If Truman had not been president?

[Supposn]

If Truman had not been president, would the world have spent less for military purposes? Would then we and the world now be better for it?

U.S. Senator Harry Truman was the Democratic VP nominee of 1944. Vice President Henry Wallace was not renominated because Southern Democrats in particular, considered him as more agreeable to farmers and labor, rather than to corporations and banks. Truman mistrusted Russia, and Wallace was believed to be less so mistrustful of them.

If after FDR's death, Wallace rather than Truman had been President of the USA;
if after WW2 there had not been an arms race between the USA and the USSR;
if less wealth and efforts were devoted to military purposes, what would have been the consequences for the world and for the USA?

Would the strides of all technological and of economic advancements of particularly the USA have been as great? Would we have even have yet begun a space program? Would there have been less wars, and/or now be better quality of lives in the USA and/or the remainder of the world?

Truman's services as president of the United States were superior to many and inferior to on other who served in that office. I've greatest respect and admiration for both Henry A. Walace and Harry S. Truman. Respectfully. Supposn

 

[Dante Reawakened]

If Truman had not been president?​

Somebody else would have.

 

[meaner gene]

If after FDR's death, Wallace rather than Truman had been President of the USA;
if after WW2 there had not been an arms race between the USA and the USSR;
if less wealth and efforts were devoted to military purposes, what would have been the consequences for the world and for the USA?

Or without the arms race, the Soviet Union felt free to use all their stolen US Technology, and made a fleet of long range bombers, armed with the newly developed atomic bombs, and attacked either Europe by land or the US by air.
Both America and Europe were tired and unprepared for war, and the Soviet Union hungry to take advantage of it.

 

[Dante Reawakened]

If Truman had not been president, would the world have spent less for military purposes? Would then we and the world now be better for it?

U.S. Senator Harry Truman was the Democratic VP nominee of 1944. Vice President Henry Wallace was not renominated because Southern Democrats in particular, considered him as more agreeable to farmers and labor, rather than to corporations and banks. Truman mistrusted Russia, and Wallace was believed to be less so mistrustful of them.

If after FDR's death, Wallace rather than Truman had been President of the USA;
if after WW2 there had not been an arms race between the USA and the USSR;
if less wealth and efforts were devoted to military purposes, what would have been the consequences for the world and for the USA?

Would the strides of all technological and of economic advancements of particularly the USA have been as great? Would we have even have yet begun a space program? Would there have been less wars, and/or now be better quality of lives in the USA and/or the remainder of the world?

Truman's services as president of the United States were superior to many and inferior to on other who served in that office. I've greatest respect and admiration for both Henry A. Walace and Harry S. Truman. Respectfully. Supposn

'If?"

Ok. Very intellectual.

 

[meaner gene]

'If?"

Ok. Very intellectual.

Everybody wonders if certain historic events had gone differently, the butterfly effect from it.

 

[Donald H]

Or without the arms race, the Soviet Union felt free to use all their stolen US Technology, and made a fleet of long range bombers, armed with the newly developed atomic bombs, and attacked either Europe by land or the US by air.

Not to change the subject but the government's political assassinations of the Kennedys reset everything to do with America choosing a course of continuous wars of aggression.

Both America and Europe were tired and unprepared for war, and the Soviet Union hungry to take advantage of it.

No, the Soviet Union was never intent on invading either Europe or America. It was always the US that was the aggressor. We're only now seeing proof positive of that being the case, as America attempts advances on Russia's borders.

 

[the watcher]

If Truman wasn't president, maybe someone else wouldn't have tolerated operation paperclip, signed the National Security Act of 1947, created the CIA, and fathered the security state, as well as greased the slate for the creation of Israel. Someone else would have the honor, but it might have been delayed some. It is what it is, he was just in the birthday boy chair.

 

[mudwhistle]

If Truman had not been president, would the world have spent less for military purposes? Would then we and the world now be better for it?

U.S. Senator Harry Truman was the Democratic VP nominee of 1944. Vice President Henry Wallace was not renominated because Southern Democrats in particular, considered him as more agreeable to farmers and labor, rather than to corporations and banks. Truman mistrusted Russia, and Wallace was believed to be less so mistrustful of them.

If after FDR's death, Wallace rather than Truman had been President of the USA;
if after WW2 there had not been an arms race between the USA and the USSR;
if less wealth and efforts were devoted to military purposes, what would have been the consequences for the world and for the USA?

Would the strides of all technological and of economic advancements of particularly the USA have been as great? Would we have even have yet begun a space program? Would there have been less wars, and/or now be better quality of lives in the USA and/or the remainder of the world?

Truman's services as president of the United States were superior to many and inferior to on other who served in that office. I've greatest respect and admiration for both Henry A. Walace and Harry S. Truman. Respectfully. Supposn

Harry Truman was just a guy thrown into a position he wasn't prepared for.
He tried to do what was right.
That's more than I can say about the current occupant of the Oval Office.

 

[meaner gene]

No, the Soviet Union was never intent on invading either Europe or America. It was always the US that was the aggressor. We're only now seeing proof positive of that being the case, as America attempts advances on Russia's borders.

Did you not learn history? Gerald Ford thought as you do, denying Soviet aggression, and it cost him the election to Jimmy Carter.

 

[Donald H]

If Truman wasn't president, maybe someone else wouldn't have tolerated operation paperclip, signed the National Security Act of 1947, created the CIA, and fathered the security state, as well as greased the slate for the creation of Israel. Someone else would have the honor, but it might have been delayed some. It is what it is, he was just in the birthday boy chair.

How in your opinion could the creation of the Israeli state been of any consequence. Are you suggesting that it was meant to create America's ME proxy?
Would it prove to be America's justification for future aggression in the ME?

 

[Magnus]

If Truman had not been president, would the world have spent less for military purposes? Would then we and the world now be better for it?

U.S. Senator Harry Truman was the Democratic VP nominee of 1944. Vice President Henry Wallace was not renominated because Southern Democrats in particular, considered him as more agreeable to farmers and labor, rather than to corporations and banks. Truman mistrusted Russia, and Wallace was believed to be less so mistrustful of them.

If after FDR's death, Wallace rather than Truman had been President of the USA;
if after WW2 there had not been an arms race between the USA and the USSR;
if less wealth and efforts were devoted to military purposes, what would have been the consequences for the world and for the USA?

Would the strides of all technological and of economic advancements of particularly the USA have been as great? Would we have even have yet begun a space program? Would there have been less wars, and/or now be better quality of lives in the USA and/or the remainder of the world?

Truman's services as president of the United States were superior to many and inferior to on other who served in that office. I've greatest respect and admiration for both Henry A. Walace and Harry S. Truman. Respectfully. Supposn

Who coined the term - military-industrial complex and warned about the dangers?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Not to change the subject but the government's political assassinations of the Kennedys reset everything to do with America choosing a course of continuous wars of aggression.

No, the Soviet Union was never intent on invading either Europe or America. It was always the US that was the aggressor. We're only now seeing proof positive of that being the case, as America attempts advances on Russia's borders.

Good God you are stupid.

 

[meaner gene]

How in your opinion could the creation of the Israeli state been of any consequence.

Israel is like the irritant to the oyster. Where the oysters efforts to rid itself of the irritation eventually creates something of great value.

 

[gipper]

If Truman had not been president, would the world have spent less for military purposes? Would then we and the world now be better for it?

U.S. Senator Harry Truman was the Democratic VP nominee of 1944. Vice President Henry Wallace was not renominated because Southern Democrats in particular, considered him as more agreeable to farmers and labor, rather than to corporations and banks. Truman mistrusted Russia, and Wallace was believed to be less so mistrustful of them.

If after FDR's death, Wallace rather than Truman had been President of the USA;
if after WW2 there had not been an arms race between the USA and the USSR;
if less wealth and efforts were devoted to military purposes, what would have been the consequences for the world and for the USA?

Would the strides of all technological and of economic advancements of particularly the USA have been as great? Would we have even have yet begun a space program? Would there have been less wars, and/or now be better quality of lives in the USA and/or the remainder of the world?

Truman's services as president of the United States were superior to many and inferior to on other who served in that office. I've greatest respect and admiration for both Henry A. Walace and Harry S. Truman. Respectfully. Supposn

No respect for Truman. He’s a war criminal of the highest order.

Had Wallace been potus, it’s very likely hundreds of thousands of lives would have been spared. He would have accepted Japan’s surrender long before August 1945 and never dropped the two bombs.

 

[meaner gene]

No respect for Truman. He’s a war criminal of the highest order.

Had Wallace been potus, it’s very likely hundreds of thousands of lives would have been spared. He would have accepted Japan’s surrender long before August 1945 and never dropped the two bombs.

Are you completely unaware of history? The Japanese were never going to "surrender" to the US, and the cessation of hostilities would have only allowed them to continue their expansion across China and the pacific unchecked.

 

[meaner gene]

I blame Trumpism for how people think they can rewrite history based on "alternative facts"

 

[meaner gene]

What once was, and what Putin seeks to make again

As they say, prove me wrong.

 

[gipper]

Are you completely unaware of history? The Japanese were never going to "surrender" to the US, and the cessation of hostilities would have only allowed them to continue their expansion across China and the pacific unchecked.

You are unaware. Get informed. Stop accepting the lies told you in government grade school.

 

[surada]

If Truman had not been president, would the world have spent less for military purposes? Would then we and the world now be better for it?

U.S. Senator Harry Truman was the Democratic VP nominee of 1944. Vice President Henry Wallace was not renominated because Southern Democrats in particular, considered him as more agreeable to farmers and labor, rather than to corporations and banks. Truman mistrusted Russia, and Wallace was believed to be less so mistrustful of them.

If after FDR's death, Wallace rather than Truman had been President of the USA;
if after WW2 there had not been an arms race between the USA and the USSR;
if less wealth and efforts were devoted to military purposes, what would have been the consequences for the world and for the USA?

Would the strides of all technological and of economic advancements of particularly the USA have been as great? Would we have even have yet begun a space program? Would there have been less wars, and/or now be better quality of lives in the USA and/or the remainder of the world?

Truman's services as president of the United States were superior to many and inferior to on other who served in that office. I've greatest respect and admiration for both Henry A. Walace and Harry S. Truman. Respectfully. Supposn

Truman was a sell out.

 

[surada]

Who coined the term - military-industrial complex and warned about the dangers?

Eisenhower.