Why did Japan attack us?

Quote of the Day by Oldeconomybuyer

Once again, Buchanan shows that he is a proud member of the Blame American First Organization.

I am incredibly grateful he was kicked out the GOP.

the interesting thing about japan is the birth rate in the 1920s--very high.

and, kaboom! a generation later, when these males reach 20 years...expansionism.

now look at japan's birth rate. the country's a basket case, as is italy, etc.

that's why the united states allows immigration and our economy hums.

"O Paddy, we hardly knew ye."

The ultimate caricature of Buchanan is Buchanan.

Uggh. This piece of fecal matter by Buchanan posted again.

Some fun facts demonstrating that Buchanan wouldn't know a fact if it bit him on his ass:

1) Japanese suffered 300 killed in WWI...this is Buchanan's "Price in Blood." US suffered over 50,000. US took NO territory from anyone. Japan took the Marshall, Gilbert, Palau, and Marianas Islands from Germany in WWI. No country took control of more surface area of the globe with fewer casualties in ANY war than Japan in WWI.

2) The US spent most of WWII in the Pacific fighting bloody battles to capture heavily fortified Japanese islands like Tarawa and Pelileu that the Japanese had taken in WW I from Germany.

3) Pat claims China is a giant and Japan is "disarmed." The Japanese actually have a Navy and Air Force that is GREATLY superior to that of the PRC, right now. And if anything the gap is tilting more in favor of Japan with time. The Japanese defense budget, in some sources, is actually higher than China's...at least, they have similar defense budgets. And the Japanese are far better trained with better technology. The Japanese would crush China in any Naval or Power-projection war. Only thing the Chinese have on them is nukes.

Before MacArthur and the occupation army helped set things straight, Japan was rapidly on the way to becoming a third world cesspool like Communist China.

Patrick would be literally surprised by the number of people over here who are deeply grateful that America kicked Japan's butt. Even those on the receiving end of the bombs in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while they debate the necessity or lack thereof still, are grateful that Japan didn't win the war.

It is true, however, that FDR baited Japan just as Buchanan has outlined. Nobody, however, forced them to take the bait. The pacifist Konoue government did not collapse-- it was replaced in a military coup d'etat.

Another factoid Buchanan conveniently omits is that there was a strong debate within the Japanese military about how oil resources could be secured. An alternative was closer but not quite so abundant-- the northern half of Sakhalin (Karufuto) Island, which Japanese oil companies are pumping in partnership with the Russians today. There was also strong indicators (since confirmed) of abundant oil supplies in Siberia. The reason the Russian idea lost was precisely because the facist militarists got along better with Communist dictators than with western civilization-- the same reason we, not the more convenient anti-Muslim, ChiComs were attacked on 9-11.

member since december 1, 2001. guess he's qualified to say?

p.s. i've read, i'll bet, a thousand posts by you, usually with approval. forget the newbie d**khead.

Who's to say that the Japanese don't have a nuke or two squirrelled away for a rainy day? They have the tech and the nuke plants. We just trust them more than the looneys of the world.

The ultimate caricature of Buchanan is Buchanan.

I have now lived a full life. We finally agree on something!

Sheesh, every time I think Buchanan can't cariacturize himself any further he does. He better not visit South Korea or Taiwan. They might not agree with his assessment.

Already posted here

Pat no longer deserves the title of conservative. It looks like associating with Dr. Lenora caused permanent brain damage.

My goodness, I want to respond, but where? each paragraph so bad.

Japan was now isolated, with Stalin's brooding empire to the north, a rising China to the east and, to the south, Western imperial powers that detested and distrusted her.

Let me see, Japan had to conquer the surrounding nations, and kill hundreds of thousands, because of Siberia. Japan had defeated the russian forces in siberia before,(I'm not sure if it was in WW1 or a separate conflict.) a china which still was not unified or free of western control, and the west which didn't trust her.

When civil war broke out in China, Japan in 1931 occupied Manchuria as a buffer state. This was the way the Europeans had collected their empires. Yet, the West was "shocked, shocked" that Japan would embark upon a course of "aggression."

Yes the west was also shocked by hitler's attempt to collect an empire too. Funny I thought that empires were bad. The US had fought against both the British and Spanish empires.

..in June 1940, Japan moved into northern French Indochina.

I guess it was another buffer zone in case the russians attacked by way of the south pole.

And though the United States had no interest there, we imposed an embargo on steel and scrap metal

I guess old FDR thought that it was in our interest to stop a nation(or nations germany and japan were allies after all) bent on global conquest. Kinda the same way Reagan thought it was in our interest to stop communism from dominating the world.

Konoye was willing to give up Indochina and China, except a buffer region in the north to protect her from Stalin, in return for the U.S. brokering a peace with China and opening up the oil pipeline

So Japan begins a war of conquest. And the solution is to let them keep some of the land they conquer. In order to avoid the "horror" of economic sanctions. That really worked when Chamberlain tried it with hitler.

.... But Chiang Kai-shek became "hysterical," and his American adviser, one Owen Lattimore, intervened to abort the proposal.

Imagine that, a chinese leader becoming hysterical that the west was willing to give away part of his country. Why I bet if the shoe was on the other foot, and Japan had conquered a large part of the US. Pat would be willing to let them keep a couple of states, if it helped avoid china putting economic sanctions on japan.

Facing a choice between death of the empire or fighting for its life...

Japan was willing to go to war(which killed millions), to keep an empire, not because they were afraid of russian troops stationed in siberia, or any other reason.

And so Japan attacked. And so she was crushed and forced out of Vietnam, out of China, out of Manchuria. And so they fell to Stalin, Mao and Ho Chi Minh. And so it was that American boys, not Japanese boys, would die fighting Koreans, Chinese and Vietnamese to try to block the aggressions of a barbaric Asian communism.

Huh, Does pat really think that Korean and Vietnam wars happened(or at least our involvement in them) because Japan lost WW2? If we are willing(it is in our interest) to fight to stop aggressive barbaric asian communism, then why isn't it in our interest to stop aggressive barbaric asian fascism? Why does pat seem to think that barbaric asian fascism, is a better alternative to barbaric asian communism.

Had FDR met Prince Konoye, there might have been no Pearl Harbor, no Pacific war, no Hiroshima, no Nagasaki, no Korea, no Vietnam. How many of our fathers and uncles, brothers and friends, might still be alive?

FDR never would had needed to meet with anyone if Japan had not tried to conquer the pacific rim. If they had not tried to conquer it, millions would have lived. They are the ones at fault.