Originally posted by GScholz
If I were to go by your posting history I would have to consider all your recent post as honest, fair and level-headed. However, we both know you are no longer the moderate poster you once were so I don’t.
[/b]
I haven't changed my views, nor my style. I don't think you're exactly an unbiased observer.
Originally posted by GScholz
If you can’t tell intent from the content of the actual post
[/b]
Re read what I said. "
It's not hard to tell intent,
especially with the history some posters have created for themselves.
"Not hard to tell". Still confused?
Originally posted by GScholz
they waited to the third year of the war, after being attacked themselves to get involved.
[/b]
I see you don't want to talk about Roosevelt and the Neutrality Acts.
Maybe you want to start with Wilson's 14 points? Nah, I bet you don't want to talk about either one of those.
Originally posted by GScholz
Seriously, why should you have acted earlier? I see no good reason beyond preventive defence.
A much better question would be how
could we have acted earlier. Again, you need to do a little research on the US after WWI, through the Neutrality Acts and then up to Pearl.