In many occasions, historians do agree on certain issues. Pearl Harbor incident however led to divergent views from historians. This relates to the Second World War when Japan carried out attacks United State on naval base situated in Hawaii. This is causing it to revenge on Japan. The citizens seemed to be dissatisfied and had questions about the incident. There were concerns on whether the attack was provoked, whether it was a deliberate action and if the government had some knowledge about it in advance. Charles A Beard, a Pearl Harbor historian was among the first person to raise concerns.
Beard in his book upheld that United States deliberated the move to leave Japan with no choice other than launching the attack. This move was by America cutting off Japan from accessing raw materials. The materials were very important to Japan for its military adventure. This forced them to strike even though it was a risk as the action would arouse the United States. In any way, the government must have had the knowledge of attack in before.
Thomas Fleming in his book argues that President Roosevelt deliberately and deceitfully forced America into war with Japan. Basil Rauch in his book refuted the argument by Beard, saying that America did not know of any attack in advance. It however knew that there would be an attack somewhere. America though had made some efforts to challenge Japan to take the first shot.
Richard N. Current even gave a more challenge to this issue. He alleged that Stimson anticipated this attack but probably not in the U. S. According to Stimson, it must have been on the Dutch or British possessions, in the Pacific.
He also did not agree with the thought that Stimson intended to somehow maneuver Japan to attack. His plan was Japan to attack the possessions owned by Britain or Dutch which could obviously look like attack on United State. This was a plan to convince United State Congress to approve a declaration of war.
Roberta Wohlstetter came up with a different approach on this issue. She did not care to answer whether United States wanted the attacks or not. She undertook the question regarding the knowledge of the government on this attack. She concluded that United States had enough warning about the intensions by Japan and should have seen the possibility of attack. The government however failed to interpret this evidence correctly.
Admiral Edwin, in his memoir was questioning the intelligence of the government on handling the issue. Deep concerns by Gordon W. Prange were on the mistakes done by the administration of the United States by interpreting wrongly the intentions of Japan. He however did not seem to be convinced that Roosevelt made any deliberations to engage Japan in a war.
Finally, claims still continued years after the incident. John Toland argued in his book that the navy new of the attacks after new evidence emerged. He concluded the president must have known the possibility of the outbreak. Roosevelt however allowed it hoping that it would arouse the United States. Toland like the other writers was not able to give any evidence.
Beard in his book upheld that United States deliberated the move to leave Japan with no choice other than launching the attack. This move was by America cutting off Japan from accessing raw materials. The materials were very important to Japan for its military adventure. This forced them to strike even though it was a risk as the action would arouse the United States. In any way, the government must have had the knowledge of attack in before.
Thomas Fleming in his book argues that President Roosevelt deliberately and deceitfully forced America into war with Japan. Basil Rauch in his book refuted the argument by Beard, saying that America did not know of any attack in advance. It however knew that there would be an attack somewhere. America though had made some efforts to challenge Japan to take the first shot.
Richard N. Current even gave a more challenge to this issue. He alleged that Stimson anticipated this attack but probably not in the U. S. According to Stimson, it must have been on the Dutch or British possessions, in the Pacific.
He also did not agree with the thought that Stimson intended to somehow maneuver Japan to attack. His plan was Japan to attack the possessions owned by Britain or Dutch which could obviously look like attack on United State. This was a plan to convince United State Congress to approve a declaration of war.
Roberta Wohlstetter came up with a different approach on this issue. She did not care to answer whether United States wanted the attacks or not. She undertook the question regarding the knowledge of the government on this attack. She concluded that United States had enough warning about the intensions by Japan and should have seen the possibility of attack. The government however failed to interpret this evidence correctly.
Admiral Edwin, in his memoir was questioning the intelligence of the government on handling the issue. Deep concerns by Gordon W. Prange were on the mistakes done by the administration of the United States by interpreting wrongly the intentions of Japan. He however did not seem to be convinced that Roosevelt made any deliberations to engage Japan in a war.
Finally, claims still continued years after the incident. John Toland argued in his book that the navy new of the attacks after new evidence emerged. He concluded the president must have known the possibility of the outbreak. Roosevelt however allowed it hoping that it would arouse the United States. Toland like the other writers was not able to give any evidence.
About the Author:
You can visit www.pearlharborchild.com for more helpful information about Pearl Harbor Historian Views Concerning The Issue.
No comments:
Post a Comment