Those Angry Days by Lynne Olson ~ August Bookclub Online

[BarbStAubrey]

The Book Club Online is  the oldest  book club on the Internet, begun in 1996, open to everyone.  We offer cordial discussions of one book a month,  24/7 and  enjoy the company of readers from all over the world.  Everyone is welcome.

August Book Club Online

THOSE ANGRY DAYS by Lynne Olson
Roosevelt, Lindbergh, and America’s Fight Over World War II, 1939-1941  

".............the definitive account of the debate over American intervention in World War II—a bitter, sometimes violent clash of personalities and ideas that divided the nation and ultimately determined the fate of the free world.   - The New York Times “In Those Angry Days, journalist-turned-historian Lynne Olson captures [the] period in a fast-moving, highly readable narrative punctuated by high drama. It’s . . . popular history at its most riveting, detailing what the author rightfully characterizes as ‘a brutal, no-holds-barred battle for the soul of the nation.’ It is sure to captivate readers seeking a deeper understanding of how public opinion gradually shifted as America moved from bystander to combatant in the war to preserve democracy.”—Associated Press

DISCUSSION SCHEDULE:
August 1-7	Chapters 1-7
August 8-14	Chapters 8-14
August 15-21	Chapters 15-21
August 22-28	Chapters 22-28

Discussion Leaders:   Ella  & Harold

[BarbStAubrey]

I am fascinated and would love to really understand the difference in feeling guilt - example - the Bataan Death march was 55 miles of 72,000 soldiers who had used up all their provisions and living in the jungle - there were between 5000 and 7000 deaths - so let's use the 7000 -

There were 50,000 men, WOMAN and CHILDREN marched 2,200 miles from the Carolina's, Georgia etc that the US government wants to only own the death of 4,000 where as the Cherokee alone, not counting the Chickasaw or the Choctaw count between 5,000 and 25,000 - So only using the 5,000 number that is 10% just over the percent who died on the Bataan Death march and yet, even I have to own my tummy still lurches hearing about the Bataan Death March. Do we like Pontius Pilate wash our hands - I hear folks say our family was not yet here in the US in 1831 and yet, how many of us had family in the Philippians during WWII or had family who survived the death march.

How does our inner unconscious decide when we will be shocked, astounded and horrified. We can quote the number of deaths from Hitler's death camps - about 12 million - the number rolls off our tongue and yet, do we count that when Columbus stepped foot in the Americas in North America alone there were between 50 and 100 million native Americans and by 1900 they were decimated to 1 million with countless children taken from their families who had already experienced the loss of their home - sure there was fighting and death to us immigrants however, the white population exponentially increased in number during the same 408 years. And yes, a large percentage was death from disease brought by the white race - however if the whites were dying in similar numbers there would be all sorts of efforts to find cures never mind the huge number of Indians purposefully given disease ridden goods.

Why? - Another - we built Japan back after WWII - it took the native Indian population to figure out how to get around state laws to finally have an economy built on the whites penchant for gambling. Those reservations without income from gambling are still in the thralls of poverty. In most cases we never even and still haven't honored our treaties but we sure took the resources and inhabited their lands.

More than anything I just do not understand how we react in outrage reading history without owning our own horrendous national behavior. This has always confused me. Do we so compartmentalize events that like riding a roller coaster we can zip along from one dip to the next - Does land not unite us but rather race and nationality bind us? I am not talking about justice, I am only trying to figure out our emotional reactions to savagery that excludes our own savage behavior.  Sorta the 'There but for the grace of God, go I'. Has this weighed on anyone else's mind?

[HaroldArnold]

In a post yesterday Ella asked:  Let us know what you learn from the various sources you are reading about Hitler.  I have never read a book about the man, know that he was from Austria, was a paper hanger, wanted to be an artist, loved his niece and brought her to Germany with him and he slowly started to form the black shirts was it?

For one of the best and perhaps a most reliable primary sources about Hitler’s mind set in the 1930’s and 40’ read the several writings of Albert Speer.   This is because of the special relation that Speer enjoyed with the Fuhrer throughout the 1930’s and 40’s.    This relationship came about because of Hitler’s early concept of himself as an artist and architect.   Speer had been introduced to Hitler I guess in the early 1930 and doubtlessly discussed architecture on a flattering peer to peer basis.  I think Speer had a role in the architectural planning of the 1936 Berlin Olympic Games.  Also he designed the art off several large pre war Nazi party rallies.  He had war time meetings with Hitler concerning post war rebuilding of Germany.  I particularly remember Speer’s description of his later meetings with Hitler who blamed others never realizing the inevitability of pending defeat until at last he bit the Cyanide pill leaving Speer the dubious distinction of his heir as the 2nd and last Fuhrer.

[BarbStAubrey]

Harold if there is another book on Hilter's life by Speer it does not seem to be available - the book by Speer that Amazon has in its inventory is Inside the Third Reich by Albert Speer - there are a few books that are given 4 and half stars about Speer that he shared a fanciful account of himself and what happened - I wonder if that is why a book he may have written about Hitler is no longer available. becasue usually if a book is out of print Amazon will still list it. Often there are resale copies that individuals try to sell. Can you remember a Title - that may help locating the book that sounds like a first hand account.

[HaroldArnold]

Today we have begun our 3rd weeks assignment  that includes Chapter Chapter 16, “The Bubonic Plague Among Writers.”  Chapter 17, “A National Disgrace, ”Chapter 18,”Well Boys Brittan’ Brittan’s Broke”,  Chapter 19, “A Race against Time”Chapter 20 ,  “A Traitorous Point of View” and Chapter 21,  Der Fuhrer Thanks You For Your Loyalty. 

At the end of this Week next Wednesday we will find ourselves almost at war with Germany with the U.S. Navy Conveying ships in the Atlantic as far as Iceland where the Royal Navy took them the rest of the distance to English ports.  On Next Thursday the final week‘s discussion of the subject with the discussion of the surprise Declarations of War against first Japan and 3 days later Germany.

[HaroldArnold]

There are probably 60 book on my book shelves relating to Nazi Germany and WW II.  Here are three titles I particularly remember, Albert Speer, "Spandau",1976.,  Albert Speer, "Inside the 3rd Reich," 1970, and James P. O'Donnell, "The Bunker," 1978.  This is a particularity intriguing account of the bunker physiology of the Top Nazi's trapped in the bunker during the final days as the Battle for Berlin waged above.

[Ella Gibbons]

HAROLD, were you in WWII?  My husband was in the Navy in the Pacific although I never knew him until 1948 and he would never talk of the war, never read a book about it.  All veterans are different in that respect, I understand.

JOANP, as I remember - I was in high school at the time - it was a joyous time for America.  Isn't that awful in retrospect?  But everyone knew the war would soon be  over, the boys were coming home.  I get teary-eyed when I write "the boys coming home."  It's a patriotic feeling, I get tears when people stand when the flag goes by or they sing the Star Spangled Banner, it's an innate feeling hard to describe.

It was sometime later we learned of the consequences, but I remember everyone justifying it by what Barbara said  - it saved untold lives on both sides.

INcidentally, Barbara, I understand.  We do compartmentalize, but we do read hopefully of all the wrongs committed in our history.

Don't you think we are less savage as a nation than what our early history was?  Are we better or getting there?  Has our emphasis on human rights done anything for us as citizens, as a nation?

[bookad]

replying to your thought 'was the atomic bomb the right way to go'.....I was thinking about 2 books I've read to do with Japan and their treatment of American prisoners of war; sadly I can only name one of these books as the online group where I kept my lists of books I've read dissolved, and somehow I am missing one years worth of the reading I did that year...but one book Unbroken by Laura Hillenbrand about Olympian star Lou Zamperini on a rescue mission from Hawaii forced to ditch his plane over the Pacific and his survival, finally to be caught by the Japanese and the malicious, abusive torture this young man received daily at their hands for no apparent reason....the other book about a group of Americans going into an Asian area to rescue a group of prisoners of war...and there was description of the horrors the prisoners of war were under,... being dehumanized.....unthinkable, no ethic code for those abusers even if they were mind shifted into the practice of abusing their prisoners and had not been that way prior to the war.....the atomic bomb at least stopped that abuse from continuing on, who knows how long further....no Geneva convention code held in place for those captives sadly

I sadly realize the horror story to the victims of the atomic bombing....many of the Japanese that were responsible for the horrors in the prison camps and those that forced Japanese soldiers to reset their minds to be able to do atrocities to the prisoners so many Japanese were themselves victims in a way,.... responding in a way their overlords wanted them to; by dehumanizing their prisoners and causing their demise in situations of horror...
...but mostly those victims in the bombed areas, the extreme pain, disfigurement, deaths, radiation sickness, cancers later.....

I think knowing this I know how I would vote with my yes or no vote to the 'bomb'! And I'm not even American so I wouldn't get a vote.

[Jonathan]

War is Hell. Who said that? Wasn't it General Sherman after his destructive march through Georgia and South Carolina? It is well that we remind ourselves of the brutalities and atrocities committed in wartime. The carnage and destruction. Is it any wonder that there was so much opposition to getting involved in another European war?

I can't get over it. Churchill providing safe transportation for the wealth of an Empire, while instructing his ambassador to tell the Yanks, 'We're Broke'!

Harold, I remember reading The Bunker under unusual circumstances, shortly after it came out. Greyhound offered Canadians unlimited bus travel for a very small fee, in recognition for services rendered in Iran by our ambassador to American soldiers caught in a trap. So I took my twelve-year-old son for a ride down to NYC. Then Washington, and finally down to Charleston and Fort Sumter. We had a wonderful time. Along the way I meditated on Hitler,s unusual fate. He had such grand dreams, but will forever be remembered for the ulitmate horrors committed in his short time on history's stage.

For a while the world was astonished at what he was achieving in Germany. The country was demoralized, in terrible shape. Churchill wanted to meet him, when he was in Germany in the early thirties, but Hilter's busy schedule didn't make it possible. But for that, and history could have taken a different course. Those two could have made a sweet deal, both being painters and all. Both detested that communist menace in the east.

[Jonathan]

Interesting thoughts on reporting the news. My gripe is that they all want to do more than report. They want to influence the reader's thinking. As a consequence we get more opinion than news. Journalists want to be influential and feel they're having an effect on public opinion polls. Perhaps even reaching the leaders. Be their mouthpiece. Of course, the period under discussion produced some very outstanding commentators Don't you all remember Dorothy Thompson? Wasn't she a sweetheart?

[marjifay]

CSpan's BookTV tomorrow (Saturday, 8/17) at 2 PM ET, will have Susan Dunn discussing her book 1940; FDR, WILKIE, LINDBERGH, HITLER - THE ELECTION AMID THE STORM.  (43 minutes).  I plan to read this book when I finish Angry Days.

It will be available at BookTV.org for watching later if you can't watch it Saturday.

Marj

[HaroldArnold]

Ella, as I have said before, I was on active duty in the U.S. Navy for some 20 months from Nov, 1944 through June 1945.. I arrived at a Navy Base in the  Philippine Island in August 1945 just a few days after the 2 Atom bombs had brought the surrender offer.  After that I  spent the next at 3 months at Ulithi atoll decommissioning the major Navy base there .  That was  followed by 7 months as as a Base Electrician at the Commander of the Marianas Headquarters on Guam.  I was Discharged at Camp Wallace  Texas  near Houston on June 19,1945.

Jonathan, I bet you and your son found that buss trip to the U.S.Interesting.  I remember that  U.S. confrontation with Iran and the role the Canadian Embassy played in engineering the release of the prisoners.  Your trip with your son to New York City, Washington, and on to South Carolina must  have displayed quite a U.S.cultural contrast.  

Also I do not recall hearing any news of the vast transfer of U.K. wealth to the U.S. for safe keeping.   I don't think it got much news publicity at the time.  I first heard of it when I read the book

  
Thank you Marjify for your report of the CSpan broadcast tomorrow discussing Susan Dunn'sr book," 1940; FDR, WILKIE, LINDBERGH, HITLER."  I'll plan on watching it.

[JoanP]

More on the subject of guilt and regret...and the atomic bomb. When thinking about Ella's question and recent comments, about how the American people would have reacted if they knew what this bomb could do...I started to think of Paul Tibbetts, the pilot who dropped that bomb.  How he felt before - and after he learned of the destruction and devastations.

From some sites on Paul Tibbets and the Enola Gay -

Paul Warfield Tibbets, Sr. and Enola Gay "...had served as the personal pilot of Dwight D. Eisenhower, and he was already an experienced B-29 pilot, thus making him an ideal candidate.
Tibbets had to frequently fly to the Los Alamos Laboratories (in New Mexico) for briefings regarding the Manhattan Project
Initially, Tibbets was unfamiliar with even the concept of an atomic bomb, and was quoted in a 1946 article in The New Yorker saying, "I will go only so far as to say that I knew what an atom was

When the A-bomb was dropped on the city, Tibbets recalls that the city was covered with a tall mushroom cloud.

Colonel Tibbets was seen as a national hero who ended the war with Japan. There were, however, no parades or testimonial dinners for him or any of the other Enola Gay crewmen.

In a 1975 interview he said: "I'm proud that I was able to start with nothing, plan it, and have it work as perfectly as it did .... I sleep clearly every night."[9]


In the 2005 BBC premier, Hiroshima: BBC History of World War II, Tibbets recalled the day of the Hiroshima bombing. When the bomb had hit its target, he was relieved. Tibbets stressed in the interview, "I'm not emotional. I did the job and I was so relieved that it was successful, you can't even understand it."
In 1995, he denounced the 50th anniversary exhibition of the Enola Gay at the Smithsonian Institution, which attempted to present the bombing in context with the destruction it caused, as a "damn big insult, due to its focus on the Japanese casualties rather than the brutality of the Japanese government and the subsequent necessity of the bombing.

"His crews respected him. Psychologically, he could handle the aftereffects of such a mission. For the last 60 years, he has had to deal with the controversy."

"I knew when I got the assignment it was going to be an emotional thing," Tibbets acknowledged Wednesday, noting of his crew, "We had feelings, but we had to put them in the background. We knew it was going to kill people right and left. But my one driving interest was to do the best job I could so that we could end the killing as quickly as possible"If Dante had been on the plane with us, he would have been terrified," Tibbets later said.

"My God," co-pilot Capt. Robert Lewis scribbled in his flight log.

Death estimates have varied widely. Some say 80,000 is a reliable figure, while noting that tens of thousands of others perished by year’s end from the effects of radiation. The dead included 20,000 Koreans the Japanese had enslaved for war work.

[JoanP]

I'm a bit confused about why we are talking about the end of the war with Germany and the atomic bomb right now - when at this point, the country is still divided about whether we should even enter the war.  The Interventionists seem to be gaining momentum, but those opposed are making themselves heard.

I'm interested in the founders of the America First movement.  Chapter 15 cleared that up...  I was surprised, (but not really) that the movement grew  on college campuses,  - first, Yale, Harvard, Dartmouth, and spreading to college campuses  across the country.  No war for these sons of the priviliged.  
 I was surprised to read here too that OXFORD students in Britain protested as well, "pledging not to bear arms for flag and country."
 Parents found this hard to comprehend.  Fathers who had fought for the country in WWI seen the horror of war, yet  were interventionists now, ready for another war.
  
Student movements protested loudly, as the AMERICA FIRST movement grew.  Charles Lindbergh was their hero.  When invited to Yale - (or was it Harvard,) his speech was met with "thundering applause" - much to his surprise.  He had been thinking of turning down the invitation, afraid of protests.  

If war comes, who would fight?  

Fast forward...to 1968, the Harvard campus.  Bruce and I were living in Cambridge at the time and saw the protest demonstrations agaist the war in Vietnam -   almost daily.  It was scarey.  So much anger.   How did their parents, the WWII vets take their unwillingness to go to war?  What was different this time, the professors at the universities were sympathetic to their position.  Weren't they also WWII Vets?  Where were you on Vietnam?  

[Ella Gibbons]

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR REMARKS, it's so interesting to come in and read them all and  isn't history a wonderful subject to discuss?   We should do more of it  - what book, what historical period would you suggest?

But back to our present book and the angry days.  Do you sense anger among these people?   Who?  What pages or chapters?  The "fierce conflicting pressures of isolationists and interventionists?"

In Chapter 19 (pg.189) we are told that "with a reviving economy, private industry was hardly eager to deny consumers the new cars and other items they were demanding or to give up the profits that resulted."[/i

Now there is a dilemma, I would think!   How was it done?  By government force, incentive, how?

FDR was ill, there was unease in Washington.   Can you imagine what G.Britain was feeling, they were losing the war - "hanging on by their eyelids" as one pundit called it.

 HOW WAS IT DONE? 

[JoanP]

 

Can you imagine what G.Britain was feeling, they were losing the war - "hanging on by their eyelids" as one pundit called it.

Ella, that's why I was so shocked to read that British students were protesting as well!  Was it just Oxford?

OXFORD students in Britain protested as well, "pledging not to bear arms for flag and country."

[Ella Gibbons]

That is shocking, JOANP, first I've ever read of it.   HEre in America we would have called them draft dodgers if they refused to serve in the military.

I have an idea Englad had a policty for dealing with those who refused to serve.  I bet Churchill would had plenty to say about  such pledges by students.

[BarbStAubrey]

When I read that I thought like father like son since we learned that most in Parliament grew up as boyhood friends in "Public" schools and attended either Oxford or Cambridge and here their sons are protesting echoing Parliament - I guess these sons and daughters in Oxford had parents supporting their efforts. I wonder if it was even brought up at the dinner table or was it so engrained an attitude there was no need for conversation at home.

Classes all day today - just a quick break for lunch - may not get back in here till tomorrow

[Ella Gibbons]

JOANP:  Just a quick note, what page was that quote from - about the Oxford students?   I want to look up the source for it and perhaps we can read more bout that.

[JoanP]

The quote was on p. 221, Chapter 15, Ella...  I checked Lynne Olson's notes in the back of the book and see it was from Eric Sevareid's book, Not so Wild A Dream. p.60  Another name from the past, no?  Was it that long ago?

Bruce and I were talking about this over lunch...he asked when the Oxford students were protesting the war - before France was invaded?  I think it would be important to know that...

Here's a link to Eric Sevareid's book -http://www.amazon.com/Not-Wild-Dream-Eric-Sevareid/dp/0826210147

ps  Just checked my library - it's there, it's available.  I'll pick it up this afternoon before I go to the market.

[Jonathan]

Here's a book that has a lot to say about those who refused to go to war. Someone here recommended it not long ago, if I remember correctly. I have a copy and it does look interesting.

http://www.amazon.com/End-All-Wars-Rebellion-1914-1918/dp/0547750315/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1376685223&sr=8-4&keywords=to+end+all+war

Thanks to everyone for the references to other books related to what we are reading. There's so much out there. But Those Angry Days should be read by every thoughtful citizen.

Is there a good bio of Harry Hopkins? Thanks for the fine pic, Ella. He does look good in it.

[Jonathan]

Was the story true, of the horse that wanted Hilter off it's back?  I believe it was meant as a parable. It's a Jewish story, of course, that's on the lookout for the ironies in their history.

[HaroldArnold]

Jonathan, I remember Harry Hopkins as a Principal Roosevelt advisers and even thought he had been around serving later Presidents,  but I was wrong about that.  There is a short Hopkins web biography at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Hopkins . I was surprised to find he died in 1946.  He had served Roosevelt in setting up the New Deal in the 1930's and through the early War crisis  years.  He had stomach cancer  in 1936 necessitating surgery that saved his life after which Roosevelt used him as a live in White House adviser particularly as his principal contact contact with Winston Churchill.  Later in 1945 Hopkins accompanied Roosevelt to the Yalta Conference.  He died in 1946.

 I also find it hard to believe Hitler did any horseback riding after WW I, certainly not after he became came to power in  1933.

 

[dbroomsc]

I have not actively participated in this discussion, but have read all the posts with great interest.

Regarding books about Harry Hopkins, I have two, "Harry Hopkins: Ally of the Poor and Defender of Democracy" by George McJimsey and "Harry Hopkins: A Biography" by June Hopkins, his granddaughter.  I attended an Elderhostel class in Savannah, Ga. taught by June Hopkins sometime late 1990's.  At the time she was a professor at Atlantic State University in Savannah.  Both books detail the enormous part Harry Hopkins played during the depression and the Roosevelt era.

[JoanP]

dean69, it is good to know that you have been with us - and to hear your comments from time to time.  I love the way connections are being made...and that you actually met up with Henry Hopkins granddaughter to learn of the part he played in FDR's administration.  Another of that era who died in 1946!  I can't begin to think of the lonely, difficult time Harry Truman will have...

Jonathan- I followed the link you provided to To End All Wars: A Story of Loyalty and Rebellion, 1914-1918 Thank you!

"—there was a stronger antiwar movement there than anywhere else. More than 20,000 British men of military age refused the draft, and, as a matter of principle, many also refused the non-combatant alternative service offered to conscientious objectors, such as working in war industries or driving ambulances. More than 6,000 of these young men went to prison under very harsh conditions, as did some brave, outspoken critics of the war."

Not long after, in the 30's, we're finding resistance to the new war that threatens Britain.  In Lynne Olson's book, she referred to the pledge the Oxford students made in Britain...not to take up arms for king and country.  Her end note directed us to Eric Sevareid's autobiography - Not So Wild a Dream, p.60.  She didn't say WHEN the Oxford Movement took place.  I thought that was important to know...
I picked up Mr. Sevareid's book from the library to read the source and learn more...and spent much of last pm reading his first person account , lost in the many tangents following this committed isolationist from very early days up to WWII and beyond.

[JoanP]

Hopefully I will be able to briefly share what I learned of Sevareid and student revolts on college campuses in the US and in Britain...

"He writes "on campust after campus, students demonstrated to keep out of any future wars to preserve at least an oasis of sanity in an insane world."
"Thousands of young Americans, including Sevareid, following the lead of the students at Britain's Oxford University in pledging not to bear arms for flag or country." This is what Lynne Olson wrote in Angry Days.  She didn't mention when.

Eric S. writes of the state of intellectual ferment he found on the campus of the U. of Minnesota when he enrolled there..  The students hated the military establishment  - students were "forced against their will" to take military training 3x a week for two years.  ROTC.  He writes of the 200-300 students who assembled to to debate the Oxford Movement, pledging never to take up arms for flag and country.   Sevareid had enrolled as a student at the age of 20, he was born in 1912 - so this took place in 1932 when their was no immediate threat of war.
He writes that the students' hope was that truth would defeat Hitler, that he would be stopped, would be killed by the democracies of Europe.

He worked as a journalist for three years in London, returned to America in 1940 after witnessing human suffering - After working in America two years, he wrote, "I could no longer postpone a personal, moral crisis, the matter of becoming a soldier." Many of his friends had enlisted, (including the Jacobins (his friends from U. of Minn who had taken the pledge.)

I've read that most of those student protesters from America's college campuses enlisted "in droves" after Pearl Harbor.  I imagine that those in Britain did the same when their shores were threatened.

Ella...as far as I can tell, there was no way to coerce manufacturers of cars and appliances, etc. to convert to planes and munitions - until Pearl Harbor - when they immediately went into production 24-!  Pearl Harbor had an amazing effect on our way of life!

[BarbStAubrey]

I remember the shock of Pearl Harbor - 9/11 seemed to freeze us for days as we watched and heard of heroics, last calls from loved ones and the digging after - where as Pearl Harbor was the opposite - maybe because there were so many irons in the fire that could move into action but it felt like overnight we were all doing something - in those early days I remember as a Girl Scout we were tearing up sheets etc and winding bandages - sounds like something out of the Civil War but that was how WWII started with women immediately going into action on the home-front using the same skill sets from WWI, they hustled the family into action knitting sox, saving newspaper, and getting the preserves counted and planning the garden for next spring to feed the family.

Been reading Roosevelt's Second Act by Richard Moe that includes lots of additional detail from 1936 forward - it appears he had been fully engaged in planning his retirement that included designing a cottage on the Hyde Park estate to work on his papers. The author shares there is very little first hand information about the mindset of FDR therefore, most conclusions about his actions were suppositions from his actions.

He goes on to 'suppose' that FDR did not see another candidate who could take on Hitler and was already deeply involved with Churchill therefore with lots of trepidations (taken from the memoirs of close associates) it was a gradual decision to seek the third term.

During the 1939 Gridiron Club dinner members wheeled out an eight-foot-tall paper-mâché sphinx featuring Roosevelt's Iconic grin with cigarette holder. The question they asked "Will you run? / Or are you done?" FDR laughed - the sphinx remains on view at his presidential library in Hyde Park.

He saw Wendell Wilkie as hapless and the remarks by a Republican was, "Franklin Roosevelt is not running against Wendell Wilkie, he's running against Adolf Hitler."

Hitler invaded Poland in 1939 and the Democratic National Convention was in Chicago July 1940. Reporters and political cartoonist continued to depict him as the 'sphinx'.

[Jonathan]

As far as I can see, Lynne Olson's whole book demonstrates that Charles Lindbergh was right in his assessment of who was dragging America into the war. With his country under attack he too 'reenlisted' and got into action in the Pacific.

I can't believe what I'm reading. I can't remember when I've been so overwhelmed by a book. What strong memories those angry days have left in the memory of others. I now see why after sixty years Philip Roth in his book The Plot Against America could still portray Charles Lindbergh as Nazi-oriented. What a climate of fear and hate. I'm surprised to what an extent FDR himself was caught up in it.

I'm sure you're all aware of Robert Sherwood's book, Roosevelt and Hopkins. Those two were certainly close. In another book I read that Sherwood fought with the Canadians at Vimy Ridge in WWI, before the U.S. got into the fight.

Back to our book. Interesting to read that many in the higher ranks in the U.S. military were of the same mind as Charles Lindbergh. Stay out of it.

[BarbStAubrey]

Another tidbit I did not know - seems the oval office had not always been oval - Theodore had made changes but in 1933 FDR made the changes we see today - more accessible for his wheelchair he loved playing architect and added the Georgian details - the pediments over the doorways, deep crown molding, bookcases in niches, a large medallion of the presidential seal on the ceiling including the tradition of two high backed chairs in front of the fireplace opposite the room from the desk so that photos could be taken of a seated president with visiting dignitaries.

The reporters used to crowd into the oval office for their press conferences after hearing of the fall of Poland the reporters asked if we could stay out - FDR replied "I not only sincerely hope so, but I believe we can, every effort will be made by the Administration so to do."

During press conferences everything was off the record with a rule what was shared was for background or guidance. The president was not to be quoted unless he gave permission. "Asked if he could be quoted directly on this last statement, he said yes."

[HaroldArnold]

Regarding my 1941 through 1944 contacts  while in High School I can not remember a single example of any organized  group in San Antonio publicizing their refusal to serve in the U.S. military.  That was what I observed in my limited High School experience.  Quite likely there were some.  I understand though it was not easy to qualify for the Conscientious Objector status.

I know also in late 1944 and up to the end of the War it became increasing difficult  to replace battle causalities on the Normandy Front.  Canada provided significant fighting manpower for the British units in France., and Jonathon isn't it true that Canada had no Draft law and that all the Canadian units wer volunteers.  In North Africa and Italy many of the British units were from Austria, New Zeeland and even India.  I dont know if they used draft  conscription as England and the United States. .   

[BarbStAubrey]

Quotes from the Fireside Chat the Sunday night September 3, after France and Britain declared war on Germany.

"I have said not once, but many times, that I have seen war and that I hate war. I will say that again and again. I hope that the United States will keep out of this war. I believe that it will. And I give you my assurance and reassurance that every effort of your Government will be directed toward that end."

Later in his chat he says, "Passionately thought we may desire detachment, we are forced to realize that every word that comes through he air, every ship that sails the sea, every battle that is fought, does affect the American future."

"Roosevelt was painting the larger picture for his listeners, reassuring them about the immediate while at the same time urging them to look beyond the immediate and informing them that a dangerous world lay beyond their shores, one that the nation could not ignore. "

[Jonathan]

Read Susan Dunn's 1940: FDR, LINDBERGH, WILLKIE, HITLER - THE ELECTION AND THE STORM.

No one could possibly have more of a problem with retirement than a man who is having a very successful career in public affairs. Nothing illustrates his political acumen better than the way he managed his nomination for a third term.

[Jonathan]

Canada and World Wars.

Yes, Harold. The draft was used to get men to enlist. There was much opposition. Getting into the war took a resolution in Parliament, but that was quickly passed. Conscription being an issue, the resolution included the statement: 'not necessarily conscription, but conscription if necessary.'

There was a vast change from WWI to WWII. In 1914 Canada was informed by the Colonial Secretary in London 'We're at war.' In 1939 we were requested to join. Of course there was no hesitation.

Correct me. if I'm wrong, Deb.

[BarbStAubrey]

Wow we are all bringing additional insight - this is grand - so glad we are doing this and doing such a bang up job of really seeing various authors additions while some offer their additional viewpoints - who knew this was such a jammed packed few months - the war seems like a train on a railroad track as compared to this stew of sentiment.

OK I think this is the best yet of what Lindbergh actually said - not a Nazi sympathizer as I can see from this radio speech.

From the book Roosevelt's Second Act. Four days after the President's fireside chat with encouragement from Lindbergh's conservative friends and with the assistance of the conservative commentator Fulton Lewis Jr. he agreed to a deliver a national radio address the following week.

Anne talking to her mother-in-law remarks how Charles would be fighting the same fight as his father did years ago.  Roosevelt learning of Lindbergh's plan did not like it. That is when Truman Smith the military attaché in Berlin, who guided Lindbergh through the German aircraft facilities to "assess the strength and technical proficiency of the Luftwaffe" is now, a colonel working for Gen Arnold is sent to Lindbergh to offer him a new "secretaryship for air"  a cabinet position not to deliver the speech.

The speech did not address the repealing of the arms embargo but rather, "urged his countrymen to see the world situation with cold detachment, not allowing "our sentiment, our pity, or our personal feelings of sympathy, to obscure the issue, to affect our children's lives, We must be, as impersonal as a surgeon with his knife." He goes on how we should never enter a war unless there is "absolutely no other recourse," and that was not the current situation. We must either keep out of European wars entirely, or stay in European affairs permanently."

Sounds like some of what we heard about the war in Iraq

Lindbergh goes on to say something about not being threatened by an "Asiatic intruder". He is  referring the Genghis Khan and Xerxes- then Lindbergh says, "This is a question of banding together to defend the White race against foreign invasion. This is simply one more of those age old quarrels within our family of nations- a quarrel arising from errors of the last war- from the failure of victors of that war to follow a consistent policy of fairness or of force."

Sounds like our penchant after the Japanese attack, followed by the hysteria that removed Japanese from their homes on the west coast was precluded by Lindbergh reminding us of our fear of Asians in this speech. Never heard or read that was our reaction but now after reading this I wonder what was our underbelly fears.

[BarbStAubrey]

Jonathan I can see why Roth would say what he did - it must be very hard if not impossible to be un-affected by all this dithering about war and blaming anyone who was not ready to storm Europe immediately knowing how many Jews could have been saved - do not know Roth's bio to know if he had family eliminated during the holocaust.

[HaroldArnold]

Lynne Olson named Chapter 17 that describes the political conflicts that emerged during the 1940 election campaign. "A National Disgrace."  Of course members of the America First group wanted to support the party offering the policies most compatible with their strict Isolationist position, but in reality the position of both FDR and WW were not much apart and in ways offered little for holders of the Isolationist position the be excited about.  When  just a couple of weeks before election day FDR found that WW was dangerously close to him in the poll, it was he who gave in with ta speech in Boston assuring American parents that "your boys are not going to be sent into any Foreign War." There were other follow-up releases that dismayed Sherwood and other interventionists backers of FDR,

On election day  Roosevelt won, but by a victory margin considerably reduced from the landslide returns in 1932 ans 1936.  The book calls it the closest presidential election the previous 25 years.  (This point is discussed in the book between pages 280 and the end of the Chapter.)  

[bookad]

Jonathan--sorry I cannot help you really....I always thought we had no conscription...my father wished to be in the airforce, but due to his colourblindness he was not allowed into the airforce and  actually worked in Calgary in the war effort ....my uncle was in the airforce and was shot down over the English channel but lived to fly again fortunately.

my father never talked about the war time till after my mother died and just before he died and he only talked about this woman he had met in Calgary and wanted to know if I could hunt for her on the internet....as I had been able to find the WW1 records of my grandfather and his enlistment in the war.

I thought they all volunteered ...I would have to research this as they are all
deceased.


amazing what I am learning thru this discussion....wish I could contribute more, but I feel out of my element especially not being around during the time we are talking about.
I'm just a 'baby-boomer' generation

[Ella Gibbons]

YES, IT IS A GRAND DISCUSSION, BARBARA, AND OTHERS.    THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR INTEREST, YOUR INSIGHTS, YOUR POSTS,  now................

Turn on your C-Span, this weekend seems to be about FDR, the era we are discussing, fascinating.  This morning I watched the re-dedication of FDR's library with many dignitaries there, FDR's granddaughter presiding.  Stories galore.  Ken Burns and author Geoffrey Ward are going to be doing a series on FDR on PBS next year.  The man just lives on, his ideas, his presidency, his life.

Yesterday, I heard author Maury Klein - A CALL TO ARMS - talk about his book and we should be reading his book along with this discussion.   What stories he had to tell, mobilization for war, getting factories that had been abandoned after WWI up and running - the HIggins boat - the Kaiser shipyards,  lend-lease, taxation, price controls, rationing;  the author claims more people were killed in the USA factories than were killed in the war.  Isnt that amazing.

Two things we had going for us - we invented mass production and we had high octane gasoline.  No other country could match those two things.

Listen to him here:   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtmrNEctgYE

Of course, FDR figures large in all of this.   What a giant!

[Ella Gibbons]

True that, according to most records, our book, FDR kept assuring the public that their sons would not go to war.  Personally, he must have known that they probably would be called, but being a good pollitician, believing it was necessary for him to carry on the presidency as other candidates did not have the international acumen for the job and knowing the majority of the public did not want to go to war, he continued with this platform.  

I see nothing wrong with this, he had no proof we would be engaged in a war, why start a panic when there was no need.

We haven't talked much about Lindbergh and FDR - accusations. Does our author make too much of this controversty?

I don't know, it's politics as usual, in my mind with one big exception.   The period in which they existed, a time of great peril in the world.  Hitler and his armies marching through Europe, at the gates of Great Britain, and if that country was conquered where would Hitler strike next?  

Lindbergh challenged FDR -  some phrases in a speech to an America First rally - "Democracy doesn't exist today, even in our own country, government by subterfge" no "freedom of information."

Does this sound like Snowden today?  What do you think will happen to Snowden if and when he gets back to this country?  Did he do wrong?

[JoanP]

I think the Presidential race was the highlight of the book - the real eye-opener!  Even the years after the election  before the war started - and the war itself, for that matter,  did not seem to equal the drama of the election.  Perhaps because we really didn't know what went on - other than the usual campaigning and mudslinging.

"FDR kept assuring the public that their sons would not go to war. I see nothing wrong with this, he had no proof we would be engaged in a war, why start a panic when there was no need."

Apparently, Robert Sherwood, who wrote those words for Roosevelt's speech right before the election, "your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars," felt otherwise, Ella.  Olson writes "he thought it a terrible speech, regretted it for the rest of his life.  Hundreds of Britons were dying every night in bombing raids - supply routes were being shut off.  
FDR KNEW what he was saying was not the truth. Everyone knew, didn't they? Those close to the president felt that he should have taken prepared the people that war may be necessary.   AFter the speech, Walter Lippman refused to support either candidate in his Herald Tribune.  FDR himself considered this election a "smear on his record."

I can't imagine how I would have voted.  Wendell Wilkie promising if he's President, he won't send the boys to the foreign war.  He probably meant what he was saying.  FDR takes the same position, but knows he will do the opposite, once elected.  What were the American people to do?  Olson writes, that in times of crisis, the American public sticks to the incumbent.  And that was exactly what they did.

We haven't talked much about Lindbergh and FDR - accusations. Does our author make too much of this controversy? Ella

I think to the extent that Lindbergh was the spirit behind the America First movement - which was the powerful voice of FDR's opposition, the isolationists - and Wilkie, I don't think too much can be said for his influence on the election...and the battle that continued in the pre-war period before Pearl Harbor.

ps.  What really motivated Robert Snowden when he compromised the liberties of millions of Americans, Ella?  Could he - should he have handled the whistle-blowing differently - if that's what he in fact intended to do?