News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
I still believe we let Pearl Harbor happen to drum up support for entering the war. I have no doubts the Bush administration wouldn't do the same.
They used Bush as a distraction while they did shit behind the scenes. I don't even think Bush was actually as dumb as he appeared to be. I think a chunk of it was an act.
So, at that point Hawaii wasn't a state. The queen of Hawaii was asking for anyone during this ongoing war to liberate them from their horrible US occupiers. Japan thought the US would be mad about it and Japan would be able to say they were just liberating Hawaii which is what that were doing with other islands around the pacific already. The US knew about the attack and pulled the valuable assets to attack the planes as they went back. What was left in the harbor were old ww1 relics that they didnt care about. When Japan saw this, they actually feared we knew and were going to attack them after they dropped their payload (which we were) so they called off most of the attack before it really even began and took a different route home.
Sources?
It's certainly possible FDR was warned of the Japanese attack in advance. But we didn't have a Pacific Fleet capable of repelling them. Moving what we had to Pearl Harbor was an effort to improve our (generally weak) Pacific naval capacity and establish a forward operating base in anticipation of an attack in the Philippines. Not coincidentally, Japan took the Philippines the day after Pearl Harbor.
Also, this was already two years into WW2 and four years into the Sino-Japanese War (where we'd been backing the KMT against Japanese encroachment since the 1920s). Nothing like 9/11, unless you want to claim we'd been at war with a continent-spanning Islamic industrialized military since the late 90s.
Also, plus, further, too, the 9/11 attacks were calculated by Bin Laden as an explicit provocation intended to draw the US into a quagmire war in Afghanistan. Which... it did! Maybe didn't go down exactly the way he planned, as the US dicked around in Afghanistan far longer than the Russians managed before their government collapsed. But if 9/11 is the Pearl Harbor to this analogy, it's akin to saying Tojo wanted the US Navy to exhaust itself in the Pacific over the next twenty years. Let's not forget that Bush didn't want a war with Afghanistan. He was focused on Iraq and Iran. Afghanistan was a massive distraction.
And all of this hinges in a world in which FDR knew about the highly secretive Japanese navy movements in advance decades before we had the B-2 spy plane much less satellite surveillance. All to score a... media victory? In a country where FDR's post-Depression government already had a heavy collar on the national press to the point that he was doing highly rated nightly podcasts to a national audience?
It's a pure apples/oranges comparison.
There's a lot of evidence that he knew.
https://www.historyonthenet.com/intelligence-warnings-of-the-pearl-harbor-attack-before-dec-7-1941
We cut off Japan's fuel supply. Of course we knew they would retaliate.