29 ms·

> he did so many things he didn't have to. Yeah, like the mass murder of civilians in the Philippines to quash their attempts at independence from colonialism.

ethbr1 3y ago
Roosevelt became president on September 14, 1901, when McKinley was assassinated. On September 28, 1901, 51 American soldiers were killed in a surprise attack on Samar, and Roosevelt gave the order to pacify the island. This led to Jacob Smith [0], who had been promoted by then-civilian-governor Taft (with appalling lack of common sense) issuing genocidal orders which clearly violated US military general orders at the time [1]. The orders were only uncovered during Smith's subordinate's war crimes trial [2], which unfortunately led to Smith being forcibly retired (instead of hung). But it's a bit of a stretch to put that on Roosevelt, halfway around the world in 1901 and having just suddenly inherited a presidency. Of course, there are also the subsequent atrocities [3], most of which are unfortunately still repeated in modern times as militaries are used to perform counterinsurgency operations. Of final note during Roosevelt's presidency would be the 1906 action at Bud Dajo [4], with the assault ordered by Leonard Wood [5] (Roosevelt's CO over the Rough Riders), in which ~900 Moro rebels (including substantial numbers of civilians) were slaughtered by naval gunfire. However, among the reasons they were rebelling, and one of the reasons they were assaulted instead of being besieged, was their desire to continue taking slaves and their raiding nearby villages to do so, which the US government had banned. So... suffice to say, the Philippine campaign was a clusterfuck, echoed in essentially every counter-guerilla campaign since, and probably can't be blamed conveniently on Roosevelt, given the communications/command capabilities of the day. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_H._Smith#Promotion_to_Brigadier_General https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_H._Smith#Promotion_to_... [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lieber_Code https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lieber_Code [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littleton_Waller#Philippine%E2%80%93American_War_and_war_crimes_acquittal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littleton_Waller#Philippine%... [3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes#Philippines https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes#Phi... [4] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Bud_Dajo#Background https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Bud_Dajo#Bac... [5] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Wood#Philippines https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Wood#Philippines
- bugglebeetle 3y ago
  Textbook apologia. Roosevelt fully supported America’s imperialist ambitions in the Philippines, so you don’t get to shuffle off the atrocities that came along with that just because the reality of what that meant was incredibly horrifying. He gave the order to “pacify” Samar and is responsible for what happened as a result. By the measure of his own stated ideals, you can’t divorce his command of the military from its consequences.
  - ethbr1 3y ago
    Can you give me some cited examples?
    - alephnerd 3y ago
      Not about Philippines but he did coin the Roosevelt Collary [0] that the US could intervene in the internal affairs of Latin American countries if they committed flagrant wrongdoings that "loosened the ties of civilized society". To be fair, he was a product of his time, and it could be argued that humanitarian missions can be treated the same. Was American carpetbombing of Germany (killing untold numbers of people) even when it saved millions of Jews and Romas being genocided? Or, using a less loaded example - directly intervening in the Yugoslav Civil War and bombing Belgrade but also ensuring the Dayton Accords were created and preventing further conflict between Serbs, Croats, Muslims, and Albanians. There's no right or wrong answer. The world isn't black or white. [0] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Corollary https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Corollary
- user982 3y ago
  While I agree that Roosevelt's direct culpability for the atrocities in the Philippines isn't large, his involvement with them predated his presidency: as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, he agitated forcefully for war with Spain (signing his letters to that effect as "a jingo") on known-fraudulent grounds (the USS Maine), for the express purpose of taking Spain's colonies (including the Philippines and Cuba) into American imperial control. Roosevelt's actions in the latter of those colonies, Cuba, are more worthy of criticism ("I am so angry with that infernal little Cuban republic that I would like to wipe its people off the face of the earth"). His bloodlust for personally killing Spanish soldiers in a war he helped to engineer lasted the rest of his life, and the corollary to the Monroe Doctrine that he gave his name to has fueled the US embargo of Cuba that has been imposed for 65 years and counting.

ethbr1 3y ago

Roosevelt became president on September 14, 1901, when McKinley was assassinated. On September 28, 1901, 51 American soldiers were killed in a surprise attack on Samar, and Roosevelt gave the order to pacify the island. This led to Jacob Smith [0], who had been promoted by then-civilian-governor Taft (with appalling lack of common sense) issuing genocidal orders which clearly violated US military general orders at the time [1]. The orders were only uncovered during Smith's subordinate's war crimes trial [2], which unfortunately led to Smith being forcibly retired (instead of hung). But it's a bit of a stretch to put that on Roosevelt, halfway around the world in 1901 and having just suddenly inherited a presidency. Of course, there are also the subsequent atrocities [3], most of which are unfortunately still repeated in modern times as militaries are used to perform counterinsurgency operations. Of final note during Roosevelt's presidency would be the 1906 action at Bud Dajo [4], with the assault ordered by Leonard Wood [5] (Roosevelt's CO over the Rough Riders), in which ~900 Moro rebels (including substantial numbers of civilians) were slaughtered by naval gunfire. However, among the reasons they were rebelling, and one of the reasons they were assaulted instead of being besieged, was their desire to continue taking slaves and their raiding nearby villages to do so, which the US government had banned. So... suffice to say, the Philippine campaign was a clusterfuck, echoed in essentially every counter-guerilla campaign since, and probably can't be blamed conveniently on Roosevelt, given the communications/command capabilities of the day. [0] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_H._Smith#Promotion_to_Brigadier_General https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacob_H._Smith#Promotion_to_... [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lieber_Code https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lieber_Code [2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littleton_Waller#Philippine%E2%80%93American_War_and_war_crimes_acquittal https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Littleton_Waller#Philippine%... [3] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes#Philippines https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes#Phi... [4] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Bud_Dajo#Background https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Battle_of_Bud_Dajo#Bac... [5] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Wood#Philippines https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonard_Wood#Philippines

bugglebeetle 3y ago
Textbook apologia. Roosevelt fully supported America’s imperialist ambitions in the Philippines, so you don’t get to shuffle off the atrocities that came along with that just because the reality of what that meant was incredibly horrifying. He gave the order to “pacify” Samar and is responsible for what happened as a result. By the measure of his own stated ideals, you can’t divorce his command of the military from its consequences.
- ethbr1 3y ago
  Can you give me some cited examples?
  - alephnerd 3y ago
    Not about Philippines but he did coin the Roosevelt Collary [0] that the US could intervene in the internal affairs of Latin American countries if they committed flagrant wrongdoings that "loosened the ties of civilized society". To be fair, he was a product of his time, and it could be argued that humanitarian missions can be treated the same. Was American carpetbombing of Germany (killing untold numbers of people) even when it saved millions of Jews and Romas being genocided? Or, using a less loaded example - directly intervening in the Yugoslav Civil War and bombing Belgrade but also ensuring the Dayton Accords were created and preventing further conflict between Serbs, Croats, Muslims, and Albanians. There's no right or wrong answer. The world isn't black or white. [0] - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Corollary https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roosevelt_Corollary
user982 3y ago
While I agree that Roosevelt's direct culpability for the atrocities in the Philippines isn't large, his involvement with them predated his presidency: as Assistant Secretary of the Navy, he agitated forcefully for war with Spain (signing his letters to that effect as "a jingo") on known-fraudulent grounds (the USS Maine), for the express purpose of taking Spain's colonies (including the Philippines and Cuba) into American imperial control. Roosevelt's actions in the latter of those colonies, Cuba, are more worthy of criticism ("I am so angry with that infernal little Cuban republic that I would like to wipe its people off the face of the earth"). His bloodlust for personally killing Spanish soldiers in a war he helped to engineer lasted the rest of his life, and the corollary to the Monroe Doctrine that he gave his name to has fueled the US embargo of Cuba that has been imposed for 65 years and counting.