For those of you who resent the Japanese for Pearl Harbor...

Turkey · December 07, 2014, 09:40:27 PM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 09:36:54 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:03:40 PM
Pearl Harbor was an unprovoked act of war against America.

No, they were provoked by America withholding oil and steel from the Japanese. It was either go to war or collapse from lack of resources.

I'm a little confused how you think going to war is a solution to the problem of America withholding resources. Japan was actively fighting against their allies, and America had zero obligation to continue trade with them.

Doctor Doom · December 07, 2014, 09:48:20 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:40:27 PM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 09:36:54 PM
Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:03:40 PM
Pearl Harbor was an unprovoked act of war against America.

No, they were provoked by America withholding oil and steel from the Japanese. It was either go to war or collapse from lack of resources.

I'm a little confused how you think going to war is a solution to the problem of America withholding resources. Japan was actively fighting against their allies, and America had zero obligation to continue trade with them.

Giving Japan resources to continue their war would have been exactly in America's best interest. They were getting paid to keep Japan fighting, and therefore run low on steel and oil and thus need to pay more to get more steel and oil. Couple that with how America's allies were doing the same, and America was doing pretty good. Withholding those two resources was about the stupidest thing the US could have done, as they not only cut off a huge source of money, they got Japan good and pissed enough to send in an air fleet.

Turkey · December 07, 2014, 09:53:16 PM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 09:48:20 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:40:27 PM
Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 09:36:54 PM
Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:03:40 PM
Pearl Harbor was an unprovoked act of war against America.

No, they were provoked by America withholding oil and steel from the Japanese. It was either go to war or collapse from lack of resources.

I'm a little confused how you think going to war is a solution to the problem of America withholding resources. Japan was actively fighting against their allies, and America had zero obligation to continue trade with them.

Giving Japan resources to continue their war would have been exactly in America's best interest. They were getting paid to keep Japan fighting, and therefore run low on steel and oil and thus need to pay more to get more steel and oil. Couple that with how America's allies were doing the same, and America was doing pretty good. Withholding those two resources was about the stupidest thing the US could have done, as they not only cut off a huge source of money, they got Japan good and pissed enough to send in an air fleet.

It's incredibly short-sighted to think supplying Japan's war effort would have been good for the U.S. Imperial Japan's expansion throughout the region and alignment with the Axis currently decimating America's European allies was absolutely counter to American prosperity, and it would have been a huge slap in the face to continue war-profiteering from our allies' deaths. What did you think would have happened once Germany steamrolled through Europe and Japan conquered Asia? That Japan would thank them for the steel and oil and go on their merry way?

Doctor Doom · December 07, 2014, 10:03:40 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:53:16 PM

It's incredibly short-sighted to think supplying Japan's war effort would have been good for the U.S. Imperial Japan's expansion throughout the region and alignment with the Axis currently decimating America's European allies was absolutely counter to American prosperity, and it would have been a huge slap in the face to continue war-profiteering from our allies' deaths. What did you think would have happened once Germany steamrolled through Europe and Japan conquered Asia? That Japan would thank them for the steel and oil and go on their merry way?

War logistics and supplying relies on neutrality. So, yes, even if America's allies were getting massacred by weapons made from steel imported from the US, it would still be profitable for America to keep exporting resources to both sides. Horrible? Of course. Profiting off human suffering? Most definitely. Pragmatic? Absolutely.

Japan was never in any way powerful enough to really defeat America. Even if the US had kept supplying them throughout the war and Japan turned on them at the end, it still would never have ended favorably for Japan. Also, the concept of Germany getting past Russia is a laughable one indeed.

Turkey · December 07, 2014, 10:07:36 PM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 10:03:40 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:53:16 PM
It's incredibly short-sighted to think supplying Japan's war effort would have been good for the U.S. Imperial Japan's expansion throughout the region and alignment with the Axis currently decimating America's European allies was absolutely counter to American prosperity, and it would have been a huge slap in the face to continue war-profiteering from our allies' deaths. What did you think would have happened once Germany steamrolled through Europe and Japan conquered Asia? That Japan would thank them for the steel and oil and go on their merry way?

War logistics and supplying relies on neutrality. So, yes, even if America's allies were getting massacred by weapons made from steel imported from the US, it would still be profitable for America to keep exporting resources to both sides. Horrible? Of course. Profiting off human suffering? Most definitely. Pragmatic? Absolutely.

Japan was never in any way powerful enough to really defeat America. Even if the US had kept supplying them throughout the war and Japan turned on them at the end, it still would never have ended favorably for Japan. Also, the concept of Germany getting past Russia is a laughable one indeed.

So then Germany conquers Europe, Japan conquers Asia, Russia conquers Germany's Europe and Japan sides with them, then both converge on America.

Obviously it would have been profitable to continue selling to Japan, but thankfully FDR had a stronger ethical backbone than a desire for profit. The point still stands that economic sanctions aren't justification for the attack.

Doctor Doom · December 07, 2014, 10:19:26 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 10:07:36 PM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 10:03:40 PM
Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:53:16 PM
It's incredibly short-sighted to think supplying Japan's war effort would have been good for the U.S. Imperial Japan's expansion throughout the region and alignment with the Axis currently decimating America's European allies was absolutely counter to American prosperity, and it would have been a huge slap in the face to continue war-profiteering from our allies' deaths. What did you think would have happened once Germany steamrolled through Europe and Japan conquered Asia? That Japan would thank them for the steel and oil and go on their merry way?

War logistics and supplying relies on neutrality. So, yes, even if America's allies were getting massacred by weapons made from steel imported from the US, it would still be profitable for America to keep exporting resources to both sides. Horrible? Of course. Profiting off human suffering? Most definitely. Pragmatic? Absolutely.

Japan was never in any way powerful enough to really defeat America. Even if the US had kept supplying them throughout the war and Japan turned on them at the end, it still would never have ended favorably for Japan. Also, the concept of Germany getting past Russia is a laughable one indeed.

So then Germany conquers Europe, Japan conquers Asia, Russia conquers Germany's Europe and Japan sides with them, then both converge on America.

Obviously it would have been profitable to continue selling to Japan, but thankfully FDR had a stronger ethical backbone than a desire for profit. The point still stands that economic sanctions aren't justification for the attack.

Didn't say it was the ethical option. Just the most pragmatic.

Japan's main goal was to secure itself as a world power. Assuming they managed to conquer Asia, they'd be just as likely to side with America as they would be to side with Russia.

But we digress. The original point has been addressed: the attack on Pearl Harbor was most definitely provoked. Justified? Debatable. But provoked nonetheless.

Turkey · December 07, 2014, 10:21:56 PM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 10:19:26 PM

The original point has been addressed: the attack on Pearl Harbor was most definitely provoked.

You've failed to justify the claim that economic sanctions are tantamount to provocation of war. It's perfectly logical for America to cut off trade with a hostile nation actively fighting America's allies, and Japan surely anticipated that. In addition, it's obvious that the instigation of war wasn't an attempt to renew trade with America.

Regardless, that was hardly the point of my original post.

Doctor Doom · December 07, 2014, 10:27:57 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 10:21:56 PM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 10:19:26 PM
The original point has been addressed: the attack on Pearl Harbor was most definitely provoked.

You've failed to justify the claim that economic sanctions are tantamount to provocation of war.

You've failed to read the next few words.

Quote

It's perfectly logical for America to cut off trade with a hostile nation actively fighting America's allies,

But hardly profitable.

Quote

and Japan surely anticipated that.

If they did, they would have attacked before America cut off two of their most needed resources.

Quote

In addition, it's obvious that the instigation of war wasn't an attempt to renew trade with America.

Of course not, but it could have been put to use by America nonetheless.

Quote

Regardless, that was hardly the point of my original post.

But it is the point of the thread.

🍁 Aria 🔮 · December 07, 2014, 10:34:32 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Pearl Harbor being a surprise attack unintentional? As I recall, the Japanese Emissary in the US took longer than Japan expected to deliver the declaration of war.

Mad Max · December 07, 2014, 10:42:16 PM

Quote from: TheOneTrueDesticle on December 07, 2014, 07:41:54 PM

Quote from: DAS B( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)T x2 on December 07, 2014, 07:41:12 PM
Quote
For those of you who resent the Japanese for Pearl Harbor...
Who does that?
I just witnessed some dipshit say how much he hates the Japanese. I think it was Kinder.

Then you fell for it. Something about hooks and lines and such.

Mattie G Indahouse · December 08, 2014, 05:31:25 AM

Quote from: TheOneTrueDesticle on December 07, 2014, 07:37:06 PM

The US accomplished this by using one of the most horrific weapons ever devised by man. It was a waste of human life and it accomplished nothing.

Agreed we should have went with Operation Downfall instead. Instead of around 100,000 people dieing we should have went with an invasion that would have an estimated casualty rate of 1million for the US and then there's the Japs. They were already commenting suicide on islands. No imagine how suicidally the soldiers would be fighting on homeland and what the civilians would do. There would be mass suicides in the hundreds of thousands or the millions.

For the "most horrific weapons ever devised by man" thing this was the most human of the WMDs we used. The firebombs we dropped over there killed more people and there's the bombing raids the Allies did over Germany. Those bombing raids caused more destruction than the nukes and they killed far more people than the nukes.

challengerX · December 08, 2014, 05:48:50 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Kinder Graham · December 08, 2014, 06:31:44 AM

Quote from: TheOneTrueDesticle on December 07, 2014, 08:47:20 PM

Quote from: Statefarm on December 07, 2014, 08:30:20 PM

Quote from: TheOneTrueDesticle on December 07, 2014, 08:20:32 PM
Quote from: Statefarm on December 07, 2014, 08:08:04 PM

Quote from: TheOneTrueDesticle on December 07, 2014, 07:50:46 PM
Quote from: Statefarm on December 07, 2014, 07:50:02 PM
Posted in The Flood, not worth my time. You are entitled to your own opinions, have a good day.
*rereads previous comments on your behalf*

This is supposed to be in Serious but I fucked up
Your opinion about anyone still hating modern Japanese people for Pearl Harbor is valid, but it's obvious this thread would be bait and a huge mess, even in serious. The truth is, the OP doesn't have much discussion (because it's so obvious).
Because anything you disagree with is bait, right?

I'm not trying to bait anyone. I'm stating how I feel on the matter and it didn't really help that I clicked off of Serious when I posted this.

Apologies. I didn't mean you posted this as intentional bait or that the opinion stated in the OP is bait. Anyone who believes that all differing opinions are bait is an idiot. I'm saying the title doesn't correlate properly with the post to provide discussion, and instead created something more effective as bait.
I see now.

The title is more in response to Kinder's bullshit-ass comment earlier.

Not only are you butthurt, but you have no concept of history. The Japanese attacked America unprovoked and without warning, killing thousands of people doing nothing to them. The Japanese had the same undivided support to their Emperor as the North Koreans to Kim Jung Un; they would fight to the last man, women, and child and even commit mass suicide before coming face-to-face with an American Marine. A land invasion of Japan would have resulted in deaths of over a million people, military and civilian alike. Japan was not going to surrender without the use of force and instead of killing millions, we decided instead to utilize nuclear weaponry AFTER giving the people of Japan a warning beforehand

Kinder Graham · December 08, 2014, 06:35:09 AM

Quote from: TheOneTrueDesticle on December 07, 2014, 07:41:54 PM

Quote from: DAS B( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)T x2 on December 07, 2014, 07:41:12 PM
Quote
For those of you who resent the Japanese for Pearl Harbor...
Who does that?
I just witnessed some dipshit say how much he hates the Japanese. I think it was Kinder.

Holy shit, are you high right now? So many people have used that joke before, just in another variation. Really, stop trying to make people seem they are hateful. How the hell is this thread in Serious anyway?

Kinder Graham · December 08, 2014, 06:36:24 AM

Quote from: Verbatim on December 07, 2014, 07:46:50 PM

Didn't FDR basically provoke the attack anyway?...

Yeah, because responding to the Japanese killing and raping of women and children across China by placing an oil embargo is totally wrong and we were the ones provoking. Read up on your history text book

Kinder Graham · December 08, 2014, 06:39:55 AM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 10:27:57 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 10:21:56 PM
Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 10:19:26 PM
The original point has been addressed: the attack on Pearl Harbor was most definitely provoked.

You've failed to justify the claim that economic sanctions are tantamount to provocation of war.

You've failed to read the next few words.

Quote
It's perfectly logical for America to cut off trade with a hostile nation actively fighting America's allies,

But hardly profitable.

Quote
and Japan surely anticipated that.

If they did, they would have attacked before America cut off two of their most needed resources.

Quote
In addition, it's obvious that the instigation of war wasn't an attempt to renew trade with America.

Of course not, but it could have been put to use by America nonetheless.

Quote
Regardless, that was hardly the point of my original post.

But it is the point of the thread.

Japan was violating human rights and killing/raping fucking women and children. Do you seriously think the U.S should stand idle when they can tell Japan to cut it out by restricting one item of trade? America knew decades before the Japs were going to attack America, before any of that ever happened. Embargo or not, we were going to be attacked as the Japanese wanted to control the Pacific, including U.S territories

Mordo · December 08, 2014, 06:52:43 AM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 09:36:54 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:03:40 PM
Pearl Harbor was an unprovoked act of war against America.

No, they were provoked by America withholding oil and steel from the Japanese. It was either go to war or collapse from lack of resources.

No actually. 1940s Japan had a heavily imperialistic culture. They'd already assimilated most of China and the Philippines at that point, and set their gaze upon America since they were right across the Pacific. I don't know what revisionist history you've been reading into, but lack of resources they did not have. They just wanted to attack America because they thought American's as people were subhuman and weak, and because they could.

Now, whether or not US intelligence knew Pearl Harbour was going to happen or not is an entirely different discussion topic in and of itself, but it was most definitely and unprovoked act of aggression on Japan's behalf.

Kinder Graham · December 08, 2014, 08:30:15 AM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 09:36:54 PM

Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:03:40 PM
Pearl Harbor was an unprovoked act of war against America.

No, they were provoked by America withholding oil and steel from the Japanese. It was either go to war or collapse from lack of resources.

Once again, Japan fucking raped and murdered Chinese women and children and made Koreans girls into sex slaves. They deserved the embargos because America wasn't going to sit and watch as their resources were being used to commit mass human rights violations

Take your revisionist history somewhere else please

Kinder Graham · December 08, 2014, 08:43:29 AM

Quote from: Madman Mordo on December 08, 2014, 06:52:43 AM

Quote from: Lord Keksworth on December 07, 2014, 09:36:54 PM
Quote from: H̲u̲r̲t̲f̲u̲l̲T̲u̲r̲k̲e̲y on December 07, 2014, 09:03:40 PM
Pearl Harbor was an unprovoked act of war against America.

No, they were provoked by America withholding oil and steel from the Japanese. It was either go to war or collapse from lack of resources.
No actually. 1940s Japan had a heavily imperialistic culture. They'd already assimilated most of China and the Philippines at that point, and set their gaze upon America since they were right across the Pacific. I don't know what revisionist history you've been reading into, but lack of resources they did not have. They just wanted to attack America because they thought American's as people were subhuman and weak, and because they could.

Now, whether or not US intelligence knew Pearl Harbour was going to happen or not is an entirely different discussion topic in and of itself, but it was most definitely and unprovoked act of aggression on Japan's behalf.

Partially correct here.

Japan had been Imperialistic really since the the 1860s with the creation of the Empire of Japan, but it was the 1930s that Japan became increasingly militaristic with the Great Depression, which led to the rise of the military having control over Hirohito and the government. But Japanese annexation began more or less with the takeover of Korea in 1910. Japan then turned to Chinese Manchuria in the 30s.

The Philippines was a U.S territory with a contingent if U.S troops on station. Japan invaded the island nation at the same exact time they launched the attack on Pearl Harbor. The ultimate motive of Japan was to create a Asian and Pacific empire and that would include U.S territories. So war was inevitable, embargo or not

But the earliest known of intelligence was created by Gen. Mitchell of the Army Air Corps who saw first hand of Japan's military preparations for an attack in the 1920s, a decade before any embargo. he predicted exact details of the attack

Either way, placing the blame on America is revisionist history and it's bullshit

More Than Mortal · December 08, 2014, 08:47:28 AM

>people thinking the nukes shouldn't have been dropped

Fuck off, hippies.

gats · December 08, 2014, 08:51:45 AM

Anyone that still hates Japan over the bombings is a fucking idiot.

Mattie G Indahouse · December 08, 2014, 08:55:21 AM

Quote from: Meta Cognition on December 08, 2014, 08:47:28 AM

>people thinking the nukes shouldn't have been dropped

Fuck off, hippies.

Agreed. It's clear these people have no idea what Operation Downfall was or if they do than they have no clue what the outcome of it would have been like. It's easy to tell Japan would have had mass suicides in the hundreds of thousands and even millions. On Bet I was telling that to a person and they said the Japaneses have the right to do so.

Doctor Doom · December 08, 2014, 11:17:05 AM

Quote from: challengerX on December 08, 2014, 05:48:50 AM

Tell me, when does the profit off the corpses of your allies help when you're cornered by two superpowers who absolutely detest your country?

Japan wouldn't have allied with Russia - they hated the Soviets as much as they hated us. They had just gotten out of their own war just before World War II broke out. Besides, even if they had, two world powers still recovering financially and militarily from their respective wars wouldn't be in any shape to corner anybody - least of all a richer-than-ever America.

The idea of Japan and Russia allying against America is a dramatic one indeed, but it wouldn't actually happen.

challengerX · December 08, 2014, 11:19:59 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Doctor Doom · December 08, 2014, 11:20:28 AM

Quote from: KletzenbrotEssen on December 08, 2014, 08:30:15 AM

Once again, Japan fucking raped and murdered Chinese women and children and made Koreans girls into sex slaves. They deserved the embargos because America wasn't going to sit and watch as their resources were being used to commit mass human rights violations

Quote

Didn't say it was the ethical option. Just the most pragmatic.

Doctor Doom · December 08, 2014, 11:34:39 AM

Quote from: challengerX on December 08, 2014, 11:19:59 AM

You don't seem to understand what I'm saying. Also, you seem to think America could've taken on Russia, Japan, and Germany all at the same time.

...Um, no? I never once mentioned Germany. If it was just Russia and Japan who, for some reason, allied despite despising one another, they wouldn't have much luck for the first few years against America after getting through two personal wars and facing countless casualties.

Quote

Where does the money made from the deaths of all your allies come in handy?

Use it to help those allies rebuild and put them in your debt. Do the same for Japan, Germany, and Italy to better international relations (which would by no means undo all the tension between them and America, obviously). Use it to build up the United States' own military if Japan and Russia decided to ally against them, improbable though it was.

Not saying the US should have done this, though. That's horrid.

Quote

America joined in the war as they should've done even earlier. What's done is done and it was for the better. Japan attacked unprovoked, end of story.

They were provoked by America placing the embargo on oil and steel. That's been gone over. Now, if you mean it was an unjustified attack, I agree for the most part. And yes, it would have happened even if America hadn't placed the embargo, which would have made the attack unprovoked and wholly unjustified.

However, America did place the embargo, which gave Japan all the reason they needed to launch their attack, so saying their assault on Pearl Harbor was 'unprovoked' is not entirely accurate.

challengerX · December 08, 2014, 11:46:25 AM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.

Doctor Doom · December 08, 2014, 12:20:55 PM

Quote from: challengerX on December 08, 2014, 11:46:25 AM

Not only would it have been horrid, it would have meant the end of America.

In the long run, yeah, if they kept on pulling that shit. Offering just enough aid to keep their allies from being completely overrun while also making a profit from the Axis would obviously have to be a short-term deal.

Quote

Your view of global politics is pretty laughable, no offense.

Some taken.

Quote

It was unprovoked. An embargo is not justification or provocation for an unannounced act of war.

An embargo that limits 80% of their oil and a good deal of their steel is by no means a justification but very definitely a provocation. An extremely petty one, mind you, and a thinly-veiled excuse to do something they would have done anyway, but still a provocation in this case.

The Lord Slide Rule · December 08, 2014, 02:20:52 PM

revisionist history ITT

Hahahaha very funny Zonda · December 08, 2014, 03:24:40 PM

This user has been blacklisted from posting on the forums. Until the blacklist is lifted, all posts made by this user have been hidden and require a Sep7agon^® SecondClass Premium Membership to view.