# Noble to "liberate" French from Nazis, but not Iraqis from Saddam? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 16, 2003, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816 "2003-03-16T18:51:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![nisosbar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c37758/32.png) [@nisosbar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nisosbar)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 12:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/21 "2003-03-17T12:13:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Urban Ranger \* > \*\*Um, what about abolishing slavery in Kuwait too? \*\* And have you stopped beating your wife? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![mrblue92](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@mrblue92](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mrblue92)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/22 "2003-03-17T14:41:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by msmith537 \* > \*\*September 1940 - Destroyer for Bases deal - U.S. transfers 50 old destroyers to Britain in exchange for use of eight British Atlantic bases. > > November 1940 - Lend-Lease plan - U.S. “lends” military equipment to cash-strapped Britain. > > August 1941 - Atlantic Charter - FDR and Churchill agree to war aims, self-determination, and condemnation of Nazism. > > Of course, all this happened after the fall of France and the rest of Europe in 1940 to the German Blitzkrieg. We still hadn’t officially entered the war officially yet, but it was pretty clear that this was already an issue worthy of our attention. While it might have been nice to “rush to the aid” of France, I don’t believe we were in a position to do so militarily. > > Of course, we shouldn’t have been involved in Europe at all since Germany didn’t attack us first, right? \*\* Depends upon your point of view. Was Lend-Lease or condemnation an act of war? Conventional definitions would probably say no, but it could be argued either way. But it’s pretty certain [destruction of naval vessels](http://history.acusd.edu/gen/WW2Timeline/Prelude18.html) qualifies. The chronology is that the US declares war on Japan, Germany honoring a commitment to Japan declares war on the US, and the US declares war on Germany in kind. It’s difficult to extend the Iraq analogy very far in this respect unless you hold the premise that Iraq’s lack of cooperation equates to a declaration of war. ---
**Author:** ![mrblue92](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@mrblue92](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mrblue92)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/23 "2003-03-17T14:50:40Z")
“The chronology is that the US declares war on Japan…” Rereads… Just so we’re clear, Pearl Harbor was Dec. 7 (duh), US declares war on Japan Dec. 8, Germany & Italy declare war on US Dec. 11, US declares war back the same day. The conclusion here is that while America had no love for the Nazis or what they were doing in Europe, the primary motive for actually entering the war was one of self-preservation rather than the defense of conquered peoples. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/24 "2003-03-17T15:29:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by David Simmons \* > [Ah, er, umm, I hate to mention this but all of the things you point to with obvious pride were of limited effectiveness in liberating France. You acknowledge this by mentioning the fall of France. So how does this bear on **elucidator’s** statement? In addition, I don’t see how it can be assumed that we would have immediately declared war on Germany after 7 Dec. 1941 if Germany hadn’t declared war on us. Well since you don’t have a wayback machine, I guess we will never know what would have happened if Germany never declared war on us. **elucidator’s** stated: > [@](#): > > Only after Hitlers thunderingly stupid move in declaring war on the US in support of Japan did the liberation of Europe become a moral crusade worthy of our attention. I am simply stating the obvious fact that the liberation of Europe did have our attention prior to Germany declaring war on us. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by David Simmons \* > The OP said: “Isn’t there a contradiction of logic there? A racism on the part of the anti-war crowd and the French, that the use of force to liberate a population from a brutal dictatorship is okay as long as it’s France, but not if it’s not France.” > > The implication there being that we had as our prime objective the liberation of France in WWII. I don’t believe the OP implies liberating France was the prime objective of WWII. I believe the OP is simply using France as an example of a nation we liberated from a dictator. Perhaps the OP should have read “why is it only noble to remove a dictator after he declares war on you?” Ridiculous. As far as that’s concerned, Italy, Libya, Tunisia and part of Germany were also “liberated from a brutal dictatorship.” > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by David Simmons \* > And one brutal dictatorship liberated Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria from another brutal dictatorship. And some people were arguing that our armies should have kept going into Stalins Russia. But there are things we want to do and things we actually can do. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by David Simmons \* > I don’t see any justification for a preemptive war against Iraq in the events surrounding our entry into WWII or in the conduct of that war in the clearing of Germany armies out of occupied territories. I wonder what would have happened if a preemptive strike was launched against Germany as they were getting ready to invade Poland? Of course it was a diferent world back then but I do see some similarities between Germany in the 30’s-40’s and Iraq in the 90’s+. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 5:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/25 "2003-03-17T17:25:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by msmith537 \* > \*\*… I am simply stating the obvious fact that the liberation of Europe did have our attention prior to Germany declaring war on us. > \*\* I don’t think the 'liberation of Europe" had our attention nearly as much as the possibility that we would be faced with a Germany, led by Hitler, who had control of all Europe. Right up until the attack on Pearl Harbor, the lot of the national sentiment was in favor of staying out of Europe’s troubles. A military draft for 1 year of service was instituted and the first draftees were called up October of 1940. During the summer of 1941 there was talk in the Executive Department about extending that 1 year limit. The slogan among many of the draftees at the time was OHIO - “Over The Hill In October.” Although the people were slowly beginning to back FDR’s support for Britain by mid 1941, the opposition to it wasn’t just from the finge kooks. Sens. Burton Wheeler, William Borah, Aurthur Vandenberg, Robert Taft, and Gerald Nye were active in opposition. And, by the way, I don’t think that the Compassionate Conservative is all that het up about the liberation of the Iraqi population, but it does provide stalking horse, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/26 "2003-03-17T21:35:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by msmith537 \* > \*\*September 1940 - Destroyer for Bases deal - U.S. transfers 50 old destroyers to Britain in exchange for use of eight British Atlantic bases. > > November 1940 - Lend-Lease plan - U.S. “lends” military equipment to cash-strapped Britain. > > August 1941 - Atlantic Charter - FDR and Churchill agree to war aims, self-determination, and condemnation of Nazism. > > Of course, all this happened after the fall of France and the rest of Europe in 1940 to the German Blitzkrieg. \*\* Perhaps even more to the point, the United States Navy was already hunting and sinking German subs in the North Atlantic in 1941, well before the attack on Pearl Harbor–so we had already been engaged in military actions against Germany for some time before Hitler finally declared war. Today, the peace creeps would insist that this meant the war with Germany was America’s fault. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/27 "2003-03-17T21:56:31Z")
Now I’m annoyed. I was dead certain that the US Navy had actually sunk some German subs prior to December 7, 1941, but I can’t seem to find a specific reference to an actual sinking on the web. I do find a couple of attacks on American destroyers and one attack on a German sub that didn’t result in a confirmed kill. Amend that previous statement to "the United States Navy was hunting and \*\* attacking \*\* German subs in the North Atlantic … " ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/28 "2003-03-18T04:59:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by msmith537 \* > I am simply stating the obvious fact that the liberation of Europe did have our attention prior to Germany declaring war on us. And your point then is what exactly? I would say Iraq has had our attention too. Hell, it has not only had our attention but we have fought a war against it when it invaded another country, severely restricted its ability to procure any materials remotely useful for weapons (along with lots of other stuff), and had no-fly zones to protect the Kurds and so forth. But, we are not arguing about something just having our attention now, are we? So, in other words, the evidence utterly fails to support the conclusion that we behaved differently in Europe in WW II than those against war in Iraq would have us behave now. And, of course, it is a poor parallel anyway since Hussein has not invaded multiple democratic neighboring nations (only 1 or 2 very non-democratic neighboring nations and not recently) and is by no means a credible military match for the U.S. let alone lots of other democratic nations. So, in the end, we find an OP that is completely and utterly devoid of any rational or logical substance at all. But hey, I guess the poster is just taking his cues from the current Administration! ---
**Author:** ![Estilicon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/848f3c/32.png) [@Estilicon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Estilicon)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 12:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/29 "2003-03-18T12:39:59Z")
> [@](#): > > Perhaps even more to the point, the United States Navy was already hunting and sinking German subs in the North Atlantic in 1941, well before the attack on Pearl Harbor–so we had already been engaged in military actions against Germany for some time before Hitler finally declared war. > > Today, the peace creeps would insist that this meant the war with Germany was America’s fault. If what you say is true, then your conclussion is right. America was the agressor. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/30 "2003-03-18T13:09:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Estilicon \* > \*\*If what you say is true, then your conclussion is right. America was the agressor. \*\* You can always trust a peace creep to side with our enemies. ---
**Author:** ![Mandelstam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Mandelstam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mandelstam)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/31 "2003-03-18T13:13:58Z")
_“Today, the peace creeps would insist that this meant the war with Germany was America’s fault.”_ Why would they insist that when all of the events you describe occured _after_ 1939? Also, may I suggest that you find a different term to describe people who don’t happen to share your particular opinion? ---
**Author:** ![gex\_gex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/94ad74/32.png) [@gex\_gex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gex_gex)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 2:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/32 "2003-03-18T14:50:19Z")
> [@](#): > > _originally posted by msmith537_ > Of course it was a diferent world back then but I do see some similarities between Germany in the 30’s-40’s and Iraq in the 90’s+. And those are? I can see many important differences. For instance, Germany was a world power, Iraq tries to invade Iran for ten years and can’t do it. Germany quickly invades many democratic countries, Iraq unsuccessfully invades two in about twenty years, and hasn’t done anything in the past ten. **Lonesome Polecat** : I believe, but cannot be certain, that these German subs were interfering with American shipping, making American attacks perfectly justified. Y’know, to this Peace Creep, it seems that the Pro-War Pricks (we both need team names) are a little like Grampa Simpson, constantly seeing death (or Hitler) everywhere. Grampa: Aaagh! Death! Lisa: No, that’s Maggie. Pro-War Prick: Aaaagh! Hitler! Peace Creep: :rolleyes: No, that’s a tinpot dictator. ---
**Author:** ![MLS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/919ad9/32.png) [@MLS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MLS)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/33 "2003-03-18T15:57:58Z")
IMHO, had the various countries that eventually fully allied to defeat Hitler done so earlier, and had they not tried to appease him and his ilk for so long, much horror would have been prevented. It would make an interesting alternative history to explore what would have happened had Chamberlin not promoted this appeasement for so long. At the time, he had the majority on his side, of course. Even after Dec 7 1941 there were significant numbers of Americans, so my mother told me, who were opposed to any involvement. (This is not necessarily to the credit of the U.S., either.) Perhaps some people are learning from this. ---
**Author:** ![gex\_gex](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/94ad74/32.png) [@gex\_gex](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gex_gex)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/34 "2003-03-18T16:07:47Z")
**MLS** , what is your point? ---
**Author:** ![MLS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/919ad9/32.png) [@MLS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MLS)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/35 "2003-03-18T16:20:23Z")
That it is a good idea to prevent SH from going further, just as (with 20/20 hindsight) to have acted against Hitler sooner. Well-intentioned people in both cases wanted to give peace (and appeasement) a chance. It didn’t work then and it won’t work now. ---
**Author:** ![msmith537](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@msmith537](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/msmith537)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 4:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/36 "2003-03-18T16:25:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by gex gex \* > And those are? I can see many important differences. For instance, Germany was a world power, Iraq tries to invade Iran for ten years and can’t do it. Germany quickly invades many democratic countries, Iraq unsuccessfully invades two in about twenty years, and hasn’t done anything in the past ten. > \*\* I was thinking more of the circumstances that led up to World War II (or as some people call it WWI part 2), Hitlers secret arming of Germany and the general atmosphere of isolationism and appeasement. But you are right, there are also very many diferences. Instead of “being late to every war” (a statement I don’t get…either we are too aggressive or not aggressive enough? :rolleyes: ) the USA led the coalition to drive Sadaam out of Kuwait from day one (also under the protest of many a peacenik). Sadaam could have just as easily rolled into Saudi Arabia and then it would have been twice as hard to get him out. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/37 "2003-03-19T00:04:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by MLS \* > That it is a good idea to prevent SH from going further, just as (with 20/20 hindsight) to have acted against Hitler sooner. Well-intentioned people in both cases wanted to give peace (and appeasement) a chance. It didn’t work then and it won’t work now. Just as bad as not learning from history is making bad analogies from history and learning the wrong lessons. Can someone try to explain how the current world policy toward Iraq of sanctions on military goods, inspections, etc. will allow Saddam Hussein to become a military might in the way Hitler did? If we think SH is so powerful, why the hell are we not even moving in enough to troops to match them one-for-one? As I noted in my previous post, it just amazes me how the current Administration seems to have lowered the level of discourse on these issues to the point where the pro-war people are really making some pathetic arguments and thinking them profound. ---
**Author:** ![MLS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/919ad9/32.png) [@MLS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MLS)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 12:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/38 "2003-03-19T00:44:50Z")
I would just submit that these efforts were not working. SH did not even start to disarm (if in fact he did at all) until the US forces began to gather. He would just keep playing hide & seek. BTW there is current concern that he is going to unleash those bio-chem weapons that he doesn’t have on the US troops. Constant, constant inspections and threats might keep him at bay and keep him from invading other countries. But it’s better, IMHO, to just get it over with all at once. Sorry if you think I’m pathetic. I am not pro-war. But I want SH out of any position of control and if war is the quickest way to accomplish that, so be it. It would cost more in both lives and money to leave him alone. And the U.N. has proved itself impotent in this instance. ---
**Author:** ![BrightNShiny](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@BrightNShiny](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrightNShiny)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/39 "2003-03-19T00:55:47Z")
> [@](#): > > Isn’t there a contradiction of logic there? A racism on the part of the anti-war crowd and the French, that the use of force to liberate a population from a brutal dictatorship is okay as long as it’s France, but not if it’s not France. I don’t know. Is it racist that the Slovaks, Slovenes, Kosovans, Bosnias, Macedonians, Croatians all get their own countires, but the Kurds aren’t allowed to have one? Any country’s foreign policy is always a mess of contradictions and hypocrisy. Why should France be any different than the US in this regard? ---
**Author:** ![Wile\_E.Coyote](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/73ab20/32.png) [@Wile\_E.Coyote](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Wile_E.Coyote)\ **Post date:** [March 19, 2003, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816/40 "2003-03-19T01:06:02Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by jshore \* > \*\*Just as bad as not learning from history is making bad analogies from history and learning the wrong lessons. > > Can someone try to explain how the current world policy toward Iraq of sanctions on military goods, inspections, etc. will allow Saddam Hussein to become a military might in the way Hitler did? If we think SH is so powerful, why the hell are we not even moving in enough to troops to match them one-for-one? > \*\* Okay, I’m an officer in the military. I’ll give y’all a few lessons. One dramatic way in which the world is different now than it was back then is the role of the international terrorist. The United States is the strongest **conventional** military power in the world. We do not fear Saddam Hussein’s conventional military arsenal. He has T-55’s and T-62’s for goshake! No, we are concerned with the warfare of the late 20th and early 21st century, so-called Low Intensity Conflict (LIC), which is a fancy name for guerilla warfare and terrorist activities. The morality of rescuing the Iraqi people from a modern day monster aside, I personally and professionally wouldn’t care if he wanted to build up as many T-62’s and Mirage-1S fighters as he could buy. However, with chemical and more especially biological weapons, he is able to act on his hatred of the United States in a way that Germany was unable to do way back when. What’s more, he even has a method to do so with plausible deniability. All he has to do is **develop** these monstrous weapons, and then conveniently “lose” them where Al Qaeda or other terrorist organizations can “find” them. Al Qaeda has stated publicly that they would love nothing better than to hit us with just such weapons. Can Saddam Hussein match us in a conventional military war? Absolutely not. Can Saddam Hussein kill hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians by providing chemical and biological weapons to terrorists? Absolutey. Does Saddam Hussein have the will and desire to do so? If his tests of these weapons on his own people and his neighbors is any indication: yes, he does. And **that** is why we need to stop him now. Because September 11, 2001 **can** and **will** happen again, if we don’t stop him. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/noble-to-liberate-french-from-nazis-but-not-iraqis-from-saddam/161816.md?page=3)