Why doesn't the US remain united in wartime?

[DanS]

The Civil War and WWII sustained high casualties without the US bailing out because it was fighting for the success of freedom and liberty, and everyone agreed on it.

More like a slim majority agreed on it.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by DanS


FDR nearly lost an election during WWII and planned the end of the war with the thought in mind that the US wouldn't support continued fighting.

I didn't know that - got a link?

[DanS]

No cite. It was in some of my readings regarding Yalta. I'll try to remember where.

[Alexander's Horse]

I threw in a few cheap shots I'll be the first to admit but there is an underlying point here.

OBL says in the end the US will give in and he's looking at history when he says it.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Almost lost an election during WW2? WTF? Unless you think winning 55% of the vote and 38 out 48 states is almost losing. Or winning 53% of the vote and 36 out of 48 is almost losing.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by DanS
No cite. It was in some of my readings regarding Yalta. I'll try to remember where.

If Yalta, I'll assume you meant the election of 1944:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._presidential_election%2C_1944

Winning the popular vote 53% to 46% and the Electoral College 432 to 99, is not almost losing by any measure.

[DanS]

AH: No doubt. On the other hand, I think he would merely create a story out of wholecloth to fit his needs in any event. In a sense, I don't think the US is a central character in his ideology. If some other power were his enemies, he would make the same points. As far as I know, a good part of the ideological underpinning of AQ is a vestige of the Arab popular fight against British imperialism.

[DanS]

Winning the popular vote 53% to 46% and the Electoral College 432 to 99, is not almost losing by any measure.

I think it's pretty damn close.

[mrmitchell]

I think it's pretty damn close in war time.

Makes Bush's 51%-49% a goddamn miracle, doesn't it?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by DanS
I think it's pretty damn close.

You're a funny guy, Dan.

[KrazyHorse]

Not really. In Canada the government was Liberal throughout WWII:

In the October, 1935 election the Liberals took 45% of the vote

In the March, 1940 election the Liberals took 51% of the vote

In the June, 1945 election the Liberals took 39% of the vote

[DanS]

Not really, what? I'm not a funny guy? It wasn't a close election in '44? Bush's reelection wasn't a goddamn miracle?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
I threw in a few cheap shots I'll be the first to admit but there is an underlying point here.

OBL says in the end the US will give in and he's looking at history when he says it.

Sorry, but I dare you to name a single war since WW2 were the Uk or France have deployed 100,000 plus troops for more than a few years which lead to no serious accrimony?

The only war I can think of that the French sent that many men to have been Indochina, which the French lost, and Algeria, which the French also lost, and which caused immense political upheavals in France.

Since 1945 i don;t think the UK has deployed 100,000 men anywhere for combat. Certainly the Uk fought some LONG anti-insurgency campaigns, but they were relatively small ones, like Malayia, or seevral long actions in Africa.

So comparing the Anglo-French experience since 1945 to the US one does not really compute.

As for what Osama says- his people could NEVER even take out one of the current repressive regimes in the ME, so claiming they can beat the US really means nothing.The Us has been in Afghanistan for close to 4 years now, probably for several more, and you hear very little about it because the Us can certainly afford without much thought having 10,000 men in a mission for half a decade or more.

Iraq was only ever tangentially related to the war on terror, and the fact is that the notion of a war to 'spread dmeocracy" is a pretty damn well contientious one to begin with, so of course the admin. will face political pressure, specially given how badly they have done in the first place.

[Imran Siddiqui]

It wasn't a close election in '44

Now you are getting it.

Actually, if you compare the '44 election, it looks VERY similar to the '88 election, where G.H.W. Bush trounced Dukakis. Unless you want to say that election was close.

[KrazyHorse]

Hell, the British public routed the Conservatives after VE day but prior to VJ day...