All true, except that the Japanese were waging an aggressive war of
imperial expansion on the Chinese mainland, (where the Japanese army
used rape and plague as weapons), and had previously fought a short
undeclared war with the Soviet Union, (in which Marshal Zhukov handed
them their heads), which helped them decide to fight the United States
and Britain, taking the "Southern Strategy" because they thought we
would be easier to knock out of a war. It was probably impossible to
avoid conflict with the Japanese without ceding them hegemony over Asia
and the Western Pacific.
Kevin Waterson wrote:
This one time, at band camp, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Launching a war simply because you want to (maybe just for political reasons)
I think all wars are fought for political reasons.
and convincing others it is a good thing, is certainly different from
responding to an outright attack (Pearl Harbor). Or even rushing to the defense of
one's allies.
But I shouldn't have said that much. And I'll stop here.
Toooo late :)
Pearl Harbour was the result of failed US foreign policy.
The United States and the United Kingdom reacted to Japanese military actions
in China by imposing a scrap metal boycott followed by an oil boycott, a freeze
of assets and the closing of the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping. The only
choice for Japan was to seek oil in South East Asia and with the the Americans
firmly entrenched in Pearl Harbour they had to neutralize the American fleet
or cave into their demands to get out of China.
It was anything but an un-provoked or "outright" attack, it was a response to
American policy.
Kind regards
Kevin
--
When you're worried or in doubt,
Run in circles, (scream and shout).
