If premptive attack is no legal did the japanese do anything wrong in premptivly attacking Pearl Harbour?

Question

When japan premptivle attacked Peral Harbour the americans called it at the time an act of utter infamy. Now that premptive attack is no legal according to the Americans did the japanese do any thing wrong if there premptive attack was wrong and an act of infamy why is not the american premptive attack on iraq then an act of utter infamy- what could not the japanese do it but the american can

Answer 1

It's all about perspective.

Japan did a sneak attack on us while we were still engaged in negotiations with them. We considered it a day of infamy, but they probably felt justified...and then we kicked their asses...

What we did with Iraq was different. We tried diplomacy, we gave them chances, we didn't retailiate when they shot at our planes, and then we warned them that if Saddam and his sons didn't leave Iraq within 48 hours, we would force them out. And then we attacked. Saddam and his followers obviously feel like this was a day of infamy, though we feel we were justified.

Answer 2

I'm no expert on the subject, but obviously neither are you. It's my understanding that a preemptive attack takes place when you know the other side is planning to attack you. I think America was a long way from attacking Japan (if ever) so I wouldn't call Pearl Harbor a preemptive attack. That was just an attack. Japan was trying to make sure America wouldn't try to prevent them from wreaking even more havoc in Asia.
As for Iraq, I personally am against what's happening there and think the US should never have gotten involved. But one bad deed does not justify another.

Answer 3

The U.S. exchange into employing rigidity to the jap to get out of Manchuria and Korea, whilst on the comparable time attempting to ascertain the protection of the Phillipines and each and all the U.S. posessions in the Pacific, i.e. Hawaii(no longer yet a state), Guam, the Solomon islands, American Samoa, the Alutians, etc. Japan's objective exchange into to create a pacific empire. They knew that the yank militia (at that element) exchange into very small and a variety of their vessels have been many years previous. Japan thought that in the event that they crippled the U.S. Pacific fleet based at Pearl Harbor, the individuals could have not any selection yet to acceed to jap calls for and comply with favorable (for Japan) negotiation words in parceling out U.S. pacific posessions. there have been 3 issues of this attitude despite if; a million. that they had was hoping to catrch the yank plane vendors (the lower back bone of the pacific fleet) at shallow moorings in Pearl Harbor and ruin them, however the vendors weren't there on the time of the attack. 2. even although the yank militia exchange into small, the jap completely underestimated American commercial potential. each deliver destroyed at Pearl Harbor exchange into repaired or replaced interior six months of the attack. 3. They mistook the yank inhabitants's want for peace to indicate that u . s . a . of america could be unwilling or no longer able to combat. Win or lose, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the attitude of the yank public exchange into such that war grew to alter into inevitable and further negotiation impossible.

Answer 4

You make some good points however the world is more complex now than it used to be. We attacked to free the Iraqi people from 25 years of bondage by the Saddam regime and to reduce terrorism in the world. So it wasn't really a preemptive attack. Others attacked us and held the Iraqis hostage for years. Our actions were a "response" to that.

Answer 5

...it seems to me that Japan was being an aggressor in their region.. and Hitler the aggressor in Europe, and it's recorded he wanted to extend his so called rule to all the world - the korean and vietnam wars were to stem communist takeovers.. Europe had no will to stop the atrocities of hitler (or stalin, mao, etc) - If big bad evil of the world u.s. would have taken the same "view" the world would be a far different place today.. And indeed still will be tomorrow, if the "america is the world's evil" propaganda keeps growing and we are successful at overthrowing our own country.

Answer 6

The pre-emptive strike by Japan some 60 years ago was unwarranted. And we got our revenge.

The one in Iraq is different; like some previous posters said, we gave Sodomy Insane several chances to give up and leave but he refused so we nailed his butt.

Answer 7

If you ask a government official they'd say we thought he had WMDs and chemical weapons (He only had the latter), which was apparently enough motive to go to war. It still seems like a bullshit reason to invade a country.

Answer 8

which is why a lot of foreigners agree with you and so do I being an American of Mexican heritage.

Answer 9

Wrong is wrong. The Japanese were wrong, and we are wrong.