Talk:Attack on Pearl Harbor

Results section

It should be mentioned that the US declared war on Germany and Italy. (Fghf12 (talk) 18:44, 16 December 2015 (UTC))

Except that Germany and Italy declared war on the U.S. first. Though the attack on Pearl Harbor certainly had somethign to do with it. --Yaush (talk) 22:15, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Agreed. Saying the U.S. declared is a trifle misleading, if technically true. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 23:00, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

We could have just ignored the German and Italian declarations, just as we could have ignored the Zimmermann Telegram in 1917. (Fghf12 (talk) 11:43, 17 December 2015 (UTC))

Really? What country ignores a declaration of war? Ever? The Zimmermann Telegram wasn't a declaration of war. If you don't know the difference... TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 18:55, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

We could have said we had no interest in helping Britain and France maintain their empires and ignored the German and Italian declarations. Hitler and Mussolini declared war because we were not neutral - in fact we had been helping the UK since the very beginning. (Fghf12 (talk) 15:36, 18 December 2015 (UTC))

And I repeat, what country ignores a declaration of war? Ever? It would have been political suicide, even had FDR not being doing his damnedest to give all the aid to Britain he could short of war. Why would Congress ignore it? You haven't explained how, or why, it's remotely rational for the U.S. to treat countries who consider themselves at war with her to ignore that. AFAICT, it isn't. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 19:13, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

People needed to ask why Germany and Italy had declared war. (LoweRobinson (talk) 11:17, 8 January 2016 (UTC))

Germany declared war either because Hitler was a master of strategic vision, having declared war on the Soviet Union June 1941 and saying "We can’t lose the war at all. We now have an ally which has never been conquered in 3,000 years"; or because with Italy, Germany declared war because the three were signatories to the Tripartite Pact user:JMOprof ©¿©¬ 14:29, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Stalin was preparing to attack German forces in Eastern Europe by the beginning of 1943. Hitler had to launch Barbarossa as a pre-emptive strike before the USSR had rearmed sufficiently, otherwise it would have been too late. Hitler and Mussolini had to declare war on the United States because the US was keeping Britain in the war. Germany and Italy should have declared war on the US in March 1941 over Lend Lease. In any case war was inevitable - all limits on aid to Britain had already been removed when Churchill declared war on Japan, and it would have only been a short while until German U-Boats began sinking American ships carrying supplies to the UK - thus giving Roosevelt a casus belli to declare war on Germany. (LoweRobinson (talk) 15:30, 8 January 2016 (UTC))

Actually, Hitler and Stalin had an extant non-aggression pact called the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, a side effect of which was Stalin's army purge. Stalin had no such plans, and killed his generals, but this being Wikipedia, you are free to edit Operation Barbarosa to reflect your views. There was nothing in the Tripartite Pact that required Italy and Germany to declare war on the US. Hitler, in June 41, attacking the USSR, and in Dec 41 declaring war on the US, doomed Germany. You can spark debate by asking which was the bigger blunder. Of note, Germany sank the Reuben James in Oct 41 with out any such nicety as a declaration of war. user:JMOprof ©¿©¬ 16:14, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

The Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact was only a temporary measure designed to give both sides time to prepare for war. Documents released at the end of the Cold War show Stalin was planning for war against Germany. The United States was not neutral which is why Hitler and Mussolini correctly declared war. Germany never had any chance of winning World War II from the very beginning. Invading the Soviet Union and declaring war on the US were both pre-emptive strikes. Anyway the US would have declared war as soon as the German U-Boats began sinking hundreds of American ships. (LoweRobinson (talk) 16:27, 8 January 2016 (UTC))

Russia and Germany were always planning for war. A common view was that splitting Poland made the capitals 200 miles closer together. All Hitler had to do was be happy with half of Poland, half of France, and half of Austria. If he'd of stopped there, he'd have won. user:JMOprof ©¿©¬ 17:38, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

No he wouldn't because the British RAF began bombing Germany on 3rd September 1939 and the Royal Navy had imposed an economic blockade. And Stalin was going to invade German-controlled western Poland and the rest of eastern Europe in 1943. (LoweRobinson (talk) 17:44, 8 January 2016 (UTC))

Stalin was going to attack Germany by 1944. (79.67.106.249 (talk) 18:40, 21 January 2016 (UTC))

That would need a citation. user:JMOprof ©¿©¬ 18:49, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

That Stalin was preparing to attack German forces at some point is broadly accepted by all historians. Most however dismiss the theory that he was going to attack Germany in the summer of 1941 as Stalin would not have rearmed enough by that time. (79.67.106.249 (talk) 19:30, 21 January 2016 (UTC))

Shock

Should the introduction mention the attack only came as a shock to the American public because people had not been told the truth about the likelihood of war with Japan? War was clearly imminent following the oil embargo. (Fghf12 (talk) 12:12, 17 December 2015 (UTC))

"War was clearly imminent following the oil embargo." Not at the time, or the U.S. would never have imposed it. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 18:57, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

Quite the assumption there, sir.128.193.252.169 (talk) 06:23, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

It was quite obvious what the oil embargo was going to lead to. (Fghf12 (talk) 15:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC))

"It was quite obvious what the oil embargo was going to lead to." Not at the time, or the U.S. would never have imposed it. It's obvious you don't know the goal was to deter Japan, not provoke a war. It's also obvious you think I'm as ignorant of it as you. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 19:15, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

Many historians have argued the aim of the oil embargo was to provoke Japan into attacking. (LoweRobinson (talk) 11:15, 8 January 2016 (UTC))

"Many historians have argued the aim of the oil embargo was to provoke Japan into attacking." Name one who doesn't also think FDR arranged the attack on Pearl Harbor. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 22:14, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

It wasn't a surprise attack

Japan had already declared war on the United States. There was a delay in translating the declaration. (LoweRobinson (talk) 11:14, 8 January 2016 (UTC))

Garbage. The 14-Point Message wasn't a declaration of war, despite it frequently being described as such, it was a declaration of an end to negotiations. Moreover, it wasn't delivered until about an hour after the attack began. Furthermore, the actual declaration of war wasn't delivered until the next day. TREKphiler ^{any time you're ready, Uhura} 22:16, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

LoweRobinson was a sock of HarveyCarter. Now blocked. Scolaire (talk) 10:33, 9 January 2016 (UTC)