Isn't that a non sequitur?

Japan attacks the US, and kills 1,900 Americans, with Germany declaring war two days later... and we are to take an isolationist/pacifist position? Do you mean we surrender unconditionally on Dec 10, 1941 to the Axis powers?

You are trying to show me that the threat made by Japan/Germany was greater than that posed by the Crash of '29... I get it. However, as you so nicely pointed out, the two were not simultaneous in nature, were they? Neither Germany nor Japan were threatening American lives and interests in 1933, but the Dust Bowl and the effects of the Crash were... enough to displace 300,000 people and reduce our capacity to manufacture and produce necessary resources and products by as much as 65%. More than one in every four adults in this nation was unemployed and had no means by which to provide for themselves or their families... and all were old enough to vote for radical socialist or fascist platforms that were sweeping into power in Europe and South America, and any one of them could have taken up arms and joined in an open "rebellion" against the government.

Why is it so difficult for you to see that the nation was in a crisis? This crash was like no other we had ever "weathered" in the past, intervention or not, and I contend that it warranted a Federal response. I can think of no other "economic" crisis that so altered American society as the Great Depression... yet you make it sound like it was an over-blown bit of Democratic drama produced to give FDR and his party-mates the means and opportunity to take control of government and fundamentally change America.

I have ALWAYS agreed that "doing nothing" would eventually have seen America rebound, but my point has always been "At what cost?" How many Okies needed to die of disease or malnutrition before its "ok" for the Feds to make a difference? How many families need to be forced out of their homes or farms, with no where to sleep from then on except in a car or truck? Where is the faith in the American system, and the traditional Christian values that are its foundation, if the people had to watch (or live through) another year of economic free fall... or two... or four?

I have never questioned the need to spend money or expand government expenses in times of crisis brought about by war or the immanent threat of war... so you can stop with the poor analogy. Our argument is simply and completely that you do not see the Great Depression as a national crisis needing Federal intervention, where I do. If that is still true, then there is no more to discuss, is there? If that is NOT still true, then where am I wrong and you still right?