Why did Japan attack Pearl Harbour?
Americans like to talk about it as though they did it for shits and giggles but there has to be a reason behind it
Was it just the sanctions America had placed on Japan in oil and iron which adversely affected their economy or was it something else
The Japanese thought that knocking out the American pacific fleet would give them time to take what they wanted in Southeast Asia without America being able to intervene for a year or two. The US and Japan both had a strong interest in a lot of the same areas in the pacific, I expect that the Japanese figured that if they kept pushing their luck they'd cross the US eventually anyway.
The US recovered a lot more quickly than the Japanese counted on, and they were pretty pissed about the whole thing.
>>1215288
They knew a war with America was inevitable after embargo. They were never going to let the japs get away with war in China and if they attacked European colonies, America would join in. They were in a pretty desperate situation as either they could lose face internationally by withdrawing from China or attack Pearl Harbor which would give them a breathing space of 6 months or so. Of course Americans were never going to let the japs get away with it, so they were pretty much doomed.
>>1215288
Due to the oil embargo, Japan wanted to attack Indinesia, then a Dutch colony, to secure an oil source.
FDR had publicly guaranteed the Dutch right to their colonial possessions, and the Japs were rightly worried that an attack on the NEI would result in an American attack. However, they assumed any reprisal would be a short punitive expedition, not an all out war to eliminate them as historically occurred.
Pearl Harbor was thus attacked as a way of knocking out enough of the fleet to give the Japanese the advantage in the 6-24 month war they were expecting.
>>1215323
By attacking China, the Japs have already attacked the European colonies.
Some of the port cities in China were controlled by the european empires of the time.
The japanese and the europeans were weary of each other for couple of decades due to the fallout of League of Nations and the growing Japanese power in the region.
With the US putting embargo on others in the area, the Japanese would have to take the colonies to fuel their war. However inorder to take those island, they would have to deal a significant damage to the US Navy in the pacific/hawaii or else the US would come around to fuck the islands they took.
It was a calculated effort, they just underestimated the US recovery speed. The popular narrative of how the US was forced into WWII is bit bogus and propaganda. Churchill/Stalin/FDR all wanted the US to be in the war, however the US public wouldn't allow it. He needed an event to push the US into war. By forcing the Japanese hands with US policies of embargo, the Japs were actually forced into the war against US.
If the Japs didn't attack the US Fleet in Pearl harbor, there might have been a chance that US wouldn't enter the war, but given the embargo and Japan taking the islands, it would have been simply a matter of weeks/months before US got itself into war.
>>1215288
I'm not an expert on WW2, but if I recall, they were also expecting to sink, or at least damaged, the american carriers of the pacific fleet, which weren't them at the time of the attack.
The idea was to gain enough time to get comfy in the Pacific.
>>1215380
>the Japs were actually forced into the war against US.
Revisionist bullshit
>>1215395
Its actually how it would've been. After the embargo the japs had couple of choises left.
>Don't attack colonies for oil, lose war.
>Attack colonies for oil, get attacked by US.
>Attack US fleet, then attack get colonies.
They didn't have much choice in the war in regards. Now if the embargo wasn't in place, it would've been different.
>Get stream of goods for war
>Take China/Harass-takeover european colonies in SEA
The end???
>>1215339
What's weird is that Yamamoto predicted that attacking Pearl Harbor is not a good idea. Yet he is fine with invading SEA. Did he predicted that the US won't go after the NEI is invaded or he did not consider the possibilities?
>>1215528
Yamamoto was the one who insisted that Japan's opening move be an attack on PacFleet at Pearl.
>>1215423
You forgot the
>declare war because of desire for colonies
>get curbstomped so hard your country is now a colony
>>1215423
>Its actually how it would've been
>Attack colonies for oil, get attacked by US
Public sentiment says no. The US wasn't guaranteeing any of the Pacific nations or colonies outside of their own. The US wasn't jingoistic against either Japan or Germany, but they were strongly against assisting the nations who were aggressors during the war, i.e. Germany and Japan. Had Japan not attacked Pearl Harbor, it's extremely unlikely the US would have entered the war if Japan had only attacked the other colonies/PAC states.
>>1215620
You are 100% wrong yet your ignorance of your own ignorance gives you the confidence to post.
>>1215629
If this is the case it should be easy for you to prove the post wrong. Instead, you're going to continue to bluster and be a general weeb faggot. Clarification before you begin: Non-US colonies/PAC states.
>>1215641
US did not only guarantee Dutch and British possessions, but was actively involved in planning for a war with Britain and Netherlands well before Pearl Harbor. The embargo against Japan was not brought on by the China war but Japan taking Indochina, a French possession. The more you know.
Another fun fact, the PacFleet is not stationed at Pearl in normal circumstances. It was there in 1941 as a threatening gesture at Japan.
>>1215675
>US did not only guarantee Dutch and British possessions
Source
>but was actively involved in planning for a war with Britain and Netherlands well before Pearl Harbor
As a defense contingency, not an aggression.
>The embargo against Japan was not brought on by the China war but Japan taking Indochina, a French possession
>Aggressor does aggressive things
>Surprised when an embargo intended to limit aggression happen
TMYK
>>1215691
>Source behind a paywall
Lad...
>>1215702
>I won't accept actual history books, but only ebin maymays.
Fuck off, retard.
>>1215709
How about you post the fucking page, retard. Anyone can post a source behind a fucking paywall and claim it says whatever they want.
>>1215702
A defensive contingency that would've triggered by Jap attack on non-US colonies.
>>1215719
Nobody's fault but your own that you are uneducated and need people to spoofeed you.
>>1215738
>There's no evidence of that.
Actually there is most definitely evidence of that.
>>1215745
>Actually there is most definitely evidence of that
Then fucking post it.
>inb4 a $30 paywall
>>1215753
>>1215745
>>1215738
Oh and a counter-argument, before you even post, from FDR himself at a congressional hearing AFTER the fucking attack happened:
>At least as early as October 8, 1940, ...affairs had reached such a state that the United States would become involved in a war with Japan. ... 'that if the Japanese attacked Thailand, or the Kra Peninsula, or the Dutch East Indies we would not enter the war, that if they even attacked the Philippines he doubted whether we would enter the war, but that they (the Japanese) could not always avoid making mistakes and that as the war continued and that area of operations expanded sooner or later they would make a mistake and we would enter the war.'
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_leading_to_the_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor
The US didn't actually guarantee anyone and wasn't going to war unless directly attacked. Guess what actually happened? I'll give you a hint: Gooks fucked up.
>>1215753
>>1215719
You are functionally retarded. By your "logic" the following paper
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0ahUKEwjaru7HsILNAhWDdz4KHS2fDj4QFggoMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjmss.org%2Fjmss%2Findex.php%2Fjmss%2Farticle%2Fdownload%2F236%2F251&usg=AFQjCNFNTB4BwOamiulR1mF3zmT8QpaWlw&sig2=IRTVS2aJmkvOriNvbMXu8g&cad=rja
has no sources! After all, they're all books that you'd have to go and pick up.
I linked you to an edition, author, book, and page. That is good enough for a university history paper, but apparently not you. Get your fucking head out of your fucking ass, or at least clear up your navel.
>>1215782
>On October 8, 1940, Admiral James O. Richardson, Commander in Chief, Pacific Fleet, provoked a confrontation with Roosevelt by repeating his earlier arguments to Chief of Naval Operations Admiral Harold R. Stark and Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox that Pearl Harbor was the wrong place for his ships. Roosevelt believed relocating the fleet to Hawaii would exert a "restraining influence" on Japan.[citation needed]
>Richardson asked the President if the United States was going to war. Roosevelt's view was:
You are a fucking retard. I didn't think I needed to explain this, since it's obvious to those of us with functioning brains, but 1940 is BEFORE 1941.
>>1215790
The thing about uni papers is that they will be fact-checked by professors using a free LIBRARY and can be refuted weeks, months or even years after the fact. This thread won't survive the time it takes for that book to reach my house with overnight shipping. Either way, you said so yourself, I'm an ignoramus and this is so obviously common knowledge (it isn't, because it isn't true). If it were such common knowledge, you'd be able to post a quick link to information supporting your claim and not hiding it behind a paywall because it's horse shit.
>>1215753
ABC-1 report. You are welcome.
Or you could read about it in many secondary sources. It's a government document and public knowledge. The fact that the US was planning a war against Japs together with Britain and Netherlands is common knowledge and should be easy to find.
>>1215809
>The fact that the US was planning a war against Japs together with Britain and Netherlands is common knowledge and should be easy to find
As a defense contingency, not an aggression. There's a huge distinction which I've already made.
>>1215804
>at least as EARLY as October 8, 1940
>AT LEAST AS EARLY
Christ.
Either way
>Japanese war planners had long looked south, especially to Brunei for oil and Malaya for rubber and tin. The Navy was (mistakenly) certain any attempt to seize this region would bring the U.S. into the war,[14][page needed] but the complete U.S. oil embargo removed any hesitancy. Moreover, any southern operation would be vulnerable to attack from the Philippines, then a U.S. commonwealth, so war with the U.S. seemed necessary in any case. In the autumn of 1940, Japan requested 3.15 million barrels of oil from the Dutch East Indies, but received a counteroffer of only 1.35 million.[15] Therefore, the Japanese were interested in expansion to the East Indies, but Malaya and the Philippines had to have been cleared in order for the Japanese to secure the area. This meant inevitable U.S. intervention.[16]
>Japanese war planners had long looked south, especially to Brunei for oil and Malaya for rubber and tin. The Navy was (mistakenly) certain any attempt to seize this region would bring the U.S. into the war
>The Navy was (mistakenly) certain
>mistakenly
>>1215827
The distinction is pointless. You said repeatedly that the US did not intend to enter a war with Japan unless its own territory was attacked. Now you are babbling on about some irrelevant distinction between aggression and defense. Why? Just admit that you are retarded, stop posting, and move on.
>>1215620
But thats not even true.
The oil embargo was a reasonable response to unchecked Japanese aggression in Asia, especially since they were invading a trade partner of the US(China). If the Japanese didn't want to get embargoed, maybe they shouldn't have been aggressive, genoicidal assholes.
>>1215946
To them:
>But muh food shortage
>But muh wealth
Don't forget the japanese had been very aggrieve sense the 1890s, repeatedly invading Korea, china and other islands. it's not like the embargo was muh vevil americans or unwarranted
Could the Japs' plan have worked if Midway went according to plan or were they fucked either way?
>>1215288
They wanted a quick, demoralizing blow to the Americans that would force them to the negotiation table. They seem to underestimate America on a psychological level who they viewed as weak-willed. Too bad it back-fired, badly.
>>1219712
Nope, they were fucked. They knew they cannot go toe-to-toe with the industrial might of the US. It will prolong the war though.
http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm
>>1215339
Why did America care more about Dutch colonies than Hitler bombing them for shits and giggles
>>1215288
To stop u.s pacific expansionism.
Think of it as japan saying gtfo
>>1215946
Oh yeah!
The u.s said they would only be in the phillpines for 3 years
>>1219747
US was practically at war with Germany so I'm not sure what your point is.
>>1219712
wars against democracies where the general population is more individualistic is rather difficult to predict
look at vietnam, the USA undoubtebly could have occupied every tree there, but they didnt, and pulled out later
the longer the war, and their home soil is safe, democracies tend to seek peace
Amerifat education
>>1219823
USA could have occupied every tree, but you'd need 10 million people for that kind of work.
War that cost so much is a phyrric victory. What is there to be gained from winning the war anyway? Nothing, maybe another american colony.
