Opinion of Henry Wallace
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 26, 2024, 09:49:30 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  Opinion of Henry Wallace
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Poll
Question: Vice President of the US (1941-45) under FDR.
#1
Freedom Fighter
 
#2
Horrible Person
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 31

Author Topic: Opinion of Henry Wallace  (Read 1619 times)
nolesfan2011
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,411
United States


Political Matrix
E: -5.68, S: -7.48

WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: February 02, 2013, 09:03:06 PM »

I did this question recently.. def FF, American hero, progressive messenger, totally got a bad rap.
Logged
justfollowingtheelections
unempprof
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,766


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: February 05, 2013, 05:04:26 AM »


If you think that letting western Europe and South Korea become Stalin's playthings was a good idea, that is. Truman did what was necessary to prevent the spread of communism.

Western Europe would have become Stalin's plaything?  Seriously?  You cannot possibly believe that.
One thing is for sure:  If Wallace was the president, he would have never used the atom bomb on a non-white nation.

btw, the Marshall Plan, probably the best thing Truman did, was Wallace's idea (from when he was Secretary of Commerce).  Truman was also very much responsible for the Cold War, the main reason the US military budget is so huge 70 years later, while there's no money for infrastructures, education or health care.

Wallace never expressed any problems with Truman using the bomb and pretty much anyone who was President at the time would have made the same decision. FDR planned on dropping it, too. Whether you like it or not, dropping the bomb was the right thing to do because it stopped the senseless slaughter across the Pacific. Truman made the best decision possible, given the circumstances.

As for the Cold War, that's revisionist history to the utmost. Truman didn't provoke the Cold War, Stalin and the Communists did. Truman simply reacted to what the Soviets were up to in Eastern Europe (i.e. attempting to colonize it) the way any rational actor concerned about America's geopolitical interest would have done. Wallace figured this out after his stint as a presidential candidate, it's a shame his latter-day supporters never have.

False.  I'm sorry to say this but I think you need to revisit your history books.  The bomb wasn't necessary at all.  The Japanese were pretty much finished and the only reason Truman used the bomb was to scare the Soviets.
The Japanese did not surrender after the first atom bomb, and they didn't surrender after the second one either.  It didn't make any difference at all.  They only surrendered when the Soviets were about to invade their country.  If you read what many U.S. generals were saying at the time, racism was a very important factor in why the bomb was dropped on the Japanese rather than on the Germans or some other white nation.
I have no reason to believe Wallace would have done the same thing Truman did if he was in charge.  The guy was a pacifist who was more interested in internal improvements, scientific innovations and civil rights rather than fighting wars.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 14 queries.