Attention Peace-Loving Voters Not Keen on Thermonuclear War: FDR Promised No War But Deliberately Got the US Into WWII; LBJ Famously Promised "No American Boys Will Be Sent to Asia" and Guess What?

Trump & Biden's campaign promises are to get your vote, not to tell you what they will do if elected.

You’re more likely to get a good deal from this used car salesman than from either the GOP or Democratic Party presidential candidate....

Dear Peace-loving voters who don’t want the United States to get into a thermonuclear war with Russia,

Unfortunately it is not possible, by voting, to avoid catastrophic unjust United States warmongering that may very well lead to thermonuclear war. (This is why I advocate this instead.)

The realistic choices for the next Commander in Chief are the Democratic candidate (Joe Biden or somebody just as much a warmongerer) or Donald Trump.

President Biden has the United States on the path to thermonuclear war.

It is mind-boggling to actually watch Western leaders foment a nuclear war.

…

During the 20th century Cold War in which I was intimately involved both as a trustee of the Committee on the Present Danger and as a member of a secret Presidential Committee with authority to investigate the CIA’s opposition to President Reagan’s effort to end the Cold War and normalize relations with the Soviet Union, I can say with confidence that even hard line anti-communists sought to reduce tensions instead of provoking war.

What I have witnessed in the 21st century is the most egregious cultivation of war by the US government in human history, and no one in the print or TV media tells us the consequences.” —Paul Craig Roberts here.

Biden even admits we’re at a high risk of thermonuclear war:

But Biden is also CREATING the high risk of thermonuclear war by placing long range nuclear missiles in Germany, which is exactly equivalent to the Soviet Union’s having placed nuclear missiles in Cuba in 1962—to remove which missiles the American ruling class was willing to risk thermonuclear war!

The U.S. and Germany said in a joint statement published July 10 that Washington will deploy longer-range missiles in Germany in 2026. This will include SM-6, Tomahawk, and developmental hypersonic weapons "which have significantly longer range than current land-based fires in Europe," they said.

In response:

Have you noticed that NOBODY who supports Biden ever talks about how his Ukraine warmongering is leading to thermonuclear war? Read here why Russia’s demands are perfectly just and Biden’s refusal to accept them amounts to nothing but evil warmongering, the motive of which I discuss in detail here.

What about Donald Trump?

“Former US President and current Republican candidate Donald Trump has told campaign donors that he “would have bombed” Moscow and Beijing if they’d attacked Ukraine and Taiwan respectively on his watch, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday, citing sources.” [Reported here.]

And yet Trump’s Vice Presidential pick, Senator J.D. Vance is an outspoken DOVE, not a hawk, with respect to the United States’s Ukraine proxy war against Russia. And in a recent interview with Bloomberg Trump (apparently, based on reports about this interview that is behind a pay-to-view firewall) also came across as a dove, not a hawk, with respect to the Ukraine war:

So, is the Republican ticket the right choice for those of us who are not keen on a thermonuclear war?

Despite some ambiguous evidence that Trump is a dove, I don’t think voting for Trump/Vance is a useful way to stop the American billionaire ruling plutocracy from extremely dangerous warmongering, and here’s why.

What presidential candidates promise has nothing to do with what they deliver, as I show in detail here for all the U.S. presidents since FDR.

The Republican and Democratic party are really just one pro-billionaire “uni-party” as Whitney Webb illustrates starting at time point 30:19 in the video below, in which she reports:

Keep in mind also that you know one of the main big Tech barons behind Biden is Eric Schmidt and Eric Schmidt serves on the steering committee of Bilderberg alongside Peter Thiel [a top donor to the GOP and the person who made J.D. Vance’s career take off in private business and then politics, as Webb earlier explains in detail—J.S.] and Bilderberg is a closed door globalist meeting where you know people like the the chairman of the World Economic Forum and all of these people come together to chart out essentially the course of global events over the following year you have Peter Thiel a republican donor and Eric Schmidt a Democrat donor all on the steering committee and according to a 2019 Newsweek article they're the most influential people there Thiel and Schmidt so again the uni-party agrees on a lot more than it does not.

Campaign promises are designed to get votes, not to tell the public what the candidate will actually do.

To help you see this is so, consider these famous “I won’t lead us into war” promises:

Do you remember the HUGE DOVE candidate, LBJ?

We are not about to send American boys 9 or 10,000 miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves.

Lyndon B. Johnson in a speech at Akron University, 21 October 1964

As I show here, the Gulf of Tonkin so-called North Vietnamese attack on a U.S. military ship that LBJ used as the excuse for sharply escalating the Vietnam War was bogus. Referring to the American sailors who supposedly shot at attacking North Vietnamese ships in self-defense in the Gulf of Tonkin, this Naval Institute Journal article quotes President Johnson remarking, "Hell, those damn, stupid sailors were just shooting at flying fish."

LBJ in his 1964 campaign for president against the Republican candidate Barry Goldwater got tons of votes with his (above cited) declaration that he would not send American boys to fight in Asia. The joke that appeared after the election goes like this:

“They told me that if I voted for Barry Goldwater then American boys would be sent to fight and die in Asia. And they were right! I did vote for Goldwater and American boys were indeed sent to fight and die in Asia.”

Do you remember the GOP candidate, Richard Nixon’s, 1968 campaign promise that he had a secret “plan to end the Vietnam War,” which of course, never happened? (The war raged and kept escalating until the U.S. had to withdraw in 1975 because U.S. GIs were refusing to fight, as you can read about in this report by the military top brass.)

Franklin Delano Roosevelt was a HUGE anti-war candidate—who deliberately but deceitfully led us into war

Here are some excerpts from my online book about WWII regarding FDR’s promise to keep the U.S. out of WWII. The lengthy details here are important because this is still not a well-known story (and my book has much more about this):

When the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor, it seemed on the surface that FDR, like the entire country, was shocked by the attack and suddenly jolted into the realization that America’s self-defense required that we enter the war on the side of Great Britain and not just help her with “Lend-Lease." But in fact, as we shall see in more detail later, FDR was not shocked by the Japanese attack on the United States, since he had been working hard to provoke it, all the while lying to the American public that he was determined to keep the U.S. out of the war. To appreciate why FDR manipulated Americans in this way, we must review just how threatening to elite power was the American working class in the decades leading up to World War II. Only based on this history of class struggle will the story of how FDR pushed Americans into war make sense. —pg 58 in my online book about WWII here.

In the 1940 presidential campaign, the Republican candidate, Wendell Willkie, charged that Roosevelt planned to send American soldiers overseas. To refute this true statement, FDR made a deal with Joseph Kennedy Sr., who had spoken against U.S. involvement in the war and was trusted by many in the anti-war camp: FDR would support Kennedy’s son,Joseph Jr.’s, future bid for governor of Massachusetts, ifJoseph Kennedy Sr. would make a nationwide radio speech and say what both men knew was false—that FDR had no plans to involve the U.S. in a world war. In fact FDR had exactly such plans. Kennedy made the speech, decisively helping FDR win re-election.225

Shortly after the election FDR set in motion a series of secret steps to provoke the Japanese to attack the U.S. Japan had to import 90% of her oil, and halfofthis came from the United States.226 FDR and his advisors knew that depriving Japan access to U.S. oil would very likely induce Japan to take actions that would lead to war between the U.S. and Japan. That war was precisely the object, and not merely a necessary risk that had to be taken in the pursuit of other aims, is indicated by a letter Secretary ofthe Interior Harold Ickes wrote to Roosevelt in the spring of 1941: “To embargo oil toJapan would be as popular a move in all parts of the country as you could make. There might develop...a situation as would make it not only possible but easy to get into the war in an effective way.”227 It is clear that Roosevelt appreciated the connection between U.S. oil and war with Japan. On July 24, 1941, FDR addressed the Volunteer Participation Committee and led them to believe that he was trying to avoid war with Japan, saying, “And now here is a nation called Japan...If we had cut the oil off they probably would have gone down to the Dutch East Indies a year ago, and you would have had war.”228 FDR’s basis for this statement was most likely the report on the effect of a U.S. oil embargo on Japan, issued the previous week (July 19) by Admiral Richmond Turner (Director of the War Plans Division of the Navy Department), that stated: “It is generally believed that shutting offthe American supply petroleum [to Japan] will lead promptly to an invasion [by Japan] of the Netherlands East Indies.”229

At the August, 1941 Atlantic Conference FDR and Churchill discussed the need for joint U.S. and British action againstJapan in the eventJapan attacked British or Dutch interests in the Netherlands East Indies, and in consequence ofthat agreement FDR issued a statement to the Japanese Ambassador on August 17, 1941 that read: “...this Government now finds it necessary to say to the Government ofJapan that if the Japanese Government takes any further steps in pursuance of a policy or program of military domination by force or threat of force of neighboring countries, the Government of the United States will be compelled to take immediately any and all steps which it may deem necessary toward safeguarding the legitimate rights and interests of the Unites States and American nationals and toward insuring the safety and security ofthe United States." Based on a detailed examination ofthe drafting ofthis statement, historian Charles Beard writes, “...it is patent that the notice given by President Roosevelt to the Japanese Ambassador on August 17, 1941, was intended to be in the nature of a war warning” and Beard adds, “To the Japanese Ambassador, familiar with the language of diplomacy, the statement could have had only one meaning.”230 With this clear warning that the U.S. would resort to war to stop Japan from seizing oil from neighboring countries, the U.S. made it equally clear to Japan’s rulers that if they were deprived of oil from the United States they would have to first destroy the U.S. military presence in the Pacific before they could expect to succeed in capturing the oil of neighboring countries.

Knowing full well that it would result in Japan attacking oil-producing British or Dutch interests in Asia, and knowing that this in turn would lead to war between the U.S. and Japan, and despite the U.S. having had no moral qualms about supplying oil to Japan after its invasion of China in 1937, suddenly in August 1941 Roosevelt froze all ofTokyo’s assets in the U.S. and ordered government officials to tie up in red tape all ofJapan’s efforts to buy U.S. oil. At the same time FDR sent B-l7 Flying Fortress bombers, which had the range required to attackJapan, to the Philippines.231 Following the cutoff of oil to Japan, Time magazine reported that Japanese Ambassador Admiral Kichisaburo Nomura (who had only one eye) complained: “All over Tokyo, no taxicab.” Time editorialized that when Normura uttered his complaint, “the sparkle goes out of his one good eye. It means Japan is desperately hard up for oil and gasoline, which meansJapan must say uncle to Uncle Sam or else fight for oil.”232 An indication ofthe mood and intentions, at this time, ofFDR and his highest level advisors is available to us in the form of diary entries by Secretary of War Stimson regarding Cabinet meetings in the month of November, 1941. On November 7, “President Roosevelt took a vote of his full Cabinet on the proposition whether the country would back up the Administration if it struck at the Japanese in the south-eastern Pacific area; and the Cabinet was 'unanimous in feeling the country would support us.’” On November 21, “Mr. Stimson had a talk with President Roosevelt about preparations to use poison gas in the Philippines in case the Japanese began to use it.’’233

In November Americans had broken the Japanese “Purple” code for sending secret messages and, from intercepts code named “Magic,” knew that Japan’s military had decided to go to war against the U.S. unless an agreement on purchasing oil was reached by November 29.134 “After that, things are automatically going to happen,” Roosevelt told Churchill on November Z4.235 Secretary ofWar Stimson’s diary report of a meeting in the Oval Office November 25 with FDR and other military leaders reads, “There the President, instead of bringing up the Victory Parade [an office nickname for a plan of action in case of war in Europe], brought up entirely the relations with the Japanese. He brought up the event that we were likely to be attacked perhaps (as soon as) next Monday, for the Japanese are notorious for making an attack without warning, and the question was what we should do. The question was how we should maneuver them into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.’ ”236 On November 26 Secretary of State Hull delivered an absurdly unrealistic ultimatum to the Japanese demanding that they withdraw from China and repudiate their Tripartite Pact agreement with Germany, or else no oil would be forthcoming.237 By this date, American leaders knew Japan would attack imminently, they just didn’t know it would be Pearl Harbor;238 they expected to be hit in the Philippines or Southeast Asia. On December 1 Roosevelt summoned the British ambassador, Lord Halifax, and urged the British navy to take preventive steps to thwart a possible attack on Thailand by Japanese troopships reportedly in the South China Sea, and “assured Halifax of American backing. As for a Japanese attack on British or Dutch Far East possessions, ‘we should obviously all be together.’ Those last words make it clear that Roosevelt now saw Japan as, in Harold Ickes’s words, a way to get into the global war in an ‘effective’ way.”239 Far from being a shocking surprise and a terrible calamity for President Roosevelt and his close advisors, Pearl Harbor was the much sought-after solution to their great problem of getting a reluctant American population fired up for a nationalistic war. Secretary ofWar Stimson’s diary entry at 2pm December 7, written after learning from the President about the attack on Pearl Harbor, says it all: “Now the Japs have solved the whole thing by attacking us directly in Hawaii...My first feeling was of relief that the indecision was over and that a crisis had come in a way which would unite all our people.”240 pg 72-75 in my online book about WWII here.

So please do not take campaign peace promises seriously. The U.S. ruling class depends on warmongering to control us, as I discuss in great detail here. To end the warmongering we must remove the warmongers from power. Here’s how.