Forums
Welcome to Live View – Take the tour to learn more
Start Tour
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
Ovalman.
22 May 10 22:38
Joined:
Date Joined: 29 Nov 02
| Topic/replies: 12,202 | Blogger: Ovalman.'s blog
I can understand part of the reason. They wanted to control th Pacific and Asia but why did they attack?
Share |
Pause Switch to Standard View My daughter has just asked me... Why...
Show More
Loading...
Report Mc Moonbeam May 22, 2010 10:42 PM BST
Money .. usually works ..
Report sparkmaster. May 22, 2010 10:45 PM BST
USA had WMDs so it was Ok, apparently.

More serisously, their ambitions were such that they knew war was inevitable, and hoped to gain a massive advantage by destroying much tof the pacific fleet. Interestingly, there was a suggestion that they should try to TAKE Hawaii, which would have made things proper difficult. The US is actually a long way away from where the pacific war was fought.
Report mr winkle May 22, 2010 10:51 PM BST
Because if they didn't attaxck, my mrs could'nt drool over Josh Hartnett in the film of the event.

Simples.
Report Ovalman. May 22, 2010 10:53 PM BST
Pearl Harbour was not an invasion which maybe would have suited the Japs. Just curious why they ?involved the USA when they didn't need too?

What was their motives?
Report STUDYFORM May 22, 2010 10:53 PM BST
Quite a few reasons.

Japan's oil supply had largely been cut off by the USA - following wars and attacks on china, and indo-china.

It has been suggested that the US wanted war with Japan or at least to get Japan to attack the US for many years, but it depends on whose version of events you believe.

Obviously Japan wanted to knock out as much of the US pacific navy and air force as they could, to leave the way clear for their activities in the region.

Other reasons too.
Report Mc Moonbeam May 22, 2010 10:53 PM BST
your missus Drools ... ??
Report STUDYFORM May 22, 2010 10:55 PM BST
nearly as much as he doesSilly
Report tobermory May 22, 2010 11:10 PM BST
Yeah Spark , they should have captured Hawaii , would have set the Americans back by at least a year .

Study is right about why they attacked .The oddest thing is why Germany then declraed War on America, as it was still doubtful that America would be involved in Europe. . Ostensibly because  Japan was an Ally of theirs , but Japan had not helped them against the Soviet Union.
Report sparkmaster. May 22, 2010 11:12 PM BST
Typical Germans...
Report ROCKIN HORSE May 22, 2010 11:19 PM BST
The reasoning was sound,to wipe out a large part of the US navy in one attack and control the Pacific ....but most of the aircraft carriers set sail the day before..call me Mr cynical but its almost as if they knew they were going to be attacked
Report naydam May 22, 2010 11:26 PM BST
There's a helluva difference, though, between sneaking within 500 miles with three 'carriers and hiding an invasion fleet.
The Japs had hopes that America would actually baulk at the idea of all-out war and would negotiate a settlement. The US at this time was doing it's  best to avoid becoming involved in another Europian war. Although the intelligent ones knew it would be inevitable as Hitler would eventually turn his attentions their way.
Report The Magic Flea May 22, 2010 11:35 PM BST
they were never scared of hitler. he fitted their beliefs. they were very worried about the red peril which was the biggest threat against the capitalist idea.
japan attacked because of their honour in the pacific, as hitler tried to take on the soviets.
basically middle management fked up
Report clacherholiday2 May 22, 2010 11:37 PM BST
there were a few sticky moments for the allies back then, if individual battles had gone the other way then the war wouldve been lost, the japanese navy not taking advantage of the pearl harbor strike and later midway were two of them.

even if they didnt invade the whole of hawaii, they couldve stationed carriers there and made the whole area a no-go for the us navy, wouldve added 12 months to the war.

not that it wouldve done them much good in the end, instead of being bombed on the mainland, they wouldve been bombed elsewhere, they wouldve had no choice but to give up.

the boys in blue were always going to come out on top after the ruskies slaughtered their own troops to beat the germans.
Report The Magic Flea May 22, 2010 11:42 PM BST
quite hideous and devious what the yanks did, but then you have to respect a game of chess
Report sparkmaster. May 22, 2010 11:45 PM BST
What's the breakdown on figures for aircraft carriers Rockin Horse?
Report The Magic Flea May 22, 2010 11:48 PM BST
clockwork is itching, and sparky is finding that homer beacon.
damn we are all autonomons. WHERE IS BODIL, I NEED HIM
Report sparkmaster. May 22, 2010 11:52 PM BST
mmmm....beacon

That was my best Homer impression!
Report ROCKIN HORSE May 22, 2010 11:52 PM BST
The United States was lucky that the aircraft carriers were not in port. Rear Admiral Newton was en route with the Lexington toward Midway Atoll, delivering 25 scout bombers. And finally, the Saratoga left Pearl Harbor for maintenance in the continental United States. The carriers were among the primary objectives to destroy in Yamamoto's plan.
Report The Magic Flea May 22, 2010 11:55 PM BST
a good impression it was as well
Report Tommy Toes May 22, 2010 11:59 PM BST
There's a train of thought that  Roosevelt wanted to enter WW2 on behalf of Europe but knew the American people would never be acceptable to it. Which frustrated Churchill greatly.

It's also suggested that both Roosevelt and Churchill knew about the plans of the Japanese for the invasion of Pearl Harbour, but no defence was set in place by the President to get America 'on side' for when the attack happened - much to the relief of Churchill.

All alledgedly, of course.
Report sparkmaster. May 23, 2010 12:00 AM BST
I think there was a third, from what I can see. I'm not sure if this is statistically of significance though, boats being at sea is not unusual, and there were battleships there.

Far less significant military actions have been used as justification for war...and in the case of Iraq, military inaction! The idea that the US would allow the destruction of a big chunk of it's military fleet to justify their involvement in a war they could pretty much had just joined in anyway seems very far fetched to me. I'm saying nothing about Vietnam.
Report sparkmaster. May 23, 2010 12:01 AM BST
I hadn't read your post before typing that Tommy, so it wasn't a personal attack. You're a wally though!
Report The Magic Flea May 23, 2010 12:02 AM BST
did vietnam have vast fields of sausages?
Report ROCKIN HORSE May 23, 2010 12:03 AM BST
It was a queston of mindset for the US citizen prior to Pearl harbour opposition to the war was almost unaninmous after it a complete reversal of mindset
Report Tommy Toes May 23, 2010 12:08 AM BST
Ha ha!

Cheers Sparkster!I didn't say it was my view, though!
Report sparkmaster. May 23, 2010 12:12 AM BST
I shall have to invoke that immortal question 'Source, please?' Rocking Horse.

I'm aware that this action helped secure greater public support for the war but the polarisation you suggest seems vastly different from the history I'm familiar with.
Report sparkmaster. May 23, 2010 12:13 AM BST
And attacking someone does generally make them a bit fiesty, it doesn't mean they asked for it.
Report The Magic Flea May 23, 2010 12:14 AM BST
sounds like a great hollywoodian "against all odds" story
WHERE TF IS CLOCKY AND BODIL
Report ROCKIN HORSE May 23, 2010 12:22 AM BST
Source ? take your pick from countless debates on the matter,dont jump to conclusions sparks....I said....its almost as if they knew they were going to be attacked ..I didnt state categorically they KNEW they were going to be attacked,its open to conjecture and academic debate.
Report sparkmaster. May 23, 2010 12:45 AM BST
Nope, I'll just ask you to back up your claim. If you can't, I'll assume you were lying.
Report STUDYFORM May 23, 2010 12:47 AM BST
not entirely unlike the Falklands in that respect.
Report The Magic Flea May 23, 2010 12:48 AM BST
wow[:o]
Report STUDYFORM May 23, 2010 12:54 AM BST
I meant about it possibly not being a great big surprise to certain thatchers, sorry I mean people.
Report ROCKIN HORSE May 23, 2010 1:39 AM BST
and what claim would that be sparks?
Report The Magic Flea May 23, 2010 10:54 PM BST
sausages, I tells ya
Report bodil May 24, 2010 12:35 AM BST
Empire building/lack of natural resources (oil embargo indeed)/racism.
Report Lozzy May 24, 2010 6:37 PM BST
Cos they were Japs.
Report mr winkle May 24, 2010 6:52 PM BST
My father was in Burma during the war, and according to him - 'The only good **** is a dead ****.'

May have changed his mind if he lived longer, odds-on he'd had ended up with a Japanese television. Laugh
Report mr winkle May 24, 2010 7:02 PM BST
Marvellous moderating LaughLaughLaugh


**** is okay  - but j a p s isn't.

You couldn't make it up.
Report mr winkle May 24, 2010 7:03 PM BST
wrong way round Confused

japs is okay but j a p isn't.

I also noticed yesterday that you can't type p a k i s t a n.
Report DOCTOR EVIL May 24, 2010 7:29 PM BST
If you are walking past a sleeping lion don't prod it with a sharp stick

I can only assume the J's were trying to destroy all the American Aircraft Carriers in the Pacific

you may be interested to know;
the only ship undamaged at Pearl was eventually sold to the Argentinian Navy

it got torpedoed in the Falklands War,'twas the General Belgrano
Report mr winkle May 24, 2010 7:33 PM BST
Every quizzerer on BF knew that - even me.
Report Joe Jordan May 24, 2010 7:49 PM BST
Japan was in a war with their sworn enemy...a hatred war ..since 1937...
USA had decided to block Raw Materials to Japan...
As they needed Rubber from Malaya , Oil from Indonesia and Raw materials to make Planes,Tanks,Guns,etc to continue the war or retire from thye conflict and lose face, they decided to STOP the USA putting the blockasde in place ..Best way was to sink their fleet , espec Aircrafty Carriers, and throw an Iron ring out around the Pacific , to forestall any comeback before they finished off China...
On 7th Dec when Japan attacked the USA Fleet it was NO coincidence they hit Malaya and Indonesia at the same time ..
The gamble only failed because the USA Carriers were out at sea on manouvres ..
Report Joe Jordan May 24, 2010 7:57 PM BST
ALSO...Germany wanted Japan to come through Northern India and Attack the British in Persia..North Africa as Germany wanted / Needed the Oil Fields to fuel their war...
That is why the Japanese came through Burma to the borders of Northern India..
..The British knew they had to STOP them before India or risk losing both India (a Nationalist Uprising if Japanese arrived)...and the Oilfields ..
Its why the Africa Corps were pushing across North Africa...to grab the Suez Canal and the Persian Oilfields...
Post Your Reply
<CTRL+Enter> to submit
Please login to post a reply.

Wonder

Instance ID: 13539
www.betfair.com

New to Betfair?

You need to open an account before you can add content to the forum.

Opening an account only takes a few minutes.

register now