they were retaliating for the US putting Japanese-Americans civilians in prison/concentration camps.
2007-10-04 07:43:29
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
There is not much difference on the part of the president. The difference was on the part of the supreme court who actually looked properly at the unconstitutional nature. Of course it was too late then, but this time round the Supreme Court showed unconstitutional tendencies towards a president who simply could not understand the constitution. Why have the terrorists been killing americans soldiers? Let's get this straight. Bush is part of the USA that believes war makes people feel good about themselves, that having a common enemy keeps people in their place with fear. The Cold War was such an example, perfect for both sides. Clinton did not feel the need for this, and so there was no common enemy. Bush decided there needed to be one. They also needed an excuse for invading Iraq. An Iraq that had nothing to do with Al Qaeda, nothing to do with 9/11, was not a treat to Israel, did not have weapons of mass distruction. I mean, they already had the Al Qaeda thing, but they were doing so damn well in Afganistan, and the Al Qaeda threat would have diminished, so they invaded Iraq, used 1/6 the recommended troop levels to pacify the country, this recommendation came from the guys who knew, the US military, they put in place a guy to run it who was either told to be incompetent, or was. They sacked the Iraqi police and army, leaving a vacuum which caused more problems. In the process Bush got 4,000 US soldiers killed, he got thousands on thousands of Iraqi's kiilled, he managed to make the share price of some companies go way up, i think haliburton was twice or three times higher, luckily now they are lower than in 2000. All of this is not a coincidence. On top of the facts that have come out about 9/11, that there seems to have been quite a bit of help by the american government in the plot. Also that they managed to get things through like the patriot act which would never have passed. Like they messed up in afganistan, how? It was won almost totally. Basically your last president was a coward, who used the lives of americans and others in order to promote his own agenda. Obama seems to be a guy who actually gives a damn about the people he was elected to represent. You want to go against the principles of your constitution with waterboarding do you? WELL GO TO CHINA, they seem to love that sort of thing, and it is LEGAL there. Some people are a disgrace to humanity, luckily many of the americans do not have any power to do anything.
2016-05-20 06:08:23
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The civilians were considered to be enemies, as Japans ally Germany was at war with Holland, UK & the Commonwealth, Japan was at war with America, and the deep distrust of Europeons - Caucasuins and the fear of Spies and that possible information of a military nature could be provided to Japans enemies meant they were all kept under guard in camps.
In the middle of a war prisoner negotiations would have been imparacticle, Japan did not even recognise the Geneva Convention with regards treatment of enemy non-combatants and enemy POW's.
2007-10-03 18:52:21
·
answer #3
·
answered by conranger1 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
the japanese considered them enemies of the empire and did not distinguish the difference between civilians and soldiers when it came to how they were treated.
2007-10-03 17:41:10
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
They locked up the obvious/potential trouble makers.
Did you miss the part about the interment camps here? We did the same just treated them better. It was not just Japanese either.
2007-10-03 17:32:48
·
answer #5
·
answered by Stand-up philosopher. It's good to be the King 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Because they were considered enemy aliens the same as the Japanese in the USA
2007-10-03 19:06:05
·
answer #6
·
answered by brainstorm 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
For the same reasons the U.S. did the same thing to Japanese civilians in the U.S....
2007-10-03 17:27:20
·
answer #7
·
answered by Marco R 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
it was on the PBS series. you must have missed one episoed
2007-10-03 17:48:13
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
enemeys of the empire
2007-10-03 17:28:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by goat 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
good question. look it up at link
2007-10-03 17:30:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by Macisbac 2
·
2⤊
0⤋