stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836 
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on May 29, 2024 22:19:24 GMT
Never heard of the latter or of any attempt at an entente at this time period. FDR had a reputation for double standards and dishonesty If you think about that topic - what does come to your mind first?
Well I remember reading that he had an habit of sending private envoys/friends to bypass formal communications and also to have people, including himself by some accounts saying things and then denying it later.
One case I remember reading about was that in 1942 a Soviet diplomatic mission was sent to Britain and the US asking for a 2nd front in Europe in 1942 which as they were told in Britain simply wasn't a possibility. The same message came from the leaders of the US Military but then FDR himself told the mission such an operation should be practical. This was totally unofficial but the Soviet diplomats were repeating that message to Stalin who announced the western powers had made such a commitment. When the British government asked the US about the matter Roosevelt simply didn't respond at all/
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on May 29, 2024 22:51:19 GMT
If you think about that topic - what does come to your mind first?
Well I remember reading that he had an habit of sending private envoys/friends to bypass formal communications and also to have people, including himself by some accounts saying things and then denying it later.
One case I remember reading about was that in 1942 a Soviet diplomatic mission was sent to Britain and the US asking for a 2nd front in Europe in 1942 which as they were told in Britain simply wasn't a possibility. The same message came from the leaders of the US Military but then FDR himself told the mission such an operation should be practical. This was totally unofficial but the Soviet diplomats were repeating that message to Stalin who announced the western powers had made such a commitment. When the British government asked the US about the matter Roosevelt simply didn't respond at all/
About bypassing formal communications - it is well-known that he'd often use under-secretary Sumner Welles for important missions instead of Secretary of State Cordell Hull.
But everything's relative. Compared to openly breaking the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, this was harmless. We'd need more examples, with good sources, to be able to call him underhanded.
|
|
stevep
Fleet admiral
Posts: 24,836
Likes: 13,225
|
Post by stevep on May 30, 2024 15:12:09 GMT
Well I remember reading that he had an habit of sending private envoys/friends to bypass formal communications and also to have people, including himself by some accounts saying things and then denying it later.
One case I remember reading about was that in 1942 a Soviet diplomatic mission was sent to Britain and the US asking for a 2nd front in Europe in 1942 which as they were told in Britain simply wasn't a possibility. The same message came from the leaders of the US Military but then FDR himself told the mission such an operation should be practical. This was totally unofficial but the Soviet diplomats were repeating that message to Stalin who announced the western powers had made such a commitment. When the British government asked the US about the matter Roosevelt simply didn't respond at all/
About bypassing formal communications - it is well-known that he'd often use under-secretary Sumner Welles for important missions instead of Secretary of State Cordell Hull.
But everything's relative. Compared to openly breaking the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, this was harmless. We'd need more examples, with good sources, to be able to call him underhanded.
I must admit I read the above example in a book on WWII from the local library where I was brought up so that was at the latest 2017. IIRC it also had a common from one of Roosevelt's son's about his father's reputation for such duplicity. I think it was in a book about how Churchill faced opposition and betrayal from many 'allies' both in Britain and in what were formally allies. However could be remembering this wrong.
Agree its far less destructive than Hitler's betrayal of Stalin but such sort of actions definitely caused problems in both the US and abroad.
|
|
|
|
Post by Max Sinister on Jun 1, 2024 18:34:37 GMT
About bypassing formal communications - it is well-known that he'd often use under-secretary Sumner Welles for important missions instead of Secretary of State Cordell Hull.
But everything's relative. Compared to openly breaking the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, this was harmless. We'd need more examples, with good sources, to be able to call him underhanded.
I must admit I read the above example in a book on WWII from the local library where I was brought up so that was at the latest 2017. IIRC it also had a common from one of Roosevelt's son's about his father's reputation for such duplicity. I think it was in a book about how Churchill faced opposition and betrayal from many 'allies' both in Britain and in what were formally allies. However could be remembering this wrong.
Agree its far less destructive than Hitler's betrayal of Stalin but such sort of actions definitely caused problems in both the US and abroad.
Hm, if his son said so, this certainly means something. Unless FDR didn't deserve his reputation. We'd need more info to be sure.
|
|
