It’s all been said before. Naysayers are abundant throughout the ages.
From the above link (bump). The NYTimes could just run the same articles and replace “Germany” with “Iraq”.
“Loss of Victory in Germany Through U.S. Policy Feared,” November 18, 1945
Grave concern was expressed today by informed officials that the United States might soon lose the fruits of victory in Germany through the failure to prepare adequately for carrying out its long-term commitments under the Potsdam Declaration. Government failures were attributed in part to public apathy. The predictions of a coming crisis are predicated upon three points: 1) The failure to start training a civilian corps of administrators to take over when the Army's Military Government pulls out of Germany by June 1. 2) The failure of the Government to set up an expert advisory group, such as that which existed in the Foreign Economic Administration's Enemy Branch to back up the American administrators of Germany with informed advice and provide a focal point in Washington for policy-making on the German question. 3) The failure of the Allies to decide together, or the United States for itself, the crucial economic question raised by the Potsdam Declaration; namely what level of German economic activity is desired over the long term?
Thank you for posting this. It is amazing how the rhetoric of the New York Times is so similar to today. I guess they consider it their role.
[quote=Fitz]Thank you for posting this. It is amazing how the rhetoric of the New York Times is so similar to today. I guess they consider it their role.
Maybe they just cut and paste - you know a story for all occasions.
[quote=HagiaSophia]Maybe they just cut and paste - you know a story for all occasions.
I would consider that, however they specialize in making things up so I don’t know that they would be so clever as to cut and paste!