Who was to blame for the attak on Pearl Harbour?
408418
The Japanese military.  They were provoked, though, by Roosevelt's policies, mostly his embargo of the materials Japan needed to continue it's war in China.
482259
The US had put an oil embargo on Japan for invading China. Without oil, Japan could not keep its war machine in operation - planes, ships and tanks use a lot of oil. \n\nI don't think you could really say attacking Pearl Harbor solved that problem, and of course it was not going to win the war, but it was the only way the Japanese military felt they could prolong the inevitable defeat. (They never believed that could actually beat the US in the end. But by attacking Pearl Harbor they thought they could gain 6 more months to advance into Southeast Asia).
1126752
Pearl Harbor was a surprise attack by a belligerent nation which, at the time the attack took place, believed that its diplomats had already issued a declaration of war. Delay in deciphering, then typing the text of the communique resulted in the attack taking place before the declaration was actually delivered.\n\nThis is to be distinguished from a "terrorist" attack which typically is not by or on behalf of a nation, but rather a group of individuals.
329649
Japan was under American Occupation in 1951, you presumably mean the attack upon Pearl Harbour in 1941. To continue it's expanioist agenda, the Japaneses signed the Anti-Comitern Pact, joining with Germany and Italy to form the Axis, attacking the Chinese mainland in 1937, Pearl Harbour in 1941 and other Allied bases, such as those of the British, in South East Asia.
1160864
lucky2bealive, I don't want to disagree with you but I don't believe you are going to find anywhere in the historical records that Bin Laden claimed responsibility for the 9/11 bombings. What he has done is praise the matyrs of that event. However, there would be more clarity and the issue can be put to bed finally if the government gave us the names of all the people that died in the various events. Where are the planes that crashed? Do you really believe that a building like the Pentagon would have cameras that are intermittent and take pictures every 7/8 seconds. Come.. Come. We are talking about the most technologically advanced country in the world. Something smells fishy and the stench cannot be dispersed until the Government come clean. Have you ever seen reports of the examination of  the so called crash sites?
989532
NO.  President Bush is just a talking head puppet if you will for forces that control all governments.  I don't think the terrorist identified were responsible or had the resources to pull off an attack like that.  Our government is definitely covering up what happened that day.  There is overwhelming evidence to support that it was an inside job.  I don't think Bush is directly responsible but probably knows what happened.  Any agency or government institution that aids in the cover up or conceals evidence indirectly implies guilt.  They needed a new Pearl Harbor to gain support for there agenda.  Who knows who these behind the scenes people are and exactly what there up to
200761
Both.\n\nThe Japanese knew that it was only a matter of time before the United States would enter the war, so they took a gamble to strike pre-emptively to keep America out of the war.\n\nTheir intent was not to scare America into submission, but to cripple the Pacific fleet enough so that it would take them over a year to rebuild. By that time, the Japanese figure that they would have entrenched themselves in the conquered territories to make it impossible for America to get them out.\n\nThey made a few mistakes:\n1) They underestimated America's industrial power. Under normal non-war conditions, it would have taken over a year to repair the fleet, but when all of America converted to war production, it took only a small fraction of that time.\n\n2) They crippled the battleship fleet, but the Navy aircraft carriers were not at Pearl Harbor at the time. Military wisdom at the time made the battleships the main fighting force of the fleet, but at that time, the Navy was already changing tactics to make aircraft carriers the main fighting force. The attack at Pearl Harbor only sped up that process. America retaliated to Pearl Harbor using their carriers.
222673
Does the word accident come to mind? Wrong target? ETC.If just to kill people were the reason,the bomb would've been a nuke.
997435
The explosion of the US battleship  "The Maine."  It was blamed on the Spanish, but it was probably an accident.
907027
I think it was probably Eisenhower taking blame for the U2 incident. Can't remember anything since then.
434427
interesting distortions and outright lies about history here...\nPearl harbour attack came first. The japanese began to loose from about 1 year into the war. The americans won, (no, the americans are not looosing when we reduce the size of an attacking force from occuping many nations back to its original size) despite american victories, the japanese refused to surrender prefering death to surrender, so the usa used nukes on two cities, and saving many american and japanese lives in the process\nLikewise 9/11 and thousands of other terrorist incidents occured before afghanistan or iraq. There are thousands of muslim terrorist bombings etc in lands that have nothing to do with the usa or even the west thus nothing to do with actions in iraq or afghanistan.. (india, thialand, sudan just for example)\nJapan was a facist, fanatical society (sounds like some muslim countries) and was given democracy... iraq and afghanistan were given democracy as well, and they will be better off for it..
322948
In theory I agree but in fact the Marines fight where the Navy is ordered to deploy. The bulk of our Navy was based in the Pacific. After Pearl Harbor the Navy and Marine commanders knew and decided that Japan would have to maintain air superiority and keep their fleets supplied. In addition the island hopping campaign to the Japan home islands. The bulk of  marine divisions ship stationed, the amphibious attacks could not occurred and the war might been lost.
248594
1) the US wanted to get the Japanese back for the bombing of Pearl Harbor\n\n2) the US wanted to intimidate the Soviet Union \n(because there were tensions between the US and the former Soviet Union and the US wanted to show the Soviet Union that it had a new, deadly weapon which the Soviet Union didn't have)\n\n3) Truman justified the dropping of the bomb by stating Japan would not surrender without an invasion that'd cause enormous loss of both American and Japanese lives. At least, with Hiroshima and Nagasaki...no American lives were lost (*rolls eyes*)\n\n\nThe bombing of Hiroshima came first (August 6, 1945), the US dropped the bomb in hopes Japan surrenders.\nSince Japan didn't surrender, 3 days later (August 9, 1945) the US dropped another atomic bomb on Nagasaki. \nJapan got the point, surrendered, and World War 2 was over.
32639
Just before 8 am on December 7, 1941.\n\nAccording to the BBC, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor left 2,390 people dead and 1,178 wounded.\n\nThe Naval Historical Center claims that American deaths were over 2400.
395978
Click and Paste is great, but it just shows you don't understand what you are answering.\n\nThe primary reason for Japan attacking the US fleet at Pearl Harbor is because Deterrence as a long-term source for peace simply does NOT work. By imposing trade sanctions against Japan and the concentrating both the Atlantic and Pacific fleets at Pearl Harbor, the US wanted to send the message "if you do anything, we will destroy you." The message the Japanese received was "if we DON'T do anything the Americans will destroy us!"\n\nJust like Vietnam, the US was drawn into World War II by trying to prop up a dying European colonial empire, again it was France. When Germany destroyed France in June of 1940 the new government was called Vichy France because the city of Vichy was the only unoccupied city that could handle the number of bureaucrats in the French government. When General De Gaulle ran away leaving his fellow countrymen to face slavery and humiliation, he began politically luring some of the French posessions to follow him. In early 1941, the island of New Caledonia had a coup which ousted the Vichy governor and installed a Free French administration. Japan, which had already made an agreement with the Vichy government in Indochina to occupy what is now Laos and North Vietnam to stop supplies from reaching the Chinese army, decided it must act before a similar event took Indochina out of their reach as well. Japan launched an amphibious invasion of all of Indochina. This is the reason for the economic sanctions against Japan.\n\nJapan knew it could not hope to win a long war, simply because of the logistical problems involved. As a small island nation, not only did Japan have to import almost all of its natural resources, but almost half of those resources arrived via cargo ships flying American, British and Dutch flags. Japan's economy was already realing from the huge expense of building a gigantic military and a modern navy (and, like the USA, cheating on the restrictions!). Any sort of long embargo from America would surely send Japan back into Depression, but any sort of political retreat would surely provoke the Japanese military to once again seize power like they did in the early 1930's. By destroying the combined fleet at Pearl Harbor at one blow, along with the British and Dutch posessions in the western Pacific, Japan felt they could be in such a strong position that they could dictate terms to America before she was able to recover. As Admiral Yamamoto had said, for the first six months I can run wild through the Pacific, but after that I can promise nothing.\n\nJapan's problem was that the strike force sent to Pearl Harbor was able to inflict severe damage on the actual fleet but was simply not strong enough to do the sort of damage to Pearl Harbor's logistical capabilities that was necessary (the dry docks, the repair shops, the fuel storage tanks, etc). By leaving Pearl Harbor relatively untouched, America's distance to strike back at Japan was cut more than in half. If the US Navy had to work out of San Francisco rather than Pearl Harbor in 1942, it would have been a drastically different war!\n\nAnd don't EVEN get me started on the ridiculousness of the FDR "conspiracy" to get Pearl Harbor bombed so the USA could enter the war. The vein in my forehead is pulsing again!
357522
Sept. 11...  This was NOT a war, we weren't expecting it and thousands of innocent poeple died.  There was Pearl Harbor before but, that was an attack on a military base so, I don't think that can qualify and there wasn't near as many people dead?  The others that you mentioned were war situations and in war people are expected to die.  I would say the War in Iraq but, that wouldn't qualify either becasue it's a war (for the same reasons above)
1020955
Of course Our people on the USS COLE matter, and yes I believe that the weakness that Clinton portrayed of Our country throughout his whole Presidency caused 911. He let those Muslim extremist kill Americans over and over without any retaliation. He was a disgrace to Our nation in my opinion!