it dosent make me feel much, in terms of casualtys it was very low, in relation to those in india, europe and china.

It exposed a great many weaknesses though. The guys in charge didnt even mobilise after they encountered a japanese sub in there midst.

In remembrance, here's a story I posted on my Facebook page none of you can friend me on, Nya!~

"So, in History class, my teacher brings up the attack on Pearl Harbor. She continues with the topic by bringing up how, out of paranoia (No, she didn't say it was out of paranoia, that's my note), the US put Japanese Citizens in the US into a "Job Camp".

As she mentions that, some girl in my class yells out "OH YOU MEAN THE BOY IN THE STRIPED PAJAMAS?".

As such, I had lost all faith in humanity just from that one class alone."

thenumberone :  I guess that makes their lives worth less...that not more died with them.

Pearl Harbor was a horrendous attack performed outside of war.  It was flat out blatant cold blooded murder because war had not been officially or properly declared first.  It is a shame it took that attack to get us involved directly in the war against Naziism.  We should have entered much earlier.

jasonkelli :
I never stated that they deserved to die or it didnt matter, i replied to the question. That in terms of death that was one of the smallest chips of the war.

The usa has attacked people without declaring war...they did it all the time with native american tribes.

It was certainly a cowardly attack but it is war, and war is declared by cowards,the elite who dont do the fighting, who manipulate the working class to die for there desires.

If by native tribes you mean the American Indians then you are incorrect.  In attacking innocent civilians the Native Americans necessitated the need for US Troops to protect those civilians through warfare.  Violent acts by a foreign power against civilian targets inside or outside of war is a declaration of war.

While I do not agree with the North's methods concerning the war against the American Indians, their acts of war were always (or at least 99% of the time) in reaction to American Indians first performing violent acts against civilian or military targets.

There is a different between needlessly attacking a nation that has officially declared neutrality concerning a war between two other nations and attacking a nation who is excessively and consistently performing acts of hostility against your civilians.


The number of deaths from the attack on Pearl Harbor is huge considering it was an act outside of war.

Its not really relevant so il keep it short, the natives attacked settlers because they kept colonising there lands. The idea that america only responded in kind is a false.

It may well have been high for an undeclared begining of hostilities but thats not really relevant is it? If your dead your dead, its little consolation to you whether you saw it coming or not.
"only the dead have seen the end of war."

Death on this scale still occurs regularly. We just dont care because it isnt us. We have a very barbaric attitude considering how civilised the west thinks it is

Thanks For Reminding Me What Day It Is Today.
I Need A Moment Of Silence.
Thank You.
Good Luck to All.
Peace.

thenumberone : so what you are saying is that the USA is violent and quick to get into a war? Honestly, in my opinion, yes, we are. I can not say understand why we are like that, just that we are. Who knows? My best bet is that is has something to do with  politics, and I stay out of those.

thing1 :
Not really no, I was blowing down the idea that the usa was any more peacefull than any other nation back then.
Nowadays the USA is to quick to go to war, every superpower always took that attitude, its just ridiculous that in the 21st century lessons still havent been learned.
In europe, we said ww1 would be the last war, it was unimaginably horrific.
Then because we, especially france, treated the losers (germany) like scum another war broke out, and again, we said thats the last one.

Then we allowed ourself to get pulled into more wars.

If the cause of a war was to help people it wouldnt be so bad, but thats not war is about, ever.

If pearl harbour stands for anything, its that people can be killed in a moments notice because of the ambition of those in power.

Who makes, wars, invades? The kings, dictators, or elected politicians who see dollar signs in front of there eyes.

"when the rich wage war its the poor that die."

The usa isnt alone in the world in being over agressive. Eventually a realisation will come that often more damage than good is done, and battles will be chosen more carefully.

Look at Somalia, now thats a country that needs military intervention.

Heres an example.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombardment_of_Kagoshima

When britain was in power, we attacked japan on the guise of revenge for the death of british people in japan. really it was probably just the uk trying to make japan show subordanance.

They bowed to the pressure.

Then a rift was created, do we modernise and make our armies like britain, or stay with tradition.

A civil war broke out, and a scottish merchant in japan, Thomas Blake Glover persuaded the uk to support the rebels. That same merchant sent japanese noble children to the uk to be educated. The rebels won the war, the nobels sent to the uk became the prime ministers, ministers of war etc, and the uk sold them huge amounts of weapons. They then decided to be even more like the uk, they needed an empire too, and started conquering all the land around them, it alarmed the usa, they put trade embargos on japan, and in retaliation, they bombed pearl harbour so that the american fleet couldnt interfere in the pacific (there were two fleets, one on the east coast, one on the west)

Why did it happen? The elite in japan wanted power. they got there drive from the uk attacking them and then modernising them.

Monkey see, monkey do.

If the people in power act like d***s this will always happen.

the usa similarly supported anti communist dictators in south america, and that was similarly disasterous.

More important than the loss at pearl harbour, is actually knowing why it happened. If you dont understand that, then you miss an opportunity to actually learn a lesson from it, and they died for nothing. And that, is an insult to them.

thenumberone : yeah, I see exactly where you are coming from. Just dollar signs and politicians and bad judgment and power, pretty much. But that is another reason I want to get my degree in History, is so that now only can  I better understand it, but teach it too, once I retire from the Army, whenever that may be.