Freedom4um

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

History
See other History Articles

Title: The Japanese Attack On Pearl Harbor Was About Oil
Source: [None]
URL Source: https://taskandpurpose.com/japanese-attack-pearl-harbor-oil
Published: Dec 8, 2014
Author: Stephen Carlson
Post Date: 2019-12-01 12:58:37 by BTP Holdings
Keywords: None
Views: 3269
Comments: 46

The Japanese Attack On Pearl Harbor Was About Oil

Stephen Carlson December 08, 2014 at 12:54 PM

The USS Arizona (BB-39) burning after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, 7 December 1941.
Photo via the National Archives and Records Administration

The “day that will live in infamy” ended with the deaths of over 2,400 sailors, Marines and soldiers, along with the heavy damage and destruction of eight battleships. The surprise attack, conducted by hundreds of Japanese aircraft flying off of four heavy aircraft carriers, catapulted the United States into a world war it had been seeking to avoid.

But the attack, which left the U.S. population in a state of shock at the time, was one that was a long time coming. Japanese relations with the United States, which had enjoyed decades of peaceful cooperation, had been deteriorating for over a decade, and in the end, an U.S. oil embargo triggered the war.

Since Japan had invaded and occupied Manchuria in 1931 and left the League of Nations in 1933, it had pursued an increasingly aggressive foreign policy. Its imperial ambitions were directed at forming a “Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere” --- a euphemism for an empire modeled on the great European powers.

Japan gradually encroached on Chinese territory, and the incident on the Marco Polo Bridge in 1937 --- where confusion over a missing Japanese soldier led to Japanese forces attacking the bridge --- sparked an all-out war with China. The Chinese were riven with internal divisions, with a civil war between the Chinese Nationalists and the Chinese Communist Party leaving them too divided to successfully fight off the Japanese.

The Japanese occupation of China was savage, with indiscriminate reprisals carried out against Chinese civilians in revenge for partisan attacks. An estimated 20 million Chinese were killed during the course of the war.

The infamous Rape of Nanjing in December 1937, where hundreds of thousands of civilians were massacred and raped after Japan occupied the Chinese capital, sparked an outcry in the West. Britain, France, and the U.S. all sent aid to China, such as military supplies and the Flying Tigers, a U.S. volunteer fighter unit, and economic sanctions began to take their toll.

The Japanese turned to the Axis, signing the Tripartite Pact with Germany and Italy in September 1940. Its division from the Allied powers was complete.

But it was the Japanese invasion of French Indochina in 1941 that finally set the stage for Pearl Harbor. Though ostensibly “allowed” by German-occupied France to take control of the colony, it was too much for the United States. President Franklin Roosevelt instituted an oil embargo and froze all Japanese assets in the U.S. in order to pressure Japan to withdraw from its conquests. Britain followed suit as well.

This was a disaster for the Japanese economy, as it lost three quarters of its overseas trade and nearly 90% of its oil imports. To the Japanese, this left them with one option: knock the United States out of the Pacific with one massive blow and secure the oil and other resources it needed by occupying South East Asia.

After the devastation at Pearl Harbor, the Japanese enjoyed great success, invading and occupying Hong Kong, Singapore, Burma, the Philippines, Malaya, and New Guinea. But despite such great initial conquests, the Japanese had started a war they could not win.

The United States was the greatest industrial power on earth, the proverbial “sleeping giant.” With its full resources mobilized and larger population, the United States could simply out produce the Japanese in every kind of war material. In 1943 alone, the United States built over 85,000 aircraft, while the Japanese built only 16,000. In the numbers game, the Japanese were doomed.

Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, the mastermind of the Pearl Harbor attack, said that in a naval war with the United States, “If I am told to fight regardless of the consequences, I shall run wild for the first six months or a year, but I have utterly no confidence for the second or third year.”

Considering the decisive Battle of Midway happened exactly six months after Pearl Harbor, where the Japanese lost four irreplaceable carriers and the tide of the war turned, Yamamoto was more prophetic than he might have wished.


Poster Comment:

Oil is the reason the U.S. invaded Iraq. Saddam was selling Iraq's oil for Euros. He said he "did not want to deal in the currency of the enemy." Saddam violated the U.S. policy of Dollar Supremacy. Saddam had to go and he did. The U.S. invasion of Iraq triggered the insurgency with roadside bombs.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 37.

#1. To: BTP Holdings, Ada, Lod, All (#0)

Japan "lost" the war but they were the winner in the long run. More so than any other country. Thanks to MacArthur.

Cynicom  posted on  2019-12-01   13:28:45 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Cynicom (#1)

Germany also lost the war but soon became much more prosperous than the Brits who thought they won.

Ada  posted on  2019-12-01   13:35:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Ada, All (#2)

Germany also lost the war but soon became much more prosperous than the Brits who thought they won.

Very true...

Japan was the greatest winner because MacArthur forced them to come out of the dark ages. The peoples of Japan and Germany are industrious and dragged themselves up by the bootstraps with our help.

Side note, beginning WWII there were six major countries with dictators. At this time there are two remaining. Do you see any correlation between world strife then and now???

Cynicom  posted on  2019-12-01   13:51:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: All (#4)

Side note, beginning WWII there were six major countries with dictators. At this time there are two remaining. Do you see any correlation between world strife then and now???

My intent was strictly the political state of six countries.

WWII changed governments for the better in four countries. Germany, Japan, Italy and Spain. Eighty years later China and Russia remain dictatorships and both are a threat to world peace, both have the strength to rule or ruin the world.

The United States saved both countries from being destroyed. Both countries are godless states, determined to rule the world.

Cynicom  posted on  2019-12-02   0:12:26 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: Cynicom (#8)

WWII changed governments for the better in four countries. Germany, Japan, Italy and Spain. Eighty years later China and Russia remain dictatorships and both are a threat to world peace, both have the strength to rule or ruin the world.

The United States saved both countries from being destroyed. Both countries are godless states, determined to rule the world.

Russia isn't a Communist dictatorship anymore or godless like it was then. Putin supports Christianity there and that's probably one of the major reasons that Leftists despise him so much.

GreyLmist  posted on  2019-12-02   10:36:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: GreyLmist (#10)

Putin is an Orthordox Christian/Catholic, I think, as is much of Russia. I agree Russia is no longer communist as they now allow all adults to vote, unlike during the Communist reign where only Communist party members could vote. I can see how the accusation of Putin being a dictator can be argued given he's won the last 5 or so elections, and I have spoken with a Russian woman who says candidates not liked by their version of the Deep State are sometimes paid visits by state authorities to "discuss" their campaigns and ambitions, but.... I'm not sure how the end result is much different than here in the USA where entities like the DNC chooses their nominees while ignoring the electorate. We do have a Deep State which is basically the core of career Government workers at the top in all departments/ministries who think they know what's better for the USA than the electorate does, and implement that with the attitude that such duties are required of them and their execution could never be any violation of the law regardless of what the law says.

It's all the same crap worldwide so in my view illusioned purists in the USA have no grounds for criticizing countries like Russia and Iran for possibly having sham elections.

Pinguinite  posted on  2019-12-02   14:00:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: Pinguinite, 4 (#11) (Edited)

Putin is an Orthordox Christian/Catholic, I think, as is much of Russia. I agree Russia is no longer communist as they now allow all adults to vote, unlike during the Communist reign where only Communist party members could vote. I can see how the accusation of Putin being a dictator can be argued given he's won the last 5 or so elections, and I have spoken with a Russian woman who says candidates not liked by their version of the Deep State are sometimes paid visits by state authorities to "discuss" their campaigns and ambitions, but.... I'm not sure how the end result is much different than here in the USA where entities like the DNC chooses their nominees while ignoring the electorate. We do have a Deep State which is basically the core of career Government workers at the top in all departments/ministries who think they know what's better for the USA than the electorate does, and implement that with the attitude that such duties are required of them and their execution could never be any violation of the law regardless of what the law says.

It's all the same crap worldwide so in my view illusioned purists in the USA have no grounds for criticizing countries like Russia and Iran for possibly having sham elections.

I have to wonder if the Russian woman said that while regime change "advocates" like John McCain were there "influentially" or not. I very much agree, though, with your statements about the electoral-dictatorship intents here of the DNC and the post-election interference intents by Deep State careerists, which are largely DNC-allied installations, as far as I can determine to date. Not only does the DNC choose their own candidate instead of the electorate, they and their Deep Staters, et al. adjuncts are all busily in the process of trying to nullify the Republican votes of the 2016 Presidential election (that Republicans won) - by their impeachment baffooneries. The Democrat Party should be abolished. Then Americans should probably consider having two separate general-elections for Republicans and Independents (who aren't Socialist/Communist), similar to Primary elections and our Founders' original intent for the winner of the apportioned Electoral College votes to become President, with the 2nd place candidate becoming the Vice-President.

The underlined statement above in your post is the only thing that I think should be disputed as something of geo-political importance, in regard to public perceptions that Putin is a Russian dictator. Actually, he didn't win the last 5 or so elections - not consecutively, anyway. It just might seem that way because the Press and others have a tendancy to blur his Presidencies with Medvedev's, as if there was no Medvedev Presidency for 4 years from 2008 to 2012. Prior to that, Putin won 2 elections of 4-year terms each as President from 2000 to 2008 and he won 2 elections of 4-year terms each as President again, from 2012-2020, after Medvedev. Just saying as FYI so that those "Democracy-irregularity" impressions of Putin being dictatorial can be re-adjusted accordingly about that.

GreyLmist  posted on  2019-12-04   19:31:12 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: GreyLmist, All (#32)

Putin is an Orthordox Christian/Catholic, I think, as is much of Russia. I agree Russia is no longer communist

I would strongly disagree.

"""VLADIMIR""" Putins grandfather spent his entire lifetime as personal cook for """VLADIMIR""" Lenin and Joseph Stalin. Putin rose thru the ranks of the KGB to become "president". For life.

Cynicom  posted on  2019-12-04   20:00:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Pinguinite, Cynicom, BTP Holdings, 4 (#33) (Edited)

Pinguinite @ #11: Putin is an Orthordox Christian/Catholic, I think, as is much of Russia. I agree Russia is no longer communist

Cynicom @ #33: I would strongly disagree. """VLADIMIR""" Putins grandfather spent his entire lifetime as personal cook for """VLADIMIR""" Lenin and Joseph Stalin. Putin rose thru the ranks of the KGB to become "president". For life.

BTP Holdings @ #34: Vlad is like a snake that sheds his skin. Communism is still ingrained in the fabric of Russia, and Lenin's body still on display is proof of this. ;)

So far it's a tie vote, 2 agree and 2 disagree. Let's call a truce on the religious matters for now and wait a bit to discuss the Communist aspect until Pinquinite returns and/or one or more other posters arrive to chime in with their views of what they think Russia should do to reasonably qualify as no longer a Communist dictatorship.

GreyLmist  posted on  2019-12-05   0:03:01 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: GreyLmist (#35)

So far it's a tie vote, 2 agree and 2 disagree. Let's call a truce on the religious matters for now and wait a bit to discuss the Communist aspect until Pinquinite returns and/or one or more other posters arrive to chime in with their views of what they think Russia should do to reasonably qualify as no longer Communist.

One thing that should be done is to define "communist", because the USA actually implements a lot of the planks of the communist manifesto... public schooling and a progressive income tax being 2 that come to mind. Of course we have social security which is the very embodiment of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need".

So classifying a country as communist or capitalist is not a litmus or pregnancy test type of thing where each country is clearly either one or the other. There are shades of gray here, and for that reason, discussing it is probably a bit fruitless as each opinion is as good as any other.

I have watched a number of interviews and press statements made by Putin, though all of which were subtitled of course, and my impression of the guy is he's intelligent and rational. I would call him cunning as well, as he plays his cards carefully, which is one reason why I do not believe he was behind the Skripal poisoning. He's just too sophisticated and smart to do something that rash and stupid. (I say Israel is the prime suspect to frame Russia as Israel was certainly very frustrated with Russia's involvement in Syria at the time. If so, Israel framed Russia about perfectly, with the result being a huge tactical success if only a limited strategic success.)

I simply do not buy into Cyni's perspective of "never trust a Russian -- your life depends on it". People are people. None are saints, all have faults, but most are good people, or at least have good intent. We do need to be wary. We do need to recognize that well intended people can screw things up royally for everyone else. But we also need to stop living in the 1970's. The cold war is over. The west won. As for Putin's grand father, assuming that's true, I'd pay it no mind. I don't think I ever even met either of my Grandfathers, and people define their own selves. Russia has been through a huge transition since the 1990's. They've paid dearly for their marxist policies and I think the lessons have been too severe for them not to have learned. That as opposed to the USA which has the whole of the D party practically embracing it. So between the USA and Russia, the country that is in the most danger of embracing communism more over the next 20 years is the USA. Not Russia.

Pinguinite  posted on  2019-12-05   3:01:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: Pinguinite (#36)

I watched his interview with the FT and another with Megan "look at me", among others. I agree with your assessment. Moreover, it is easy to see why he's successful in politics, and, perhaps less obvious, that he is a great leader.

Anthem  posted on  2019-12-05   9:20:56 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 37.

        There are no replies to Comment # 37.


End Trace Mode for Comment # 37.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest