[Zamuel]

The internment of Japanese-Americans was his biggest blunder. Though FDR was reasonably progressive about race for his time (he started a slow crawl for integration), this was a completely unnecessary

? Not so sure about that ... As the war began there was a great deal of Japanese espionage going on that was never really publicized. At Pearl Harbor, Several Japanese spies who had been reporting on ships in the harbor were busted. There were Cars Parked on hills that morning with their lights on and pointing at ACTIVE dispersal airfields. The difficulty of infiltrating counter espionage agents into ethic Japanese spy networks was obvious. Aside from security concerns, there was a growing hatred of ethnic Japanese taking place that threatened the innocent and mostly loyal Japanese population ... To be fair, those attitudes were being encouraged by the military to attract recruits. Internment wasn't intended to be a punishment, it was a method to protect both American Security and Innocent Japanese/American families. For what it's worth, it was effective.

Added to this, Japanese soldiers were used very sparingly in the occupation and pacification of Japan. More of this would have been helpful.

This is a McArthur / Truman issue, not really an FDR thing.

Finally, it continued a precedent to remove and distribute land based upon ethnicity. After the war, housing and other government programs were applied along racial lines.

I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to? But again ... After... the war you should be looking at Truman.

Zam

-When I got home from my war, my uncle Dan clapped me on the back, and he bellowed, 'You're a MAN now!' - I damn near killed my first German- Kurt Vonnegut

[The Immortal Goon]

Not so sure about that ... As the war began there was a great deal of Japanese espionage going on that was never really publicized. At Pearl Harbor, Several Japanese spies who had been reporting on ships in the harbor were busted. There were Cars Parked on hills that morning with their lights on and pointing at ACTIVE dispersal airfields.

To my knowledge, the only Japanese spies were from the Japanese consulate, and not US citizens.

This is a McArthur / Truman issue, not really an FDR thing.

The internment of the Japanese, however, was an FDR thing.

I'm not sure what exactly you're referring to? But again ... After... the war you should be looking at Truman.

I'm not saying FDR was solely responsible, but Internment perpetuated the race-based housing segregation policies of the government at the time. Part of this was the sudden sale of Japanese areas. For instance, in my town most Japanese lived in Little Tokyo. After internment, the area was made Chinatown, the previous Chinatown being given to Europeans. This was all pretty above board, and this kind of race-based community building was encouraged. But FDR had started to break it down with the Fair Employment Practice Committee—which is marred as at the same time he was moving loyal people that happened to be of Japanese descent into camps.

[Zamuel]

To my knowledge, the only Japanese spies were from the Japanese consulate, and not US citizens.

Yeah, Internment worked ... At the time of Pearl Harbor there were around 40,000 resident Japanese Aliens living on the west coast, and about 70,000 citizens of Japanese descent. Japan sponsored a super nationalist organization called the "Black Dragons" that was devoted to aiding in the military defeat of Japan's enemies. The accomplishments of black dragon operatives in areas where they were able to function is substantial and fairly well documented. There aren't any hard figures on American membership, but the FBI estimated it at several thousand. With the assistance of military intelligence, they considered themselves capable of covering counter-espionage requirements in Hawaii, where the Japanese population was concentrated in a small area. But covering the entire west coast was an impossible task.

The internment of the Japanese, however, was an FDR thing.

I don't dispute that. I simply question that internment was a mistake ... the alternative being possible sabotage, rioting and lynching of ethnic Japanese, and the diversion of critical troops from the battlefront to serve as security forces at home. Internment undoubtedly set back the development of civil liberties and is certainly nothing to be proud of, but that's war.

Zam

-I've never really wanted to go to Japan. Simply because I don’t like eating fish. And I know that's very popular out there in Africa- Britney Spears

[Oberon]

The opposite has been argued extensively (and successfully), in fact: FDR's policies extended the Depression, forestalling a recovery that would've happened sooner.

No, it's never been argued successfully. I've all the arguments, including Freidman's, and what is obvious about them is they almost all claim 'it was WW II that got us out of the Depression', which of course is hilariously contradictory, but of course the wartime spending was indeed 'government spending' and it was the massive scale of that spending that ended the Depression, so the libertarian and pseudo-conservative spin is internally contradictory and ridiculous. Keynes was right, and still is; FDR's admin wasn't spending nearly enough to correct the severe damage the mindless laissez faire nonsense the economic policies of the 1920's wreaked on the country, which in fact is what the war buildup proves beyond a doubt.

A very close second is the internment camps.

It was a decision based on good reasons at the time; there was indeed justification for it, some of which other posters have already cited, along with the Nihau[sp?) incident on Hawaii itself, involving Japanese civilians aiding a downed Japanese pilot. If it is an 'error', it was on the side of caution, and nothing to be sniveling about these days. Zamuel covers it well.

Stop reading Ann Coulter's gibberish. Her crap is not based on real history, just cherry picked distortions, lying by omission, and a whole raft of fallacies and hyperbolic ravings.

My favorite quote re the study of history:

" ... And here is what bothers me so much about modern "scholarship." At what point did history become ethics? Why should we subvert the elusive search for facts to moralist concerns? So what if they are on or off the hook? If you want to be a preacher, go preach. If you want to save the world, go into politics. If you want to invent a world free of evil, take Prozac. It was said in Ecclesiastes and it still is true today, people suck. They did then, all of them. They do now, all of us. History is the history of self-interested, competing, aggressive, selfish, murderous humans. At what point did it become a morality play?" -Dave WIlliams, George Mason Univ.

Objective study of history just isn't very supportive of inane ideological memes and fantasies, so do your own homework.

[Rich]

Internment undoubtedly set back the development of civil liberties and is certainly nothing to be proud of, but that's war.

Why shouldn't people be proud of it? I believe war was necessary for the survival of our liberal societies. Its possible that an Axis vcitory might have led to gradual liberalisation, but its also possible that it could have led to a lot of nuclear weapon getting chucked around. War involves harming so called "innocent" people. War involves trampling on innocent people and on their liberties. War at least an all out war against an enemy of similar strength requires the extermination of vast numbers of innocent people, and the maiming and injuring of vast numbers more. Why should anyone feel ashamed of doing what needed to be done?

No its the modern pacifist liberals who should feel ashamed, not our noble forbears. This is why as British patriots we should be proud of the fire bombing of Hamburg, of the extermination of Hamburg's working class, despite the fact that working class of Hamburg was far, far less pro Nazi than the British Conservative party. we should be proud because it needed to be done, not out of some bigoted anti German racism.

[Zamuel]

Internment undoubtedly set back the development of civil liberties and is certainly nothing to be proud of, but that's war.

Why shouldn't people be proud of it? I believe war was necessary for the survival of our liberal societies.

"necessary evil" is what it is ... Internment was a regressive necessity that forced the united states to act against it's own ideals. Breaking your own nose is not something "Normal" people want to brag about.

Why should anyone feel ashamed of doing what needed to be done?

I did not suggest anyone be ashamed. Shame is an expression of guilt and I don't think I accused anyone of doing anything wrong. Your statement suggests that somewhere in your subconscious is an association of guilt you are in denial of.

as British patriots we should be proud of the fire bombing of Hamburg, - we should be proud because it needed to be done,

I think those involved in the strategic bombing campaign were rightfully proud of their service and deserve to be honored for it ... But under review, the strategic bombing of Germany appears to have been a waste of time. The resources devoted to it were horrendous and could have been much more effectively employed. The civilian slaughter only hardened the Germans to fight on and prolonged the war. It was a mistake, and being proud of making a mistake is another.

Zam

-God created war so that Americans would learn geography- Mark Twain

[late]

The devil is in the details. It would be more accurate to say FDR didn't fight the internment of citizens of Japanese descent.

Which is understandable, he had a thousand things that had to get done yesterday. You also should remember that this was not long after the worst racial violence in the history of the country. Things could have gone South quickly.

Which is also not to say I am taking a position on this. If someone that knows how to do history, or can find a good historian, I might look at that. But I haven't seen much historiography in this thread.