30
Jan
07

Was Pearl Harbor really that bad?

Fewer than 3,000 Americans were killed by the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941. The target was military, not civilian — seriously, warships are just asking for it aren’t they? And this was 1941 — Hawaii wasn’t even a U.S. state! It was a justified strike against American imperialism.

So, the Japanese attack us, and then we go to war against them and the Germans and Italians. We invade North Africa? Talk about the wrong continent!

Did we overreact? Fewer than 3,000 dead at Pearl Harbor and then we go to war and add 297,000 to that number? What were we thinking?

If all of the above made sense to you, then this tripe probably does too.

Was 9/11 really that bad?
The attacks were a horrible act of mass murder, but history says we’re overreacting.

The author is history professor David A. Bell of Johns Hopkins University. We here at Hoystory would like to congratulate Professor Bell on making the value of Johns Hopkins history degree transparent; it isn’t even worth the paper it’s printed on.


4 Responses to “Was Pearl Harbor really that bad?”


  1. 1 Historyman Jan 30th, 2007 at 12:16 pm

    Did you read the entire article? Your blog seems to be an “over reaction”!

  2. 2 Brian Feb 2nd, 2007 at 7:56 pm

    And, come to think of it, was Vietnam all that bad? We aonly lost 58,000 soldiers. And, also, come to think of it, Iraq is another Vietnam. AT the rate we are losing soldiers, it’ll only be another few decades until we equal Vietnam.

  1. 1 Hoystory » Blog Archive » The first draft Pingback on Jan 31st, 2007 at 12:33 pm
  2. 2 Politics: 2008 HQ » Blog Archive » Following Outcry, LA Times Changes 9/11 Headline On The Sly Pingback on Feb 1st, 2007 at 5:11 pm

Leave a Reply

Comments will be sent to the moderation queue.





Follow Hoystory on Twitter


February 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jan    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

Themes


  • Support the Cause




  • Hoystory's advertisers


Your Ad Here








Close
E-mail It