To the Congress of the United States
Yesterday, Dec. 7, 1941 - a date which will live in infamy - the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

The United States was at peace with that nation and, at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with the government and its emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.

Indeed, one hour after Japanese air squadrons had commenced bombing in Oahu, the Japanese ambassador to the United States and his colleagues delivered to the Secretary of State a formal reply to a recent American message. While this reply stated that it seemed useless to continue the existing diplomatic negotiations, it contained no threat or hint of war or armed attack.

It will be recorded that the distance of Hawaii from Japan makes it obvious that the attack was deliberately planned many days or even weeks ago. During the intervening time, the Japanese government has deliberately sought to deceive the United States by false statements and expressions of hope for continued peace.

The attack yesterday on the Hawaiian islands has caused severe damage to American naval and military forces. Very many American lives have been lost. In addition, American ships have been reported torpedoed on the high seas between San Francisco and Honolulu.

Yesterday, the Japanese government also launched an attack against Malaya.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Hong Kong.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked Guam.

Last night, Japanese forces attacked the Philippine Islands.

Last night, the Japanese attacked Wake Island.

This morning, the Japanese attacked Midway Island.

Japan has, therefore, undertaken a surprise offensive extending throughout the Pacific area. The facts of yesterday speak for themselves. The people of the United States have already formed their opinions and well understand the implications to the very life and safety of our nation.

As commander in chief of the Army and Navy, I have directed that all measures be taken for our defense.

Always will we remember the character of the onslaught against us.

No matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people in their righteous might will win through to absolute victory.

I believe I interpret the will of the Congress and of the people when I assert that we will not only defend ourselves to the uttermost, but will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.

Hostilities exist. There is no blinking at the fact that our people, our territory and our interests are in grave danger.

With confidence in our armed forces - with the unbounding determination of our people - we will gain the inevitable triumph - so help us God.

I ask that the Congress declare that since the unprovoked and dastardly attack by Japan on Sunday, Dec. 7, a state of war has existed between the United States and the Japanese empire.

Pearl was quite a mess to deal with. Not sure I could have dealt with a sea of blood around those ships.

They paid for it though...enough said...

Did ya know? On 7 December the first shot was fired by the US Navy?

But yeah - Here's to our Veterans and Current Armed Service Members. :salute:

What I never understood was America getting flack for dropping that bomb.... OK peal harbour wasnt on the same magnitude as that A-bomb they dropped, but either way you look at it... civilians were killed, bigtime... on both sides. and taking all factors of the current situation into account, If I were in the commander in chief's shoes I would have painfully done the same thing after offering them an option to throw in the towel

Collateral Damage... its a bitch but thats the pice you pay for war.... that is why war should always be the last last last option

Glad to see that other 8'ers are of the same mind that I am

What I never understood was America getting flack for dropping that bomb.... OK peal harbour wasnt on the same magnitude as that A-bomb they dropped, but either way you look at it... civilians were killed, bigtime... on both sides. and taking all factors of the current situation into account, If I were in the commander in chief's shoes I would have painfully done the same thing after offering them an option to throw in the towel

Collateral Damage... its a bitch but thats the pice you pay for war.... that is why war should always be the last last last option



The Bomb was about using the lesser of a few perceived evils. :-/

Frankly, what most civilians fail to see is how during war, soldiers/leaders are often faced with lose-lose situations. A leader has to collect all the info, and make his best educated guess.


:-/

Good post, Dreamer.

Does it ever make you regret driving a Jap car?

Does it ever make you regret driving a Jap car?

lol... nope... have nothing against Japanese people at all.... I'm talking about war not race :D

Does it ever make you regret driving a Jap car?
Nope. The past is the past. It was a different time and place.

What I never understood was America getting flack for dropping that bomb.... OK peal harbour wasnt on the same magnitude as that A-bomb they dropped, but either way you look at it... civilians were killed, bigtime... on both sides...

For the record, a total of 49 civilians were killed in the attack on Pearl Harbor compared over 110,000 immediate civilian deaths in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and 230,000 additional deaths from injuries and radiation within the next five years.

That doesn't exactly amount to "civilians were killed, bigtime on both sides."

This, of course, does not excuse the attack on Pearl Harbor, a deliberate act of war. Nor does it necessarily condemn the US decision to drop the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima. (The second bomb on Nagasaki two days later is much more difficult to justify.)

Records of the period suggest that many in the US government felt that an invasion of Japan would have resulted in many more civilian (and military) deaths on both sides. However, there is also clear evidence that the Japanese government was engaged in efforts to surrender prior to the Hiroshima bombing. And it is also clear that a significant factor in the use of the A-bomb was to impress the Russians and prevent their entry into the war against Japan.

Hindsight is, of course, 20/20, but to equate the attack on Pearl Harbor to the bombing of Japanese cities, including Hiroshima and Nagasaki, is not historically justifiable.

so that's why our cars glow at night..... :o

I knew it wouldn't take long for an apologist to come along.

For the record, a total of 49 civilians were killed in the attack on Pearl Harbor compared over 110,000 immediate civilian deaths in Hiroshima and Nagasaki and 230,000 additional deaths from injuries and radiation within the next five years.Ah right. Only 49 civilians were killed by Japan. America really is evil!

If you want to do the math, just the number of women forced into being sex slaves at comfort stations outnumber those killed by the atomic bombs. Clearly being killed by a bomb isn't the same as sexual slavery, but I mention this to try to illustrate the scope of what Japan did.

I knew it wouldn't take long for an apologist to come along.

Ah right. Only 49 civilians were killed by Japan. America really is evil!

If you want to do the math, just the number of women forced into being sex slaves at comfort stations outnumber those killed by the atomic bombs. Clearly being killed by a bomb isn't the same as sexual slavery, but I mention this to try to illustrate the scope of what Japan did.

he presented the facts as they were and didnt take a side no need to get defensive...it was just a clarification. pearl harbour is not similar in any way to nuclear attacks, and one cant be seen as retaliation for the other, its just two different events. japan attacked us while we were at peace with them...it was devastating. hiroshima and nagasaki were also devastating after all war is hell. No one is justifying the bombings as anything more than necessary.

he presented the facts as they were


Point of order - He presented 'facts' as he believed them...some comments he made are not irrefutable. :)

To add to Jason's comments :

The first from a Canadian... Dr. G:

At least we're not war-mongering hillibillies.

I knew it wouldn't take long for an apologist to come along.

Ah right. Only 49 civilians were killed by Japan. America really is evil!

If you want to do the math, just the number of women forced into being sex slaves at comfort stations outnumber those killed by the atomic bombs. Clearly being killed by a bomb isn't the same as sexual slavery, but I mention this to try to illustrate the scope of what Japan did.
Jason, I think you're blowing this way out of proportion. I didn't read anywhere in jhs1120's statement where he was apologizing for what we did to Japan. He was simply correcting TODreamer's statement that lots of civilians were killed on both sides; meaning many civilians were killed at Pearl Harbor.

Japan's surprise attack on Pearl Harbor and other military bases on Oahu lasted two hours. Twenty-one ships were heavily damaged, and 320 aircraft were damaged or destroyed. In all, about 2,390 people were killed and about 1,178 were wounded, according to the National Park Service, which maintains the Arizona site.

Jason, I think you're blowing this way out of proportion. I didn't read anywhere in jhs1120's statement where he was apologizing for what we did to Japan. He was simply correcting TODreamer's statement that lots of civilians were killed on both sides; meaning many civilians were killed at Pearl Harbor.He used those numbers to make claim that the united states was not justified in bombing Japan.

Point of order - He presented 'facts' as he believed them...some comments he made are not irrefutable. :)

i should of clarified i was only responding to the facts in the post not the conjectures made in the last paragraph...to which i dont know much about.

He used those numbers to make claim that the united states was not justified in bombing Japan.

i think we are forgetting that the two events in all technicality are not related! they happened almost 4 years separate from eachother and the circumstances are very different. Many more civilians died all across europe and japan in conventional attacks as well. like i said before war is hell. There is no apology for war only historical record.

Gentlemen - this is a day of rememberence, not a day of pointless bickering. Honorable men and innocent civilians died on both sides.

i think we are forgetting that the two events in all technicality are not related! they happened almost 4 years separate from eachother and the circumstances are very different. Many more civilians died all across europe and japan in conventional attacks as well. like i said before war is hell. There is no apology for war only historical record.They are related. It's all part of World War II. But it wasn't like they attacked Pearl Harbor, then we bombed two of their cities immediately afterwards. If that were the case, I'll be the first one to say our actions wouldn't be justified. But clearly that isn't the case.

Also the fire bombings killed far more people than the atomic bomb. Imagine being in the middle of a city where all the buildings are made from wood, everything is on fire and you have no place to go.

I think it's interesting so much focus is put on the atomic bomb.

Gentlemen - this is a day of rememberence, not a day of pointless bickering. Honorable men and innocent civilians died on both sides.

thank you this isnt a day to compare casualty lists its a day for remembering probably one of the darkest days in our history, when we made a decision that we did not desire but had to make in order to preserve our society. It was a decision made knowing that millions would die...thats sobering and thats really why it is a day that will live in infamy...no one wanted war but war is what we were obligated to participate in on this day 63 years ago. I salute all those who died this day and throughout that war.

He used those numbers to make claim that the united states was not justified in bombing Japan.
And I would agree that using the attack on Pearl Harbor alone as reason to drop atomic bombs on a country is not justifiable. Japan's actions throughout the war (as you pointed out) as well as our government's position on Russia's involvement (as jhs1120 pointed out) combined with the attack on Pearl does justify the bombings.

However, you called him an apologist. At no point did he apologize for us bombing Japan. Nor did he attempt to justify their attacking us. Hence the definition of an apologist.

It's all good Jason. ;)

If we're gonna reactivate a war, let's start with the civil war. There's a redneck up the street I've been wanting to shoot for some time now. :D :D :D

I think this country is forgetting this day. I did a search of several news papers and local news channels on-line. Most don't mention it and the ones that do use the same story from some other news source. I even checked a local Hawaii newspaper. Nothing but a small story about one of the islands that had one bomb dropped on them and it might be a memorial. Not even front page news. Looks like the new Pres in Afganistan is big news.

A reporter asked a HS student what he knew about Pearl Habor.
Response: "I don't know that lady." How we forget.

I might have this wrong but I thought Japan didn't surrender after the first bombing so thats why we dropped the second one? I don't see how the second one would be harder to justify in this case.

I think this country is forgetting this day. I did a search of several news papers and local news channels on-line. Most don't mention it and the ones that do use the same story from some other news source. I even checked a local Hawaii newspaper. Nothing but a small story about one of the islands that had one bomb dropped on them and it might be a memorial. Not even front page news. Looks like the new Pres in Afganistan is big news.

A reporter asked a HS student what he knew about Pearl Habor.
Response: "I don't know that lady." How we forget.

That war was over nearly 3 generations ago. We're now at peace and treat each other with admiration and respect. I honor those who served to protect their country and we should never forget the lessons of war but the war itself fades into the past and rightly so.

But Nubo!! We should remember so that we don't let our guard down and we need to try and make sure history does not repeat itself, well at least in theory. We certainly had our guard down when 911 happened. Shame on our security system being so trusting of folks.

Look at the history of the what Hitler ordered done with the Jewish folks back in WW11. Already some teens today don't think that ever happened, that its some made up story. Yes we forget. China would like the world to forget what they did to their young people too.

lA reporter asked a HS student what he knew about Pearl Habor.
Response: "I don't know that lady." How we forget.

that is pretty scary. and very sad. That highschool kid is here today in this world b/c of what all those before him faught and died for. To not even know why or how any of it started is sad. People should never forget. alas maybe i should become a hs teacher and beat some knoledge into these kids...haha wait a sec i'm not to far detached from being a kid myself:p hehe

Hindsight is, of course, 20/20, but to equate the attack on Pearl Harbor to the bombing of Japanese cities, including Hiroshima and Nagasaki, is not historically justifiable.

you know... i was really talking about the idea behind "WAR" in general (maybe i didn't word it well).... if pearl Harbour was filled with civilians... do you think it would have stopped the japanese??? NO... why? they did it because they saw a target worth striking for whatever strategic reason

generally speaking there is going to be collateral damage... you say it was muscle flexing to drop the bomb... maybe some of it was... but really, I saw it as a stretgeic move made due to many factors as a result of that war.
After a few years of INTENSE fighting in Europe and now having to deal with an ENTIRE country who really hasnt seen all that much "action" (relatively speaking) ....and a commander in chief is supposed to send his tired men into a relatively fresh country and try to beat it??? I don't think so... we can't even do that now with little ol Iraq... what makes you think they could do that to Japan? I flat out wouldn't want to do it.....not after scrapping like that in Europe and damn near losing the whole thing. Hell no.... Offer them a chance to call it quits and go their own way or suffer the consequences

Would I feel good about nuking a country? of course not... but put it this way, the point that war got to... people are going to die... lots of them... and when you think about it, the soldier is not much more innocent than the civilian. Most of those "soldiers" were just kids with basic training that dont know their head from their ass with a mother and a father at home as well.

In the end, you have to look out for the best interest your men.

War.... innocent or not people get killed....whether you drop o bomb on them, mass slaughter them with bayonettes or napalm their ass...do it over night... do it over 5 years.... dead is dead right?

War is a btich aint it

hmmm you make a valid point but your evidence bakcing it up is waaaaaaaaay off. "...an ENTIRE country who really hasn't seen all that much 'action'..." and no way was japan a freash country...they had been fighting since 1933 and it was now 1945? that's 12 years of war. the reason why they bombed pearl harbor was b/c it was the only force in the pacific that could contend with their own fleet..they did it b/c we stoped giving them nature resources that their manland didn't have (we stoped b/c they had been fighting the chinese sine 33) so they attacked us on the 7th (a sunday when we would be most distracted) to take us out of the fight so they could take over most the the pacific islands...with all of their natural resources. The reason we droped the atomic bombs was b/c (as someone said) it was the lesser of 2 evils...better for 350,000 to die than for a million plus civilans (not counting our casualties) to die. yes it is horrible but that's why it is called war...and not a tea party.

sorry fo rthe rant...haha dunno what came over me...maybe i watch too much history/discovery channel as a kid. lol:p




ah yes the point of my rant was Japan had some 12 year combat vets to go up agaisnt..plus a finaticle population who thought their emporer was a god, and would do anythign for his name. They were deffinutly not freash (there economy and military were in a shambles by 45)

War.... innocent or not people get killed....whether you drop o bomb on them, mass slaughter them with bayonettes or napalm their ass...do it over night... do it over 5 years.... dead is dead right?

War is a btich aint it


that is the best way to say it....war is not some glamorous hollywood movie..it sucks

Well after dealing with Germany in Europe and almost losing.... there is no way the US was in any sort of condition to "do it again" dude, I'm sorry... whether Japan has been fighting since '33 of NOT.... sending troops in there to try to defeat them would be retarded

But Nubo!! We should remember so that we don't let our guard down and we need to try and make sure history does not repeat itself, well at least in theory. We certainly had our guard down when 911 happened. Shame on our security system being so trusting of folks.

I did say we need to remember the lessons of war. What needs to be forgotten is the sense of indignation and any animosity towards Japan. Let it fade. What is the problem in the Middle East? I'll sum it up -- they still haven't gotten over the friggin' Crusades. Take a look at the Middle East. THAT is what you get when you say "never forget" and take it to heart -- endless war.

The greatest act of peace in the history of the world was the U.S. aid in rebuilding Europe and Japan after the war. In large part to help the world forget, and move on. Learn the lessons of peace as well as war.

Well after dealing with Germany in Europe and almost losing.... there is no way the US was in any sort of condition to "do it again" dude, I'm sorry... whether Japan has been fighting since '33 of NOT.... sending troops in there to try to defeat them would be retarded


without a doubt it would've been retarded. no argument here on that. :D

The problems with the middle east will be there until their oil runs out. They are living on the desert sands. Once their source of income is depleted, they might be driven back to the tents they started out in. I am not that versed in history to tie the Crusades in with the Middle East issues. Europe is a many klicks away from the sands of the Middle East. Just a thought.

well during the times of the crusades the middle east was at the high point of the old world while the west was like the upstarts...now the rolls are reversed adn i think it rubs a lot of them the wrong way. but in 40-50 years when the oil is gone...then it shoudl be interesting to see what happens:)

What a day that was. It happened Dec. 7 1941. I was born 41 years after that and at the same time it happened. 0723 in the morning. Freaky huh

...in the details of the decision to drop the A-bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, there is a wealth of recent scholarship, much of it making the point that the conventional explanation that its purpose was to avoid invasion of Japan is not supported by the historical record.

In fact, the Japanese had asked the Russians to broker a surrender several weeks before the Hiroshima attack. Virtually none of the commanders including Eisenhower and MacArthur supported the use of the atomic bomb, feeling that the Japanese would surrender without the need for an invasion.

The overriding reason appears to have been expressed by Secretary of State Byrnes, that doing so "would make the Russians more manageable in Europe."

As to the reason for dropping the second bomb on Nagasaki two days later, this appears to have been done without explicit Presidential authorization and primarily to indicate to both Japan and the Soviet Union that the US had more than one A-bomb. In fact, Truman explicitly forbade the use of any other bombs after the attack on Nagasaki as the evidence of the effects of the Hiroshima bomb were becoming clear.

This is hardly the place for an extended, detailed discussion of such issues, but I'd be happy to discuss the issues through email if anyone cares to do so. For anyone interested in learning about the details, among the best sources are Gar Alperovitz, "The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb", and Ronald Takaki, "Why America Dropped the Atomic Bomb."

In a period where there is considerable pressure to support American foreign policy regardless of its rationale and consequences, it is perhaps useful to consider that decisions undertaken in the context of war do not necessarily deserve unquestioning applause, regardless of the intentions of the decision makers.

OK peal harbour wasnt on the same magnitude as that A-bomb they dropped, but either way you look at it... civilians were killed, bigtime... on both sides.

Not saying it wasn't bad what they did or what we did but Pearl Harbor was a navy base, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cities.

Not saying it wasn't bad what they did or what we did but Pearl Harbor was a navy base, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were cities.


a military base of a country that isnt at war is not much different... its not off limits to civilians...

but thats besides the point I wasnt trying to compare the two specifically... they were just examples to a bigger point