It is too subjective to ascribe intent. It is worse than psychoanalysis because "the US" isn't a distinct individual. Instead there's a collection of individual

It is too subjective to ascribe intent. It is worse than psychoanalysis because "the US" isn't a distinct individual. Instead there's a collection of individuals, all with different sets of sometimes overlapping incentives. Inevitability isn't the question. Rather, "power play" in terms of post-hoc analysis is the only question we can probe. Suggesting otherwise is a leap beyond conjecture. Without implying that this was the analysis at the time, we can safely say that the US was positioned to be the sole remaining industrial superpower post war, if the US entered the war at the time which it did. If it had entered earlier or not at all, this may not have been the case. The original comment was concise. Perhaps it was appropriate for a simple assertion, but it did leave room for ambiguity.