Quote:
Originally posted by Jeff Higgins
I see part of both points of view playing out. Any major attack would certainly pull us together in the short term. Once the mess is cleaned up, however, the finger pointing will start. The parties and pundits will seek to lay blame at the feet of their opponents. The real enemy that perpetrated the attack will become a secondary consideration. Kind of like right now.
I'm too young know what the political climate during, and then following, WWII was like. Were the political parties blaming each other for the war? Were they blaming each other for allowing Germany to rebuild itself into a threat so soon after the last war? Were they blaming each other for being asleep at the wheel concerning Japan? I wasn't around then, but somehow I don't think so. Times have changed.
|
Should do some historical research before concluding this.
I think the political infighting was just as bad in the "old days", it's simply been erased by our rose-colored glasses. Recall there was a very strong isolationist movement pre-WW2, Roosevelt was pillored for trying to drag America into another bloody war in Europe, even Lend-Lease was heavily opposed.
Have not read much about after WW2, but it hardly compares to the current situation - if all the terrorists and rogue state governments line up on a battleship and sign unconditional surrenders (or commit suicide in their bunkers), then maybe you could draw a parallel . . .