Does anyone think it was fair for the US government to put the Japanese-Americans in interment camps?And Why?

Question

For a essay!

Answer 1

Absolutely not. It was a clear violation of the 14th amendment, which guarantees equal treatment under the law, and the 6th amendment which guarantees due process (a fair trial before putting anyone in prison). That's the consensus of the the legal community today. It isn't a matter of being PC.

As "knowbody" correctly points out, it's one thing to say you can understand why someone would do something so obviously wrong (in hindsight), but a very different thing to say it was justified for those same reasons.

To the respondent who said the internment was justifiable because no acts of espionage happened: your reasoning is faulty. That's like shooting a well-behaved dog, then claiming that the absence of dog attacks in the neighborhood was because of the shooting.

There was NO evidence of espionage or any other acts of disloyalty from Japanese-Americans in the months between Pearl Harbor and the internment. Therefore, your conclusion is based on racist paranoid fantasy, not even reasonable speculation based on evidence.

Furthermore, German-Americans and Italian-Americans were not incarcerated en masse like Japanese-Americans were. Only the few who were suspected of disloyalty because of their words or actions. I don't think this was justifiable either, since they too deserved fair and impartial trials.

Answer 2

It's easy to look back and say that it's not the right thing to do. Hind sight is 20/20. While you are the midst of it all, in the heat of the war, I believe what the government chose to do at that time can and should be excused. Besides, 50 to 60 years ago, cultural understanding (from any culture to another one) is much lower than today. Certainly, I hope they will not do the same thing now, having learned the lesson. And they certainly didn't jail the Arabs indiscriminately after 9/11.

Just my humble opinion, but hope it helps your essay.

Answer 3

In 1941 Henry L. Stimson selected McCloy to become assistant secretary of war. In 1942
In December, 1941, Stimson put McCloy in charge of dealing with what he called the "West Coast security problem". This had been brought to Stimson's attention by Congressman Leland M. Ford of Los Angeles who had called for "all Japanese, whether citizens or not, be placed in inland concentration camps". McCloy held a meeting with J. Edgar Hoover and Attorney General Francis Biddle on 1st February, 1942 about this issue. Biddle argued that the Justice Department would have nothing to do with any interference with citizens, "whether they are Japanese or not". McCloy replied, "the Constitution is just a scrap of paper to me."

McCloy also got support from Earl Warren, the Attorney General of the State of California. He argued that all Japanese-Americans should be interned. However, Henry L. Stimson, like Francis Biddle, had his doubts about the wisdom of taking this action. However, on 19th February, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt authorized the construction of relocation camps for Japanese Americans being moved from their homes.

Over the next few months ten permanent camps were constructed to house more than 110,000 Japanese Americans that had been removed from security areas. These people were deprived of their homes, their jobs and their constitutional and legal rights. Earl Warren later confessed: "I have since deeply regretted the removal order and my own testimony advocating it, because it was not in keeping with our American concept of freedom and the rights of citizens. Whenever I thought of the innocent little children who were torn from home, school friends and congenial surroundings, I was conscience-stricken."

Answer 4

it is not. i'd propose you to no longer make the assessment of Pearl Harbor with that of 9/11. Many people make that assessment yet Japan became already at conflict by utilising this factor. multiple people do no longer even question why the Pearl Harbor became bombed. they in simple terms assume that it became like 9/11 - a terrorist bombing geared in the direction of civilians and putting concern contained in the rustic's people. Pearl Harbor became a protection rigidity base and Hawaii became no longer even a state yet. multiple the themes between usa and Japan dates as some distance decrease back by way of fact the 1850s. while the atomic bomb became used, people in congress did no longer even recognize that the bombs even existed. they in simple terms found out after it became dropped. although the concentration camps is yet another tale by way of fact they have been people with eastern ethnicity being placed in camps, one among those racism in the direction of Asian ethnic communities have been trouble-free contained in usa contained in the early 1900s. chinese language have been banned from stepping foot in usa at one factor. There are numerous examples the place usa has acted in techniques that are actually not "Constitutional." the eastern-people are in ordinary terms one occasion.

Answer 5

It wasnt fair. The US was assuming Japanese Americans were anti-american just because Japan bombed the US.

Answer 6

My answer is very un-PC.

Yes.

Also the German- and Italian-Americans who were put into similar camps (one of them I visited in Texas).

Fighting a large-scale war with people of potentially divided loyalties running around loose is very unwise, and yet we're doing it again, today, now.

No one knows how many acts of espionage and sabotage were prevented by this action. I say that is true BECAUSE they were prevented.

"The price of liberty is eternal vigilance." --Jefferson (D-VA)

Answer 7

no question about it, and at the same time throw in all the other Asian in there too. it just seem like a logical choice at the time.