Patrick J. Buchanan: Why did Japan attack us?

Creators Syndicate ^ | Tuesday, December 11, 2001 | Patrick J. Buchanan

[malarski]

Now Japan is disarmed and China is an Asian giant whose military boasts of pushing the Americans back across the Pacific. 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?

As usually Pat is not politically correct even for this forum. But he just might be right. On the other hand if Poland's leadership did not refuse to meet with the visiting German dignitaries in 1935-1936, who were proposing a common anti-communist front, for all we know WWII might have not happened and Pat's analysis in reference to Japan would be irrelevant today.

[John H K]

As usually Pat is not politically correct even for this forum

It's not that he's politically incorrect, he's just factually completely full of s***. He simply invents or twists whatever he wants to fit whatever cockamamie argument he wants to present.

I didn't even get to:

Now Japan is disarmed and China is an Asian giant

The Japanese Navy (with NO US help) would take, oh, about a week or two to destroy the Chinese Navy. And they'd kick the living crap out of the PLA Airforce.

The ONLY thing the Chinese have on the Japanese is nukes. People really don't have a concept on just how powerful, well funded, and well trained the Japanese military is. They have Aegis Cruisers, F-15s, etc. And in large numbers.

[elhombrelibre]

The sad fact is Pat is an embarrassment. He mostly embarrasses himself, but by saying he is on the right he also embarrasses us. As someone else said above, Pat is a Blame-America-Firster. He must hope for some huge American catastrophe so that people will eventually turn to him. Fortunately, he's been wrong so many times (Remember Iraq I?) that he will remain just a crank and nervous nellie until the great disaster comes. Then he'll come to our rescue claiming, "I told you so."

[sheik yerbouty]

Apparently he's become an Axis apologist.

[Voronin]

When civil war broke out in China, Japan in 1931 occupied Manchuria as a buffer state.

I was under the impression that Japan was an island. Even now, military specialsts laugh at China's ability to launch an invasion of Taiwan, so how could such a 'fear' be more possible then.

Regs,

Mr. Confused,

VRN

[Fiddlstix]

Thanks for the Ping

[JohnGalt]

You give the game away by citing 'Iraq I' as proof that he was incorrect, the same way I would cite the Gulf War as the root of our troubles with Middle Eastern terrorists from Saudi Arabia.

The history you believe is a history written by folks with an agenda, no different than Pat's take is for an agenda.

[Cincinatus]

From Hitler apologist to Tojo apologist, huh? Pat sure has come a long way.

Pat's grasp of history is so profound, he wasting this stuff on mere news columns. He belongs at an Ivy League university.

[junta]

"Hate" My my what could possibly bring that on sir?

[Tauzero]

bump

[<1/1,000,000th%]

Good analysis!

[Travis McGee]

Exactly. What disgusted the world was not merely occupation, but gleeful mass bayonet practice against bound prisoners, brutal Japanese Army rape brothels, indiscriminate terror bombing of defenseless civilian targets etc etc.

The Japanese were acting in a totally inhuman and cruel manner for all the world to see, demonstrating that further Japanese conquest endangered all free nations. That's why we embargoed them. If they had merely sent "peacekeepers" to unsettled regions in China, they would not have been embargoed.

Buchanan has some blind spots in his soul.

[x]

What is with Pat?

There are times when he's right on target and even brilliant. Then there are times when he sounds crazy.

All in all, we were better off not waiting for Germany and Japan to digest Russia, China and India before fighting them. And we would have had to fight them at some point.

The problem with these historical "what ifs" is that you can make a decent guess at what might have been necessary to avoid a certain problem or crisis or war at a given time. But you can't say anything with any degree of plausibility -- let alone certitude -- about what would have happened later. Perhaps Germany would have destroyed itself. Perhaps Japan would have stopped and settled down. Perhaps Stalin would have all of Europe. Maybe the Holocaust would never have happened. Or maybe Nazis would rule the world even now. One can't say with any degree of confidence. One has to make a decision based on what one knows at the moment and what the likely results of an action are.

In any case, it's likely that centuries of Japanese history had more to do with Japanese conduct than the Washington Naval Conference. They had already fought at least three wars for empire, so the pattern was already established.

[x]

So the moral of the story is that we should continue to back Israel, no matter how much our allies across the Atlantic pressure us to do otherwise.

Actually, it looks like the moral of your tendentious tale is that we or the Europeans should expect another Israeli sneak attack.

Thanks for the warning.

[ex-snook]

There are some that go ballistic whenever Pat points out the truth that history should guide America today. More and more evidence is coming out that Roosevelt was the leader of the then War Party. He schemed the American people into war just as Johnson schemed the American people into Vietnam. The truth is that there is a War Party trying to scheme the American people into WW III. George Washington was right.

MERRY CHRISTMAS

[t-shirt]

Why do you hate him?

[weikel]

He would impose foolish trade restrictions not only on our enemies but also our allies he opposed taking down Hitler( even by aiding the allies) and after Hitler got the Russia and Britain he would go after us. He'd also enact socialist laws to appease his union buddies. That being said he's right about Wilson.

[t-shirt]

So to you tarrifs are socialist?

[RightWhale]

Japan was an island

Japan expanded outward from Korea.

[TopQuark]

I'm assumeing that there is a point to this. Of course I could be wrong. No, there is a point and it is wrong.