Why was the British goverment so confident that they would not be defeated by the Japanese?
140767
one of their allies had the atomic bomb and were prepared to use it. also, Germany was the main foe, being so close to taking over Europe, they had to worry about them first. military strategy throughout history warns about fighting a battle on 2 fronts. depletes your resourses and manpower. Germany was the main concern then take on Japan.
634985
During battles on some of the islands approaching the main Japanese islands, it became clear that their soldiers would fight to the last man.  A full-blown invasion would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of American casualties, and Japan would have ended up a wasteland.  Aside from that, there was just no way that the Japanese would surrender unconditionally without the bomb being dropped.  And remember, it took two A-bombs before they surrendered.
539129
The British Empire (along with Spain) had a very formidable navy. During the many generations when land ownership (and most other disputes) was being resolved through military means a powerful armada was yardstick of a countries success in acquiring and holding new territories.
822977
The Britis are far from perfect, but they are quite civilize compared with the many nation-states who have achieved such dominance that they have invaded and took over other countries.\n\nOne, therefore, is tempted to say that the United Kingdom would be a first-rate country to dominate the United States.  Certainly, one can expect that England would have eased its exploitative policies toward the colonies.\n\nBut the one thing that would be missing is that the capital of the colonies would be thousands of miles away.  That is not conducive to good government.  On the other hand, we have the example of Hawaii -- one of the 50 states -- but 5,000 miles away from Washington D.C.  As time goes on, distance bceomes less of an obstacle.  Still, there are independence movements in Hawaii.
246684
You are an idiot!  Don't you know antthing about WWII history?  The Japanese were warned several times and would not stop fighting.  The only way to end the war would have been to invade Japan causing millions of Japanese to die.  They were finatical about the war and would stop at nothing.  This was the only way to stop them.  Thank God some of you bleedy heart liberals weren't around during WWII.  We'd probably be speaking German or Japanese right now if you were.
682494
Because Japan was able to cooperate with European nations and thus avoid the destruction that affected most of southern Asia and Oceania, Japan was able to begin building a large industrial and military infrastructure, then with help from European mentors Japan started to push out and take responsibilities in Asia. Japan was able to seize Korea and Formosa (Taiwan) first in wars with China. Then, during the Russo-Japanese War, Japan was given economic power and right to defend Manchuria, which they later annexed as Manchukwo. During the First World War, Japan declared on the side of the Western Allies, and at the Versailles Treaty in 1919 Japan was given the League of Nations mandate over the former island posessions of Germany in the Pacific Ocean (Carolinas, Marshalls, Bismark Islands, etc). In 1937, after quarrels with China over Manchuria, Japan began the actual invasion of China, which would bog their military down for almost ten years. When France was conquered by Germany in 1940, Japan reached a protective agreement with the French authorities in Indochina, then actually seized the entire province in 1941 which led to America placing economic sanctions. In the opening move of Japan's part in the Second World War, Japan seized Hong Kong, Malaya and Singapore, Indonesia, northern New Guinea, the Philippines, Guam and Wake. In early 1942, Japan took the Solomon Islands and Guadalcanal, and made an effort to seize the remaining southern portion of New Guinea to isolate Australia and New Zealand, but were turned back at the aircarft carrier fight in the Battle of the Coral Sea. The Japanese army was advancing through Burma and into the frontier of India, but were stopped at Imphal. With these setbacks, Japan felt it had to knock the American navy out of the war right away, thus the overextended plan for the ambush at Midway, which of course turned out to be an ambush against the Japanese navy. From that point on, Japan was not able to mount offensive operations until late 1944 in the South China Sea with disastrous results in what was called the Leyte Gulf Turkey Shoot.
670765
Absolutely. The US was able to apply resources that the British and the Russians struggled to supply. The Russians fought an incredibly bitter war and in many cases the Nazis were known to prefer fighting against the US and the UK than the Russians. However, it was the sheer scale of the entrance of the US to WW2 that put Hitler firmly on the backfoot. To sum up - The British won the war because they stood fast against a superior army, the Russians won the war through sheer sacrifice of numbers and grim determination, and the US won the war because although they were more interested in sorting out the Japanese (Pearl Harbour), they pumped billions of dollars worth of aircraft, man power and ammunition into the effort.
690767
Nope; the planners of the attack were firmly convinced that it would strike a crippling blow against their eventual rival in the Pacific, forcing the U.S. to make more favorable arrangements to split spheres of influence in the Pacific Rim.\n\nThe Japanese Empire was shamelessly and eagerly imperialist; they wanted everything in Asia subservient to them.  They saw the U.S.A. as the only serious obstacle to that hegemony, since the English, French, and Dutch were tied up in World War.
1082357
Why are other nations prejudice against British?\n\nIt goes both ways....it's called human frailty.
220027
Japan Invaded Shanghai, which was formerly held by the int'l concession (USA and UK) and the french concession. Japan used Chinese citizens as tests for biochemical activities, and at one time planned to bild a zepplin with gas to poison target californian cities. Oh, and Japan had a mutual war pact with the nazis. Other than pearl harbor and the previous reasons stated..., I see no reason to be alarmed.
389276
The attack on Pearl Harbor and the resulting war between Japan and the Allied powers appears to be the culmination of a series of events and decisions that began in the 19th century. By the mid-19th century, western imperialism had come to east Asia. Various European powers had taken control of India, Southeast Asia, Indonesia, and various islands in the Pacific. After defeating the Qin Dynasty of China in the Opium Wars, several western imperial governments forcibly exploited China's resources. The Japanese were shocked by the European defeat of the Qin dynasty and the resulting conquest of Chinese territory and resources. It was also around this time, in 1853, that Commodore Perry appeared in Tokyo Bay with the "Black Ships" and ordered the isolationist, Tokugawa shogunate government of Japan to open trade with the west. The U.S. appeared to support the other western powers in their exploitation of China, even sending troops to help put-down the Boxer Rebellion. The U.S. also gained control, through victories in the Spanish American War, of several significant territories in the east Asia/Pacific area by the end of the 19th century, most notably the Phillipines and Guam.\n\nIn 1868, Japan's Tokugawa shogunate was forcibly replaced with a new government model during the Meiji restoration. Japan's new government's decided to try to achieve parity with the western powers, believing that the only other alternative was helpless victimization, as had happened to the Qin Dynasty.\n\nThus, Japan embarked on a period of significant economic, political, and military expansion (citation pending). In order to fund this expansion, resource-poor Japan embarked on a series of their own imperialistic moves that brought it into conflict with neighboring powers. In 1894, Japan defeated the then current Chinese government and took control of Taiwan. In 1904, Japan defeated Russian forces and took control of Russian territories in and around China and the Korean peninsula. In 1910, Japan took all of the Korean peninsula. Japan supported the UK and U.S. side in World War I and, as a reward, was awarded control of former German possessions in the central Pacific. In 1931, Japan forcibly established a "puppet" state in Manchuria. In 1937, having made further progress in constructing a large and modern navy and army, Japan initiated a large-scale of invasion of mainland China, attacking from Manchuria and at several points along China's Pacific coast.\n\nJapan's invasion of China now appeared to directly threaten the assets and territories of several of the western powers, including Great Britain (UK) and the U.S., who were strong allies. The move also threatened the U.S.' "Open Door Policy" concerning China. The U.S. and UK responded at first with diplomatic pressure, condemning Japan's aggression in China. Japan didn't back down, but instead continued it's military campaign in China and formally aligned itself with the Axis Powers in 1940. The U.S. responded with economic sanctions, including partial or full embargoes of scrap metal and gasoline, renouncing previously-signed trade agreements between the two countries, and closing the Panama Canal to Japanese shipping. Again, the Japanese didn't back down and, in 1941, invaded northern Indo-China. The U.S. response was to freeze Japanese assets and initiated a complete oil embargo.\n\nOil was the most valuable and crucial resource that Japan required. In addition to fueling Japanese military operations, oil was vital for core economic activities. 80% of Japan's oil imports came from the U.S. Diplomatic negotiations climaxed with the Hull note of November 26, 1941, which Prime Minister Hideki Tojo described to his cabinet as an ultimatum. Therefore, Japan now had an important decision to make- either to comply with the U.S. and UK demands and back down from its aggression in China and the surrounding areas, or go to war w
620700
The Brits kept Hong Kong as theirs to watch over China (strategic location to bomb china if need be, as was their thought process after ww II) But as per the treaty they signed with China, it was handed over in 1997. And now it is a Chinese territory, but runs on its own steam with a state govt. etc.
52336
In a very similar fashion as in the USA. They have competing parties with the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party)being the most prevailant. Japanese citizens vote for their candidates and proposed laws like you'd expect in a democratic society. However, another big contender in Japan is their national Socialist party (can't recall their exact name).\n\nTGW
383035
Holy cow, some really horrible answers so far........\n\nThe US had imposed economic sanctions on Japan because of their invasion and occupation of Manchuria, and their invasion and occupation of most of Western China.  We wanted them to withdraw from China, and imposed increasingly stringent sanctions that were hurting the Japanese economy, which not only prevented them from supporting their military activities but also hurt civilian production and consumption.\n\nThe Japanese decided that the best way to get the resources they needed (primarily tin, rubber, oil and other natural resources)  was to invaded the resource rich Dutch East Indies.  They also felt they needed to invade US possessions in the Phillipines and the Central Pacific in order to provide an outlying perimeter to protect their conquests.  The Japanese were well aware that such actions would cause the US, Enland, and the Dutch to declare war on them.  Since the English and Dutch were heavily involved in the war in Europe against Germany and Italy, the only real threat the Japanese faced was the US, primarily the US Pacific Fleet which was based at Pearl Harbor.  \n\nTherefor the Japanese devised a plan whereby they would launch a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor, crippling the US Pacific Fleet to the point where it couldn't interfere with their plans for quite some time.  By the time it could, the Japanese would have built up their outlying perimeter making it extremely difficult for any US fleet to interfere.  They also hoped that the attack would so horrify the US civilian population that the US government would sign a peace treaty and accept the status qou.  Admiral Yamamoto and other high level militarly leaders warned that if the US decided to go to war, it was a war that Japan could never win because of the industrial and economic might of the US.\n\nSo, the attack was in response to US sanctions, sanctions which crippled the ability of the Japanese to conduct their war in China.  Since they were unwilling to give up their conquests there, and any further invasion would bring about war against the US, they decided on launching a surprise attack.\n\nHerbmueller99 gave a very short, essentially correct answer. Bobmarley and karatekaty are pretty much dead wrong, and everybody else besides nywrek are almost dead wrong. Nywrek is generally correct, although it was no secret that Germany, Japan, and Italy had signed the Tripartite Pact, and the entire USN wasn't based at Pearl Harbor, just a majority of the Pacific Fleet.\n\nHigh school and college history teachers must be doing a lousy job nowadays, or people simply don't read anymore.
1046067
This is a complicated issue, and there isn’t a black and white answer. But I can offer a few factors for you to consider. Prior to the Japanese’s attack on Pearl Harbor, the U.S. had refused to fight in WWII. We were only drawn in when Japan, unprovoked, destroyed most of our Navy in a sneak attack. Before WWII was over (a war that America had wanted to stay out of) more than half a million American troops lay dead. So how did the war end?The Japanese finally surrendered when they witnessed the destructive capacity of the nuclear weapon. A few hundred thousand Japanese were killed when our atomic bombs were dropped, but many other lives were saved. It’s hard to say how many, but consider that before we ever dropped “The Bomb”, more than 50 million people had been killed in WWII already. Even though many Japanese died, there is a good chance that more lives were saved overall by ending the war immediately.\n\nWith that said, I think that once the U.S. witnessed the destructive capacity of nuclear weapons, we had a dramatic “change of heart”. Reasonable people understand that all wars have some collateral damage, but nuclear weapons are so indiscriminate that almost all of the destruction is collateral damage. A nuclear bomb cannot distinguish between enemy combatants and innocent civilians. It destroys everything. Recognizing this, the U.S. has spent trillions of dollars developing precision guided weapons. Rather than “nuking” an entire city, we can fire GPS guided missiles that only destroy military targets. These advanced weapons systems are more costly to make, but by using them instead, we can preserve the lives of innocent people. So while the U.S. did use nuclear weapons, it is unlikely that we ever will again. Consider that the U.S. has been involved in many wars since then and has not used, or even threatened to use nuclear weapons.\n\nThe United States along with the other nuclear powers, and most of the countries in the world, have decided that nuclear weapons development should be discouraged. Most countries have agreed not to develop these weapons, and the countries that have them have been slowly reducing their stockpiles. I’d like to see us reduce our stockpiles even more quickly, but if we are down to about 2000 than we’ve made significant progress. We used to have more than 30,000.\n\nWouldn’t you agree that it’s bad for anybody else to get these things, regardless of who already has them? The more nuclear weapons there are in the world, the worse off everyone is. Now with that said, there are certain countries that are of particular concern to the world, and to the United States in particular. The most dangerous countries – the ones where we are justified in “getting our panties in a bunch”, are the ones who are most likely to use them against us or our allies. Iran, for example, is pretty anti-American. Most Iranians, including the Iranian President, consider the U.S. to be “The Great Satan”. They have many reasons, mostly religious, for hating us so passionately, but one of the greatest is that we are “friends” with Israel. \n\nThe Iranian President has called for the destruction of the State of Israel on many occasions, and he views our alliance with them as an impediment to the fulfillment of his goals. Is it hard to imagine that someone who has called for Israel to be “wiped off the map” would be willing to use an atomic weapon? It’s true that they don’t currently have the technology to produce weapons grade uranium, but the technologies aren’t nearly as far apart as you might imagine.\n\nAs I mentioned above, this really is a complicated issue with no clear cut answers. What if they really only want to use nuclear power for energy? We can’t know for sure, but we do know that the Iranian President has said some pretty disturbing things about his own intentions, and the longer that they continue to enrich uranium, the closer they will get to having weapon
139845
Great Briton is a proud, strong and sovereign nation that would prefer not to align itself too closely with the US.  This seems to bring about critisism from the left as well as its European neighbors.  We argue with Great Briton as much as anyone and that is healthy, because it shows the world that we are two different countries with two different agendas. The English know that we are here anytime they really need us.  That was true in 1939 when Nazi Germany was bombing London on a regular basis, and it is true today provided, when they need help, they ask for it.  They have been beside is in nearly every campaign since WWII and I'm quite sure they will continue to be amongst our strongest allies, along with Australia, Israel, Japan, Canada and Tawain.
789665
no, cos the two wars they fought with the oppostion haveing air and sea power proved america can not fight a country with those capabilities, the second world war the soviets won as even the german admitted after, the pacific war ,america resorted to use two atom bombs to make the japs surrender, there is a saying, "never fight an enemy who could hit you back twice as hard"