POSTED FURTHER RESPONSE TO A COLUMN BY EDALAT AND SHAHABI IN THE GUARDIAN
Again a poster too timid to use a name.
But I suppose it's just as well since you simply do not know what you are talking about.
I suggest informing yourself a bit before continuing to make an intellectual ass of yourself.
The Japanese offers of surrender are solid facts. The bombing was entirely unnecessary.
To describe the attack on Pearl Harbor as in the least way comparable is beyond the rational.
The Japanese targeted military ships. They killed a few thousand servicemen. It was as purely a military attack as it was possible to carry out at the time.
How would that be compared to destroying entire cities full of civilians? Especially after they had offered to surrender.
But the U.S. didn't want their surrender, it wanted their reduction as a Pacific competitor.
In fact, many American establishment figures welcomed the Japanese attack. It gave the excuse for going after Japan ruthlessly. Japan had been viewed as an unwelcome growing competitor for years.
Indeed, it is also an historical fact that Japan had planned not to attack the United States, but when American economic and other measures became so severe, the plan for the attack was made.
Its sole intention was to eliminate the U.S. fleet and thereby its ability to act over any short time horizon in Asia.
There was no issue of 'world domination' except in the minds of the same propagandists who called the purely military attack as 'a day of infamy.'