Let's compare and contrast here, shall we?

Three years after the attack on Pearl Harbor, FDR has the Germans and
Japanese
by the throat.

Three years after 9/11, Bush 43 allows Al Qaeda to murder American civilians
at will.

Walt

Let's continue the comparison. FDR had an almost unaminous support in the
Congress. Bush clearly does not. FDR had almost unaminous support in the
American Press. Today Bush faces a majority of media outlets that wish his
presidency to fail regardless of the threat to the country.

FDR could jail American citizens with no proof of any crime or criminal intent.
Bush cannot bring himself to increase surveillance of our porous borders and
potential enemy aliens lest he arouse firestorm of protest in Congress and the
Media.

FDR already had selective service conscription in place and could increase the
size of the military to levels never dreamt of before or since. Bush finds
himself caught up in the backwash of the Peace Dividend recklessy squandered by
his predecessor.

FDR had two genuine allies and one nation coincidentally fighting one of the
same enemies and therefore worthy of support. Dozens of other countries
contributed tiny amounts of troops in order to gain some advantage in the
postwar redistribution of influence. Bush finds himself with only one genuine
ally and that one under the same internal and external assaults that he is
subject too. Dozens of countries are contributing tiny amounts and several
major countries are actually waiting out the results or actively conspiring
against him to suit thier own advantage in the post war world.

FDR allowed the Germans and Japanese to murder and torture American POWs at
will from 1941 to 1945 and the American Press never called him on it.

John Dupre'