You need to explain how Pearl was a primary target. Especially compared to the Philippines. The only remotely similar attack was when the British attacked the Italian fleet- and they were not days away from a safe base like that. Let alone that the harbor was shallow, making torpedoes from planes problematic.
The Philippines were a much more obvious target- given that they blocked the Japanese from resources.
And looking back at abilities and perceptions, it is very obvious to me that the US military had no idea that Japan would even try that. Shame on them, for sure.
As for FDR- yea, he applied pressure on Japan that was hostile- that is indeed factual. In reaction to what Japan was doing in China. However, you still need to provide a single, realistic, alternative that could have avoided war and gotten Japan out of China. I donāt think that itās realistic to say that the only realistic option to react was an obvious track to war.
IF FDR knew that he was getting into war based on his economic sanctions, so did the Japanese. Given the very limited choices that the US had to react to Japanās invasion of eastern Asia, they had to have know the US would have reacted in that way, or it would have been a military reaction- which also would have started the war.
The economic sanctions were pretty clearly the only path FDR could take, as it was no secret to anyone in the world that the US did not want to join the war- given all of the very open campaigning in 1940 and who won.
So either Japan had to know how the US would have reacted or they were pretty dumb. And I would not think they were dumb.
With all due respect, I just stated that to put some merit into my argument. And I never said FDR knew about Pearl Harbour. I just suggest that his policies were aimed on pushing the USA into war
FDR wanted war and this all for trying to achieve world dominanceā¦he was fighting isolationism for nearly a decade and finally won so he could āmake America great againā for the first time as the UK lost their Empire. I find the way that most people look back at history many times too traditional whereas the Timeghost Army tries to be unbiased and dare to think out of the box
So really? Thatās where you want to go with this? You say I never said FDR knew about Pearl Harbor when you literally named the thread FDR knew about Pearl Harbor?
I guess the question mark gives you plausible denial ability.
Sounds like you just wanted to pick a fight against the imperial American forces. If we really wanted an empire you would still be a colony today but go on and live in your fantasy world.
When you go on this disrespectful course, you donāt belong on this forum and I will not give you any more answers as I only respect people who can discuss in a mature way and respect each other. I donāt feel that with you, Iām afraid, sorry
Thatās all great in theory and placing ideas into other people.
But you still need to answer what ANY leader would have done to Japan when they were violating much of east Asia. You are basing your entire theory on what FDR did to Japan, and have presented no alternative to what he did. Which means you are right by default for even the most stringent isolationist that would have done exactly the same thing.
Iām not at all saying that FDR didnāt want to get into the war- most of his closest people admit exactly that- so thatās not all that controversial. He also added some force in SE Asia with the B17ās, to try to back up the desire to get Japan out of China.
Your title questions if FDR knew about Pearl Harbor, and that you disagree, so please donāt back track on that claim.
What I miss is the logical alternative that would have gotten Japan out of China without a war. And, as Iāve pointed out, if āFDR Knewā then Japan was in on the ruse- as they were the original ones to provoke the world. Given the lack of actions that FDR could have taken- to make the claim that āhe knewā just based on the only think he could have done- which Japan would have expected- is flawed.
Well boys, I think it got a little heated in the comments. I think the question also represents a european wondering over the US approach to WW2 in general. Why was the US so concerned over Japan behavior i China that its imposed trade sanctions on Japan, but stayed neutral to Germany until dec 11th 1941? And to refrase the question in this topic a bit: would FDR hide Intelligence, if possible, to the senate / public if it would bring US into the war?
While i would like to see the supporting documents, I just saw a theory that FDR was going to Congress on Dec 9 to ask for military action. So Iām not sure what would be gained by hiding what was going on.
The US had territories in the area- the Philippines were part of the US back then- so keeping Japan in check was also for that.
But when the suggestion that intel was not being passed to the US and Congress so that it would bring the US into the war- can you explain what kind of intel would that have been? Most of what Iāve read was more the opposite in terms of intel on the Japanese. Other than placating the Japanese, what could the US have done to prevent a war?
Itās all great to present ideas, but one must have some evidence and alternatives that would be realistic.
Thank you for putting back common sense and nuance into the topic, Finn! I am almost regretting to have posed my question, because obviously some people feel offended. Let me clearly point out that it is never my intention to hurt or offend anyone and I respect everyoneās opinion as long as they also show some respect. Remember we are discussing a bunch of theories about a conflict that was gruesome and cost millions of livesā¦never forget
I would have to be director of the CIA to be able to come up with documents. Proving this is just impossible, I am just curious about opinion, as long as they are within reason
BTW, with regards to āworld dominanceā- it did not take long between the UK and Germany that the US had the most important world dominance- the economic one. And it would last for a few decades given how much money it would take to dig out of the damage due to the war.
So claiming that FDR wanted world dominance as a motivation- since the US had it, in spades, by 1941, I donāt think there was much need for more motivation.
(as an aside, it was interesting to see US businesses pretty much blow that by the 70ās- had they done exactly what was taught and developed Japan, who knows where the US would have ended up- notably the US car companies who all trail Toyota)
Sorry, you donāt need documents to provide an alternative to the economic sanctions that the US placed on Japan. I canāt think of one, and when I do a quick look into the history, the sanctions placed on Japan were accepted in the US- thinking that it would avoid a war.
So the actions would have happened for FDR or any other President, as far as I can tell.
Right, but US could have opted for no sanctions and put trade ahead of moral concerns. Was the sanctions a miscalculation, or was US ready to go to war with Japan to support China?
I went to a week long conference in Pearl Harbor up to the 60th anniversary in 2001. My impression was that the US already had the pieces of Intelligence needed, ( the jap navy had been missing for 6 weeks an so on ) but someone had to imagne that Japan would dare to attack Pearl Harbor and puzzle the intelligence together with that scenario in mind. It is done in the movie Pearl Harbor by an intelligence officer, but I dont know if that is historic correct. But that could be the case. On the best available Intelligence we think this will happen? The decision it now up to FDR - what will he do?
This is my point: every bigger nation was trying to get world domination. Only in the USA was a sense of isolationism within, mostly, Republicans. FDR wanted desperately to try and open up the sentiment towards joining the UK to fight the Naziās but he needed a pretext to join in the war. Japan was a target that surely would bite the bate, considering their war waging manners and lack of resources. They were obliged to occupy the Dutch Indies and Malaysia, for oil and food resources alone, also making use of slave labour. Hence the economic sanctions.
By the way, Finn, much appreciate your contribution
I totally agree, and as I mentioned in another post, I think that things went in the wrong direction just after ww1 when Japan felt they did not get their fair share of world dominantion when the German colonies was shared by the winners. Japan wanted to be seen a equal to US and Britian, which was a rather fair expectation, I think. In stead their navy was allowed to be equal to France and Italy. So they decided to do what everyone else had done for centuries: conquer land by military means.
Looking up trade with Germany, the US dealt with Germany and Japan pretty equally from 1939 on. No trade, and also Lend Lease- the UK and China both benefitted by that. And there was enough support for both China and the UK that people volunteered to fight for both.
So while the Japanese sanctions were official, it was the same for Germany, realistically.
