Really, as a history major and an historian in training, this pisses me off.
In yet another thread on US-Japan WWII hostilities, someone (a Canadian who is always around to bash the US no matter what) said that the US provoked hostilities with Japan by cutting off the oil trade with them. At the time the US was the world's leading oil exporter (those were the days) so that was a crippling blow to oil scarce Japan.
In response to that bullshit, I posted this:
The reason we cut off Japan's oil supply was because Japan refused to withdraw from China, after the US, the League of Nations and practically everyone else in the international community demanded that they withdraw.
We put an embargo on Japan in 1941, this was after:
The illegal Japanese seizure of Manchuria in 1931
Japan's second invasion of China in 1935, and the subsequent LofN demand that they withdraw
The Rape of Nanking in 1936
The fall of Shanghai to the Japanese
This is why the US embargoed Japan. It wasn't like we did it just to spite 'em. Believe it or not, the US was standing up for the Chinese at the loss of a major marked for US goods and, as we learned, Japanese military retaliation.
End post
Now, I took a Japanese history course last year and I know whereof I speak. I did a 14 page paper on the seizure of Manchuria and a 1 hour class presentation on Japanese war crimes in China and and against Allied POWs.
Here's the thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=2003064&mesg_id=2003064