How WWII Shaped Our Nation's Leaders | Presidents at War

The following video tells the story of America's past presidents and how WW2 (both Pacific and Europe) shaped many of them...either good or bad... It was a well done documentary IMO and I learned some stuff I did not know before. If you like a bit of history check out the video as I do not think you will consider it a waste of time.

youtu.be...

a reply to: 727Sky

Pretty amazing that every President from Eisenhower to Bush I served in WW2, 1953-1993.

originally posted by: 727Sky
The following video tells the story of America's past presidents and how WW2 (both Pacific and Europe) shaped many of them...either good or bad... It was a well done documentary IMO and I learned some stuff I did not know before. If you like a bit of history check out the video as I do not think you will consider it a waste of time.

youtu.be...

I really like documentaries like this...

firmly believe you got to know your past to help you see potential futures. That said as WWII has shown all it takes is a nutjob leader or two and a worn-out population for the chit to go sideways.

originally posted by: putnam6
firmly believe you got to know your past to help you see potential futures. That said as WWII has shown all it takes is a nutjob leader or two and a worn-out population for the chit to go sideways.

Well, that explains Europe (actually three nutjobs) but the Japanese were a bit more methodical and in a way even more ruthless than the Germans.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: putnam6
firmly believe you got to know your past to help you see potential futures. That said as WWII has shown all it takes is a nutjob leader or two and a worn-out population for the chit to go sideways.

Well, that explains Europe (actually three nutjobs) but the Japanese were a bit more methodical and in a way even more ruthless than the Germans.

True

Though Ive read speculative accounts where Japan and Russia's conquests might have been just regionally minus the spark of Hitler's rise, though this just delays a wider conflict. Not to mention more than one historian believes Hitler doesn't become emboldened without using Mussolini's blueprint for the Nazi party.

a reply to: putnam6

The Japanese were looking for eastern/central Pacific and Asian hegemony to rival both the United States and the United Kingdom. They had already smoked the Russians in a highly embarrassing manner at Tsushima earlier in the century and didn't consider them rivals like the two great powers. The Japanese, unlike the Germans, had a true blue water navy, and if they didn't attack the United States would have easily held the territory they acquired prior to Pearl Harbor.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Definitely agree, Japan was strong enough and brutal enough to hold its empire if it left the US alone. But again that would have been just pushed down the road a few years if not a decade or so.

I could talk about WWII what if's how comes? and still felt ramifications 24/7. Hell the Middle East alone...

would there have been communist China without the Japanese attacks on mainland China?

a reply to: putnam6

Yeah, this would make an interesting thread topic, I don't want to take the OP's off topic.