4 of 10 people found the following review helpful
Awful biased trash,
This review is from: Lindbergh vs. Roosevelt: The Rivalry That Divided America (Hardcover)
This book is awful. It is trash. I did not finish it. You should avoid it. The author would have you believe that FDR was as awful as a Nixon or a Bush II, while the Nazi loving anti Semite Lindberg was an innocent child. Rubbish.
Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-4 of 4 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Feb 27, 2013 3:09:48 PM PST
Dietz Ziechmann, Shofet says:
My mind's made up, don't confuse me with the facts?
Posted on Feb 27, 2013 4:22:28 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 27, 2013 4:23:35 PM PST
Dietz Ziechmann, Shofet says:
Duffy's book is well-researched and well-written. Much of the book deals with Lindbergh's strong sense of adventure, curiousity, analytic powers, and above all duty vs. FDR's dissembling, devious, opportunism, grudge-bearing, prejudices, and unscrupulousness. There is also another element that is valuable and thought-provoking: the strategic discussions on what should be American strategic defense policy? There where no defense policy think tanks to speak of back in those days to thrash out these questions in depth, so such questions tended to fall into an ad hominem contest, with nuances being lost, and emotions being high. Jews were anxious to protect fellow Jews in Central and Eastern Europe at a time when no country was willing to offer refuge. Wall Street financiers were keen on securing big profits, and some had some sentimental attachments to Great Britain. Others had a passionate attachment to "anti-fascism" that blinded them to criticisms of Stalin's super-fascism and astute calculations of how to cope with that factor. All nations paid a delayed price for the punitive anti-German stance of armas merchant Basil Zahkaroff, who vetoed David Lloyd George's efforts at a compromise peace with Germany in 1916 and the deceitful punitive Versailles dictate in 1918. Lindbergh and Duffy fault the Western powers for their inconsistency: being permissive in the 1930s when they didn't need to be, and threatening in 1939, when they had less capacity to carry out their threats and little appetite for doing so. In Aug. 1939, FDR had his ambassador to France, Wm. Bullitt, give his Polish counterpart in Paris a misleading guarantee of military suppport to the Polish state, which helped cause the Poles to make a major strategic miscalculation. In subsequent months FDR engaged in a cautious policy of gradual, semi-disguised military escalation. As he did not want to publicly acknowledged his goals, he resorted to a general program of defamation of anti-interventionists, especially Lindbergh as a substitute for a candid discussion of strategic options. Duffy does an excellent job of identifying Lindbergh's strategy of concentrating on Western Hemisphere defense employing the latest and longest-range craft.
Duffy quotes Lindbergh on the virtue of the USA being a multi-cultural, multi-racial society and criticised FDR and the Democrats for tolerating Jim Crow in the South, ironic in light of the false attacks on Lindbergh as a Copperhead or a Nazi-sympathizer.
Posted on Jul 8, 2013 5:51:08 PM PDT
FDR kind of reminds me of our current president. There was a cult of personality that surrounded him, based on some of the tactics of FDR's favorite politician, Stalin. FDR essentially gave Stalin eastern europe and his administration was riddled with Soviet spies. Today we also have a communist sympathizer in office who's administration is riddled with terrorists from the Muslim brotherhood.
FDR prolonged the depression and created much of the welfare handout dependency that is currently bankrupting the nation. Lindbergh's anti-intervention policy was well informed after the ridiculous blood bath of world war 1 that accomplished nothing. Moreover isolationism it is a long standing American policy advocated by non other than George Washington. The latter is a man who neither FDR nor Obama is worthy to tie his shoe. It is difficult to shake off the current Marxist brainwashing pushed by our controlled media, but it is possible.
In reply to an earlier post on Jul 29, 2013 6:56:55 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Jul 29, 2013 7:03:38 PM PDT
Completely off topic to the Lindbergh book, but in need of rebuttal:
"Today we also have a communist sympathizer in office who's administration is riddled with terrorists from the Muslim brotherhood."
Sooo.... Obama's people, who went and found and killed Bin Laden, are part of the Muslim brotherhood. While Bush Light, who shelved plans to find Bin Laden, concocted various bits of fabricated lies in order to invade Iraq, and who also expanded trade aggressively with China was obviously a saint. Interesting views, but what exactly were you smoking when you wrote them?
Bushes invasion of Iraq led to a war that has now claimed hundreds of thousands of victims, but no doubt you'll find a lot of rationalizations to support him.
‹ Previous 1 Next ›