Sept. 11, '01, Can't Compare To Dec. 7, '41

SF Gate ^ | Monday, September 9, 2002 | Harley Sorensen, Special to SF Gate

[vannrox]

The comparison between the Dec. 7, 1941, attack on Pearl Harbor and the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon becomes more ludicrous by the day.

It's a comparison between an elephant and a gnat.

[vannrox]

.

All I can say is do your research!
--FR POSTED COMMENT

.

[sheik yerbouty]

Germany and Italy declared war on the U.S. on Dec 8 1941, I believe.

[ohioman]

Hey Harley...most in America could care less about the California Fruitcake position.

[Cicero]

This guy obviously never had a decent course in history or political science. Where the teachers are fruitcakes, their pupils will be fruitcakes.

[sheik yerbouty]

You've got the wrong number..

[bonesmccoy]

The columnist's history regarding EO9066 is correct. It is high time for the GOP and conservatives to remove Earl Warren's legacy from their own. The fact of the matter is that Earl Warren, as the sitting California Attorney General, permitted the incarceration of 160,000 people without recognizing their inherent GOD GIVEN rights.

FDR signed this executive order without any sign of remorse because it was a method of ethnic cleansing which specifically benefitted his political party and his cronies.

Any other characterization of EO9066 is sham history.

Having said this, the columnist is dead wrong about the President's actions in the wake of 9-11-01.

There is a big difference between FDR and GWB. FDR denied 160,000 people their rights and pursued ethnic cleansing policies in Hawaii and the West Coast of the United States. GWB's record stands in stark contrast. This President publicly stated his desire to prevent racism, to protect the rights of all Americans, and to specifically exclude any possibility of unamerican racial profiling or denial of due process rights.

One wonders when SF Chronicle will stop lying about the history of the California Democratic Party and when they will start printing the truth about the current graft, greed, and payola in the Democratic leadership of this state. Simply choosing to not cover California politics is a vice.

[ohioman]

My post was directed at the author of the article, not Sheik Yerbouty. (lol-nice name).

[x]

Virtually the whole world -- the whole Northern Hemisphere and a large chunk of the Southern -- was at war in 1942. That's not the case now. Calling Iraq, Iran and North Korea an "axis of evil" -- and it hasn't been proven that they had anything to do with 9/11 -- doesn't make them the equivalent in power or destructive capacity of Germany, Italy and Japan in 1941. Seriously, could al Quaida hold Britain and Russia at bay, conquer Europe from the Channel Islands to the Volga, or Asia and the Pacific from Manchuria to India to New Guinea to Midway to the Aleutians?

To be sure the potential does exist for a devastating terrorist strike. But that's a possibility regardless of what we do in Iraq or elsewhere. Terrorists abound, and weapons aren't that hard to get. All it takes is another mad or evil millionaire to fund the operation.

Harley Sorenson does downgrade 9/11 too much. It was a truly terrible crime, and shouldn't be minimized. But the world situation is very different now from in 1941. Terrorists may cause much death and destruction, but we don't see a situation where most of two continents have been conquered by tyrants. Given time, people will recognize the difference between then and now, if they don't already. The difference is a matter of common sense, though what it means or how much it matters for us now is debateable.

If nothing else, you won't see the draft or mass mobilization or a whole generation at arms unless things go terribly wrong. That in itself makes 2002 different from 1942.

[wideawake]

Let's have an end to the ridiculous whining about Japanese internment during World War II.

Let's see - hundreds of thousands of American boys were drafted (i.e. forced) to travel thousands of miles from home to live in foxholes and ditches exposed to the elements and risk death, all by the order of the US government. Thousands and thousands of them didn't survive. Their families received a few dollars for their loss.

At the same time, about a hundred thousand other US citizens were removed a few hundred miles from home to live in facilities that were completely safe from the dangers of war. For this completely non-life threatening inconvenience, their families were paid lavish sums.

Was it better to be a draftee half-frozen on a German battlefield choking on his blood and dying in a ditch, or was it better to be a internee huddled in a warm barracks, completely safe from the bullets and bombs, waiting for the war to end?

It's time for these people to quit their bitching, whingeing and moaning. Those Japanese could have all volunteered for military service in Europe (hundreds did). They PREFERRED to stay safe and sound. And now they've been paid for it. Cowardly sadsacks.

[Vets_Husband_and_Wife]

You are right. And, I might add, more LIBERAL politicians complain then do the Japanese who were interned.

I've seen many articles and documentary's that show how the Japanese UNDERSTOOD the camps. Especially in light of what happened in Pearl Harbor!!

[citizenK]

Harley Sorenson does downgrade 9/11 too much. It was a truly terrible crime, and shouldn't be minimized. But the world situation is very different now from in 1941. Terrorists may cause much death and destruction, but we don't see a situation where most of two continents have been conquered by tyrants. Given time, people will recognize the difference between then and now, if they don't already. The difference is a matter of common sense, though what it means or how much it matters for us now is debateable.

I agree with the points you make here. For events occuring in our recent past, it is difficult to ascertain their historical meaning and what movements and forces are really shaping events as they unfold. The difference between 1941 and today is that in the past, our enemies tried to defeat us by conventional military means and the projection and confrontation of industrial powers. WWII left little doubt as to the supremacy of American military and industrial power. Our enemies today know they have absolutely no chance whatsoever of taking over our country with military force. Today our enemies wage their battles secretly using proxy terrorist organizations.

Seriously, could al Quaida hold Britain and Russia at bay, conquer Europe from the Channel Islands to the Volga, or Asia and the Pacific from Manchuria to India to New Guinea to Midway to the Aleutians?

The problem isn't the possibility of being taken over militarily, the problem today is the possibility of an ensuing tyranny enveloping the Constitution, and the American people abandoning the freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution in favor of a "secure" society. So it's not like 1941, it's more like the problems incurred by the Romans - the nuisance attacks by the barbarians to the north and decline of the social and civil society within the empire. The barbarians could not have conquered the Roman empire either, but they did help topple it.

[steve-b]

On Dec. 8, 1941, with Pearl Harbor still smoldering, Congress solemnly declared war on Japan. The next day it declared war on Germany and Italy.

I quit reading at this evidence of non-research. Germany declared war on us, not vice versa.

[sheik yerbouty]

Not a problem.

[JCG]

Virtually the whole world -- the whole Northern Hemisphere and a large chunk of the Southern -- was at war in 1942. That's not the case now.

Today one-fifth of the world's population is at war with the rest on a daily basis. It's called Jihad, or holy war. Its 1.2 billion 'warriors' constitute a far greater threat to our way of life than the paltry, less than 200 million, Axis population of WWII.

America's Fifth Column ... watch PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
New Link: Download 8 Mb zip file here (60 minute video)