Pearl Harbor Revisionist Analysis

The Bombing of Pearl Harbor on December 7th 1941 sparked a development of skepticism and conspiracy theories among traditionalist and revisionist historians on whether the attack was justified or not. Traditionalists and historical texts claim the attack was motivated by the imperialistic aspirations of the Japanese in the Pacific region. While the theories of past and current revisionists is that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was not a surprise and that it could have been prevented, if it were not for Roosevelt who used deceitful tactics to increase U.S. involvement gradually and to stir up pro-war sentiments in the American public. In order to assess the contestability and interpretations of Pearl Harbor, these various perspectives

Despite Franklin D. Roosevelt’s professed neutrality, however, he was apparently already considering the possibility of conflict with Japan. The Office of Naval Intelligence whose duty it was to collect and analyze pertinent information for the Navy, was then assembling material about potential Japanese and communist espionage agents. Franklin D. Roosevelt voiced out his thoughts in an anti-war speeches during his stay in Chautauqua, New York, only four days after signing the August 10 memorandum about the possible incarceration of U.S. Japanese residents which states: “I wish I could keep war from all Nations; but that is beyond my power... I can at least make certain that no act of the United States helps to produce or to promote war.” It was agreed that if the Japanese got into the Isthmus of Kra, the British would fight. The consensus of the War Cabinet was that this should not be allowed to happen, and the members discussed ways to prevent it. They did not believe the United States should strike at the Japanese force without warning. But they didn’t think the United States should sit still either and allow the Japanese to proceed. They decided