national

Pearl Harbor ceremony focuses on U.S. response to Japan's attack

43 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2008/9 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

43 Comments
Login to comment

It's amazing on how strong the relationship is between the United States and Japan, these two magnificent nations have had quite a unique history together. They went from being allies to being bitter enemies, and then they rejoined their alliance. And today it remains one of the strongest alliances in the world. Let us never forget what happened on December 7th,1941 but also let us never forget the advancements that both of these great nations have made since then.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

bandogeek;

Yes - it is quite amazing how well the US and Japan get along considering the enmity of the war. Kudos to both countries for making such a turnaround, despite the occasional bumps in their relationship, and notwithstanding the whingers on this site.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

May their souls forever rest in peace.

I do take one exception to this part from the article:

..."Underscoring how far Americans and Japanese have come since Dec 7, 1941, President-elect Barack Obama in Chicago on Sunday introduced retired Gen Eric Shinseki, a Japanese-American born in Hawaii a year after the attack, as his nominee to head the Veterans Affairs Department."

Sorry but this is a rather poor example of saying how far Americans and Japanese have come. General Shinseki is a Japanese American, and it's not like Japanese Americans on the island were not affected by this savage attack either. Even Senator Daniel Inouye was a guest speaker at this memorial years ago. It would have been far better and more relevant if they used examples of former Imperial Japanese military members attending the memorial ceremony. Obama picking Shinseki is irrelevant to how far relations between Japan and America have come, Shinseki's ethnicity is just ironic that is all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Sorry but this is a rather poor example of saying how far Americans and >Japanese have come. General Shinseki is a Japanese American, and it's >not like Japanese Americans on the island were not affected by this >savage attack either.

Sorry but I disagree. The IJA's treatment of POWs such as the Bataan Death March or the Burma Railroad, or treament of civilians, etc can be called savage. But the Pearl Harbor attack was a brilliantly executed military attack on an enemy military asset and adding insult to injury is the fact that we should have expected it. I succesful military struke whether conducted by us or by an enemy isn't "savage" in my book.

Even Senator Daniel Inouye was a guest speaker at this memorial years >ago. It would have been far better and more relevant if they used >examples of former Imperial Japanese military members attending the >memorial ceremony. Obama picking Shinseki is irrelevant to how far >relations between Japan and America have come, Shinseki's ethnicity is >just ironic that is all.

But it is a good example of how America's realtionship with Americans of Japanes decent have changed since the days of the internment camps. Nevertheless I do agree that the wording of the article suggests the US and Japan directly. Perhaps the Japanese F-15 fighters in joint training with the USAF over Alaska and Guam is a better example.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Comparisons with Pearl Harbor and the advancement of Japanese-Americans are rather lame. The Japanese-Americans in Hawaii at the the time of Pearl Harbor never deviated from their support of the US. RJR mentioned Senator Inoue, a holder of the Congressional Medal of Honor. Japanese-Americans also formed the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, "the most highly decorated military unit in the history of the United States Armed Forces." General Shinseki and his forebears of the the 442nd are 100% American, their Japanese ethnicity is just incidental.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm not disagreeing with you Ossan on your first part, but I agree, using the F-15 fighters in joint training would have been a much better part. I'm more along the lines of what timorborder is discussing in that comparing two distinct groups that shared the same racial/ethnic background is a bit off.

I'm sure the AP writer was trying to use an example of how far the two nations have come, and it is a great thing to point out as indeed two nations that had such a bloody history amongst each other now allies is remarkable. But just thought it could have used a better example that's all.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

adding insult to injury is the fact that we should have expected it.

Hmmmm.. maybe not. National Security Agency historians concluded the U.S. had no advance notice of Japan's plans to attack Pearl Harbor. The NSA says weather reports, meant to alert Japanese diplomats to destroy codes, did not reach U.S. officials prior to the attack. It's in the Saturday edition of the New York Times. However, if you're talking in terms of the 'overall' trade, military and diplomatic situation pointing towards eventual aggression, I'd agree. But specifically, the NSA says there was no reasonable warning of an attack on Pearl Harbor.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I am glad that at least one some level, people are realizing that in focusing on the "response" to an event, rather than the evil-ness of the event itself is the best way to move foreward, rather than taking on the all too easy poor us "victim" role. Bravo.

And as far as how far we've come, enemies to friends,etc., I'll paraphrase Sun Tzu: "The best way to defeat your enemy is make him your friend."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

But the Pearl Harbor attack was a brilliantly executed military attack on an enemy military asset and adding insult to injury is the fact that we should have expected it.

Brilliantly executed, maybe, but the US was neutral at the time, and Japan violated Article 1 the Haague Convention, to which it was a signatory, which states: "The contracting Powers recognize that hostilities between themselves must not commence without previous and explicit warning, in the form either of a declaration of war, giving reasons, or of an ultimatum with conditional declaration of war."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Brilliantly executed? I think not, neither do the Japanese. Admiral Yamamoto basically felt that Pearl Harbor was a strategic failure because they failed to sink the US Navy Carrier elements. But hey, what does he know?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Brilliantly executed? I think not, neither do the Japanese. Admiral Yamamoto basically felt that Pearl Harbor was a strategic failure

Apples and oranges. The strategic after-effect of an operation does not take away from how brilliantly executed the operation was. The U.S. military had deemed it impossible that ships at Pearl could be torpedoed by plane due to the shallowness of the harbor. By means of technology and intense practice, the Japanese did that, and more. It was brilliantly done. The world was in awe.

but the US was neutral at the time,

But making noises that did not sound neutral. America was justified in its response to Japanese aggression, yes. But it was not so much that no thought Japan would like to attack America, it was more like no one thought it possible. I am not of the opinion that the American government was so naive to think that aggressive punitive diplomacy with a militarized nation would elicit nothing but hand shakes and smiles.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

remember the usa fired the first shot . the one that sank the mini sub

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I often wonder what is America's fascination with WWII..

I also agree with several posters that Shinseki should not have even been mentioned here. He is an American. I don't recall anyone of German or Italian extraction being used to show the alliance between the US and either of those countries (btw, if you travel to Queens or Long Island just to name two, you will learn of an often un-told story of Italian and German American camps similar to that Japanese American camps on the West Coast)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I also agree with several posters that Shinseki should not have even been mentioned here

goes to show how little was learnt from the Internment camp affair.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hmmmm.. maybe not. National Security Agency historians concluded the >U.S. had no advance notice of Japan's plans to attack Pearl Harbor. The >NSA says weather reports, meant to alert Japanese diplomats to destroy >codes, did not reach U.S. officials prior to the attack. It's in the >Saturday edition of the New York Times. However, if you're talking in >terms of the 'overall' trade, military and diplomatic situation pointing >towards eventual aggression, I'd agree. But specifically, the NSA says >there was no reasonable warning of an attack on Pearl Harbor.

Would these be the same folks who failed to warn us of 911?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

General Shinseki and his forebears of the the 442nd are 100% American, their Japanese ethnicity is just incidental.

Timorborder;

You are spot on. Anyone who is friends with Japanese Americans will attest that they're Grandparents who suffered the indignity of internment camps came out of that experience with a pure hatred for Japan and their forefathers for starting a war they had to pay for with their civil liberties, businesses, homes, and futures. I think only in Hawaii will you find Japanese Americans whose decendents to this day speak Japanese. On the west coast its a dead language for them.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Brilliantly executed, maybe, but the US was neutral at the time, and >Japan violated Article 1 the Haague Convention, to which it was a >signatory, which states: "The contracting Powers recognize that >hostilities between themselves must not commence without previous and >explicit warning, in the form either of a declaration of war, giving >reasons, or of an ultimatum with conditional declaration of war."

Neutral at the time? While suppprting the KMT? While a US pilotd bombed Japanese ships in China prior to Dec 1941? That's about as neutral as we were to Germany while sending miliytary aid to England. Yes, neutral in a legal sense, but far from it in both conviction and practice. Declaration of war? Japam never declared war on Russia in 1904, a war in which we supported Japan 100%. Why should any military intelligence officer believe that Japan would make a declaration?

Brilliantly executed? I think not, neither do the Japanese. Admiral >Yamamoto basically felt that Pearl Harbor was a strategic failure >because they failed to sink the US Navy Carrier elements. But hey, what >does he know?

Yes, Brilliantly executed from our point of view because we were taken by complete surprise and suffered massive losses. And a failure on the Japanese side because they failed to get our carriers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Anyone who is friends with Japanese Americans will attest that they're Grandparents who suffered the indignity of internment camps came out of that experience with a pure hatred for Japan and their forefathers for starting a war they had to pay for with their civil liberties, businesses, homes, and futures.

That's like a Jew hating his own Jewish heritage instead of the Nazis for his experience of the Holocaust. Stories like that only appear on Neo-Nazi and Holocaust denial media.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't recall anyone of German or Italian extraction being used to show the alliance between the US and either of those countries

Considering that the USA elected a president of German extraction just eight years after D-day (for which he was the Supreme Allied Commander of course) you have a point. Don't think much was ever made of his being a German-American, while 67 years later a point is still being made about someone being a Japanese-American. Of course, that might just be because the USA-Japan relationship is a lot more complicated than the ones with Germany and Italy, and has a lot more baggage. Germany never attacked Kansas for starters.

And for what it is worth, I am with Timorborder on this one. Brilliant execution isn't much good if it is part of a strategic failure. I also think that thinking of WW2 as a strategic failure from the start helps to explain a lot about Japanese actions and attitudes, both then and now. But I am not daft enough to try and explain what I mean by that on Japan Today!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Miltarily laziness on the US' part. The Japanese had carried out a similar surprise attack on the Russian pacific fleet at Port Arthur in 1905. The only difference was that battleships were used instead of the then non-existent aircraft carriers.

Americans make me laugh with their historical immaturity and double standards. When did they officially last declare war on someone, before taking military action? If my memory serves me right, it was in 1917.

Americans.....

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Don't forget the USS PAYNAY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It was attacked by the Japanese before Pearl Harbor.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Someone needs to ask the question "Why?"

The attack on Pearl was brilliantly coordinated, and although the U.S. carriers were not home, being a bit of luck for the Americans, the worry that they might return caused the Japanese not to attack two facilities that would haunt them early in the war in the third wave attack.

Adm. Yamamoto was right in saying, we only angered the beast, we did not strike a significant disabling blow.

However the 'why' that should be asked is, "Why was there no warning to the rest of Pacific installations? Why was the Philippines attacked three (3) hours after Pearl Harbor (after the air attack being delayed in Formosa by fog), the Japanese taking off - believing they were flying into a known 'death battle,' with defenders forwarned and ready, they found the planes were arranged in straight lines, no air defenses, no patroling aircraft up to defend - basically asleep enjoying a nice Monday in the sun on their arse!!!

Why?

Seems like we didn't learn too much from that gross mistake, and then repeat it in the debacle of 911, although 60 years had passed from incident one to incident two.

"Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dogdog: When you ask "when did they las officially declare war on someone before taking military action?" Are you talking about military offensive, or defensive action? Because the United States declared war much later than 1917. War was declared on Japan December 8, 1941. War was declared on Germany December 11, 1941, and war was also declared on Italy, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania June 5, 1942. Maybe yur memory needs to be recalibrated a little bit. You're welcome for the information.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

War was declared on Germany December 11, 1941, and war was also declared on Italy, Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania June 5, 1942. Maybe yur memory needs to be recalibrated a little bit. You're welcome for the information.

Go read a basic history book and find out who declared war on who

0 ( +0 / -0 )

amazing that for what ever reason, Shinseki must be mentioned here at all. He did not fight in that war and he article should remain about the event of WWII, not one person who happened to have been born during that time. His heritage has nothing to do with the war, the US Japan alliance, nor any outcome of that war.

I like the one poster: "goes to show how little was learnt from the Internment camp affair." to insinuate some sort of bigotry on those posters who feel the same as I do.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dogdog: The United States has only declared war 5 times, with Germany being the only country the United Sates has declared war on twice, 1917 and 1941. Maybe you need to read more, or get rid of the basic history book that you are reading. Again, you're welcome.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Dogdog....

You're obviously too lazy to go and do the most basic research.

GERMANY DECLARED WAR ON THE USA IN 1941

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Blackknight:

Wrong time zone?

"-basically asleep enjoying a nice Monday in the sun on their arse!!!"

At 7:55 a.m., the moment on a Sunday morning in 1941 when hundreds of Japanese planes began raining bombs and torpedoes onto Oahu’s U.S. military ships and planes, onlookers across from the sunken USS Arizona went silent.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Underscoring how far Americans and Japanese have come since Dec 7, 1941, President-elect Barack Obama in Chicago on Sunday introduced retired Gen Eric Shinseki, a Japanese-American born in Hawaii a year after the attack, as his nominee to head the Veterans Affairs Department."

uh, fyi, Shinseki is American! who's the idiot who wrote this article?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Blacknight, as an answer to your question, there was something on TV. apparently some historians found a document signed by a few American generals, who ordered a large scale attack on Japan to happen just a few days after Pearl Harbor. the document was signed before the Japanese attack. so either there was pure coincidence, either the Japanese knew about the American attack

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Americans make me laugh with their historical immaturity and double >standards. When did they officially last declare war on someone, before >taking military action? If my memory serves me right, it was in 1917.

We declared war on Japan on Dec 8, 1941. We declared war on Germany and Italy on Dec 11, 1941.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Don't forget the USS PAYNAY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! It >was attacked by the Japanese before Pearl Harbor.

Why? It was a mistake and the Japanese apologized, paying $2,000,00 in reparation which we accepted.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Underscoring how far Americans and Japanese have come since Dec 7, 1941, President-elect Barack Obama in Chicago on Sunday introduced retired Gen Eric Shinseki, a Japanese-American born in Hawaii a year after the attack, as his nominee to head the Veterans Affairs Department."

uh, fyi, Shinseki is American! who's the idiot who wrote this article?

During the war, Shinseki would have been sitting in an internment camp. That is because Japanese can mean an ethnicity as well as a citizenship. Not that it qualifies as a valid excuse, but Japanese were distrusted because the little bit of Japanese tradition they hung on to appeared much more foreign and suspect to us than the traditions of German-Americans for example. Further, they formed more close knit groups and had more ties to their ancestral country, though that may have a product of racism on the part of Americans as much as culture and choice on the part of those of Japanese decent. Mixed marriages were not tolerated by either side. Not so with the German Americans in general, white Christians who sang the same Christmas songs.

The writer was a bit short-sighted, but I would say far from being an idiot. It would have been better to clearly state that racism and hard feelings against the Japanese and those of Japanese decent has lessened greatly since the war, and General Shinseki proves that. But strong feelings against the Japanese and those of Japanese decent yet persist. You won't find that with Germans and those of German decent nearly as much. That is because the Japanese seem a lot more foreign to the average American.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica,

Would these be the same folks who failed to warn us of 911?

I don't want to get too off-topic or the JT mods will toast this.. suffice to say, there WAS a Presidential Daily Briefing ("PDB") preceding 9/11. But, there was no specific such warning preceding Pearl Harbor.

And back on topic, General Shinseki's new gig doesn't really speak to the U.S. relationship with Japan as it does to the U.S. relationship with its own citizen.. many of whom were interred completely unfairly and immorally during World War II.

Moderator: No further references to 9/11 please. It is not relevant to this discussion.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

remember the usa fired the first shot . the one that sank the mini sub

Funny, but true. This happened over an hour before the planes came. Did everybody just go back to bed after sinking the sub? Those things could not cross oceans on their own!

It just goes back to how the Japanese succeeded in doing what everyone thought to be completely impossible. Our boys were on such alert that they spotted periscopes, not an easy thing to do unless you are really looking. Yet, the impending doom still wasn't realized.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The US leaders knew all about the plans, preparations and the schedule of the attack on Pearl.

Those US servicemen were sacrificed. sacrificed in order to enable a war against Germany by way of the mutual security pact between germany and Japan.

This was done for international Jewry.

Of course there were no aircraft carriers hit. They were kept a safe distance away. The ships at Pearl were deliberately put at risk, and the Americans got the taste for war against japan after they were lied to and told it was a sneak attack.

Japan's money for its military at the time of WW II came from a Mr.Schiff, a Jewish New York banker. Interestingly Germany's money and supplies at the time of that war also came from ostensibly American sources - kosher ones.

The sheople really don't learn from history. One false flag after another. The most recent being the farcical 9/11/01. (But one more due in a short while I think).

It is a pity most Japanese do not know they about the big con that pearl was. But unfortunately as I mentioned, the sheople really cannot be helped.

As I recall, the US enforced a trading embargo against Imperial Japan in the lead-up to the war. This is a defacto declaration of War. Basically Japan had no option other than to attack the US due to the latter's actions.

And it was organised International Jewry (dubbed as Zionists) who unilaterally declared war on Germany through a trading boycott. Those Jews required the Americans to destroy the imminant threat to Jewish hegemony throughout the world. The Americans were very reticent to go to war against Germany, so America's treasonous leaders had to create 'Pearl' to stir up the requisite war-fever. Pearl was just the last of a long line of belligerent acts against Germany coordinated by ostensibly Americans. The Germans seem to have been pretty tolerant of US boycotts and attacks to its ships at sea etc... .

The US was the only country which was wealthier after the war than before, while Britain lost 25% of its gross national wealth, and other countries like Japan and Germany got taken to the cleaners, purged of most of their menfolk, raped the women and proceeded on a course of brainwashing the ensuing generations into feeling guilty for crimes which the Allies' were at least as guilty of if they weren't even worse.

Pearl Harbor is a significant moment in history all right. it shall be remembered amongst the awakened in a similar light as 9/11.

Ah! Such invincible naivette! To think that I used to believe the fiction recorded as history during my history lessons at school! Now for me the whole game is transparent. But I will be dragged-down because of the overwhelming weight of the pleasant, but ignorant masses. - At least I will know what is happening.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

OssanAmerica: Thanks for the back up. He/she acted as if I was pulling the information out of my arse or something. The United States has declared war more recently than 1917. On Japan, and Germany in particular.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I was sitting in church Dec. 7, 2008 and thought about the events of Dec. 7, 1941. I think it is good that we honor all those who lost their lives during WWII.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm glad that we have ceremonies to remember these tragic moments in history no matter which side of the debate your on. And hats off to mael for most interesting post today.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Toguro, Hitler declared war on the US on Dec 8, '41. It was kinda nutty 'cause the US had not - had not, amiga - declared war on Germany.

I don't see what his hurry was. Do you?

History up, mein friend.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Toguro, Hitler declared war on the US on Dec 8, '41. It was kinda nutty 'cause the US had not - had not, amiga - declared war on Germany.

I don't see what his hurry was. Do you?

I think Hitler was kind of forced to declare war on the US. If he hadn`t, the tripartite agreement with Japan would have meant nothing. When the Germans made the deal with Japan, they assumed the Japanese would simply be attacking British territory rather than American.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Japan's money for its military at the time of WW II came from a Mr.Schiff, a Jewish New York banker. Interestingly Germany's money and supplies at the time of that war also came from ostensibly American sources - kosher ones.

Mael, would you be able to back up any of this with respected sources without sounding like a rabid anti-semite? No? Thought not.

It would appear the Schiff helped lend Japan money substantially prior to WWII - at the time of the Russia-Japan war at the turn of the century. He also helped market what are now called Samurai bonds.

In case you had forgotten, Japan was in WWI on the side of the allies, fighting against the Germans, so lending Japan money was hardly a crime. However, as a wealthy, prominent Jew, he was and is inevitably the focus of anti-Jewish propaganda and conspiracy theories, of which you are unfortunately a proponent.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I've been trying to put a model together, to understand this crazy world. This is what I got so far. Am am of the opinion that Japan's attack was staged, not surprizing when one considers that WWI and WWII were also both central banking scams. Feel free to try and improve the model.

http://www.freelists.org/post/harbor/World-View

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites