of course, Rooseveltwas successful in getting the Japanese to take the bait. This is Hoover’s subject, for next time.
    • http://www.infowars.com/Beyond Treason(2005) Documentaryhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZVOOmi9gDEWar Made Easy: How Presidents and Pundits Keep Spinning Us To Deathhttp://www.sprword.com/videos/warmadeeasy/Paying the Price: Killing the Children of Iraqhttp://www.sprword.com/videos/payingtheprice/Architects of Control - Mass Control & The Future of Mankindhttp://www.sprword.com/videos/architectsofcontrol/Banking with Hitlerhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YauM5dHLn1sThe CIA And The Nazishttp://www.sprword.com/videos/ciaandthenazis/Dear America: Letters Home From Vietnamhttp://www.sprword.com/videos/dearamerica/END THE FEDERAL RESERVE AND END ALL THEWARS THE FEDERAL RESERVE FINANCES THEWARS SO THEY FINANCE THE KILLING END THEFED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Money, Banking and the Federal Reserve VIDEO BELOWhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLYL_NVU1bg