3 April 2012
Pearl Harbor and the Pacific
The Axis Powers wanted more land and a better world in their eyes, and what was not handed to the alliance would certainly be taken by force. Adolf Hitler, the Japanese, and all accommodating nations of the Axis Powers were criminal in their measures taken throughout World War II. It was an unjust war in a multitude of ways, and morals seemed to completely dissipate during combat. With the unprovoked attacks on Pearl Harbor, the invasions and capturing of many other countries for the mere purpose of seizing land, and the horrific conditions the prisoners of war experienced in the Pacific, the United States had plenty of justifiable reasons to enter World War II. War is possibly the most controversial phenomenon that takes place today, and it can be traced back to the beginnings of the human race and has always been a central focus in historical studies and teachings. Some people see war as indignant, while others perceive it to be a necessity, or rather an inevitable part of human nature. There is a fine line between the two, and while war should be avoided at all costs one has little to no control over the mentality or beliefs of others. In her paper about the nature of warfare, Mead states that war is just a bad invention by humans, and individuals should strive to create a better way of solving disputes by realizing its defects, spreading anti-war propaganda, and by pointing out its “terrible cost in human suffering and social waste” (4). This argument would be greatly beneficial to society, but in dealing with World War II this logic cannot be applied. No amount of reasoning or anti-war propaganda would have even fazed the Nazis or the Japanese, for the peoples who resided in these nations did not have the privilege of free speech. Speaking out against the country, or any attempts to hamper the war effort would have possibly lead to an imminent death. That being said, Orwell argues...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document