Americans can learn lessons from World War II era

Americans can learn lessonsfrom World War II era
EDITOR:
Looking through history books, I couldn't find any evidence of a "Dec. 7 Commission" convened in early 1942. One would assume, considering the unprecedented weight given to the current Sept. 11 commission that a committee of "bipartisans" would have looked into and thoroughly investigated the Japanese bombing of Pearl Harbor in 1941. Lord knows there was overwhelming evidence that the U.S. Naval intelligence intercepted coded transmissions indicating an attack on U.S. interests was imminent. What did Roosevelt know and when did he know it? Imagine if the finger-pointing, political blood lust so prevalent today was unleashed during World War II.
And considering the Japanese had their knickers in a twist at the U.S. embargo on oil and other material they needed to further their murderous conquest of the Pacific, it could be argued that the Japanese attack on 12-7 was "all about oil."
I also looked through library copies of Photoplay and other '40s movie magazines but didn't see hate-filled "Roosevelt-bashing" from the likes of Humphrey Bogart, Jimmy Cagney or Martha Rae. I suppose they were too busy touring with USO shows or selling war bonds to mouth off about Franklin D. Roosevelt's culpability in "allowing" the 12-7 attack.
As history reveals, it wasn't a slam-dunk election win for Roosevelt in 1944, contrary to long held notion that American voters supported him unconditionally. It might surprise some to learn that Thomas Dewey, the Republican opponent, got 45.89 percent of the popular vote while Roosevelt got 53.39 percent. The numbers show that at least 22,017,617 voters weren't thrilled with FDR. What's most remarkable is that despite the 8 percent difference in voter support, the political rancor never materialized into the widespread, anti-war, Bush bashing hatefests so common today.
There most certainly was strong political opposition to every move FDR and his administration made, but whatever it was, it stayed within the halls of Congress and behind closed doors.
For some strange reason the war on terrorism doesn't resonate with the same urgency and determination with some Americans, particularly the Democrats. By all indications, our present terrorist enemy is as formidable as the suicidal Japanese or the technological Nazis. This new enemy has no prescribed code of conduct, no rules of engagement, no uniform, no border, no flag to surrender and certainly no mercy. They are driven by a twisted corruption of Islamic fanaticism and Muslim theology where no middle ground exists. There's no place in their world for anyone who believes otherwise.
It's all too obvious that national support and a unified war effort, as evidenced during World War II, is the true strength of this country. Back then our disagreements stopped at the water's edge and put the enemy on notice that we were all together in the fight.
JOHN P. MORELL
Struthers
Prisoner abuse is cowardiceand not common practice
EDITOR:
A May 23 letter said with little qualifications that all nations mistreat prisoners of war. Apparently the writer believes that no attention is paid to the Geneva Conventions, which set rules among civilized nations for the care of prisoners of war.
The mistreatment of prisoners in Iraq is a serious blot on the honor not just on our armed forces, but also on the United States. No matter what other nations may do or have done in the past, if we fail to maintain the highest standards for humane treatment, we will soon regret it.
In 1945, after having been wounded in the Battle of the Bulge, I was commander of a guard company responsible for prisoners of war. I can assure readers that the very highest standards were observed and that all prisoners were provided with excellent care. I might also remind readers that during World War II, thousands of Axis prisoners were brought to the United States, and they were given very good clothing, rations and housing.
To put it bluntly, those who mistreated prisoners in Iraq are cowards. Mistreating helpless prisoners is, by definition, cowardly. They put front-line combat troops at extra risk.
If young people, who may be future soldiers, put much credence in the May 23 letter, they may well be on track for court martial, dishonorable discharge and a few years in jail.
MILTON R. NORRIS
Canfield