The Japanese attacked Pearl, if Hitler had not declared war on the US, should....

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs
DF, isn't it true the the US greatly benefited industrially and technologically from it's involvment in WWII? What if we'd chosen to stay out of it? We could have easily fallen behind the USSR and the Nazis in terms of military technology. Plus, given that the Nazis were a military-industrialist power and the Soviets could outpace even them, do you really think it would have been in our or the world's best interest to allow the Nazis to continue?

War is the single most powerful motivator for advancement. Would the USA be where it is today (leaving 9-11 and all related subjects out for the sake of argument) if it hadn't gotten involved in '41?

The UK transfered nearly all its wealth to the US in return for its survival. It enabled the US to become even more powerful than it was. Also the British gave ALL their technology to the US who had the money and resources to improve on it, eg RADAR

[DRoseDARs]

Just remember, TS: when WWIII starts, it'll be the UK's turn to bail OUR butts out, and you'll probably get ALL our nifty toys too in the process...

( "Simpsons" reference, for those who missed it. )

[TheStinger]

I'm not saying that the US didn't save the UK in WW2 i'm just pointing out that they got an awful lot in return

[Daz]

I think that the US protected their interests in Europe. Theoretically the didn't have to enter the war in Europe, but then Europe would be gone for good, and who knows that Hitler would do next?!

On such a level, there are no "Friends". Such actions are not motivated by "Friendship". That would be naive.

[Lancer]

Yeah, we got alot in return from the Brits.

A PM that got elected by the left feels the debt strongly enough to put his career on the line for what's right. Still amazes me.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by Lancer
Yeah, we got alot in return from the Brits.

A PM that got elected by the left feels the debt strongly enough to put his career on the line for what's right. Still amazes me.

Yes it works both ways except for Suez and a dodgy bit in the early 90's when Bush and Clinton decided to pursue a strong relationship with Germans the UK-US alliance(I should probably add in Canada) is the strongest in history

[Zero]

Originally posted by curtsibling

They would have concentrated their efforts in the pacific.

If we assume that Japanese didnt bomb pearl harbor (as it says in title) then what would be the incentives for US to attack japan?

[badman]

I'm really glad that the Americans attacked Germany and saved us both from our own dictatorship and from a soviet dictatorship (at least West Germany).
But that doesn't mean that we have to do what you want us to do and that doesn't mean that we have to "stand with you" now.

And I don't think that Blair wants to go to war because he feels some kind of debt towards the US. I think he believes that the world has to get rid of Saddam right now under any circumstances.

[Andrew1999]

The U.S. Navy had already begun attacking German submarines in fall of 1941.

[Sava]

Hindsight is 20/20. We know now that going against Germany, Italy, and Japan was the right thing to do. But this question is in no way objective because people know what the true extent of the evil of the Axis powers was. Back then, the American public didn't have access to information. Most of the news came from the government which passed it on to media outlets.

Knowing what we know now, my answer is yes.
Knowing what we knew then, my answer would be no.