12-7-41 that is.
The term “Post 9-11” is getting just as much Airplay now days as “9-11” did in the first couple of months after the tragic event(s). I’m just curious as to if the Rhetoric heard now days can compare to Post 12-7.
Statements such as “The next Pearl Harbor” have been given to 9-11, and facts and stats usually compare the two to each other. Are the two events that similar, or are they apples and oranges?
I’m not trying to downplay one or the other, I’m just looking for context.
meeko
I remember the Sept 12, 2001 Boston Globe headline was “Second Day of Infamy” so it seems that people were making the comparison almost immediately.
The bombing of Pearl Harbor was an act of war by one country on another. We knew who the enemy was and what to do about it. We geared up for war and counterattacked. The attack on the WTC/Pentagon/other targets was done by religious zealots who left us no one to strike back at and defeat. It took place in a different day and age where the enemy is within our borders hiding behind our own constitution and we aren’t doing a damn thing to prevent it from happening again.
Yes. Apples and Oranges.
I could be wrong, but from what I understand, much during WWII was justified by “After all, there IS a war on!” “Finish what’s on your plate – there’s a war on!” “No vacation this year – there’s a war on!” “That’s all you’re getting for Christmas – there’s a war on!”
It was justified, of course, because there were shortages and deprivation, and a lot had to change because there was a war. But patriotism did swell in the heart of the American bear (and the British lion and unicorn, I suppose) not as a direct result of Pearl Harbor, but under the ongoing aura of war.
I think we HAVE been living in a post-12/7 world, for just over 65 years now. That was one of those days that marked a significant change in what would have happened otherwise. Suppose we had never entered the war; however it turned out would then not have entailed a superpower America.
The OP referred to a “post 12/7” world. In terms of New Zealand, small country that we are at the edge of the Pacific, I’d say that “12/7” (we’d have used “7/12” of course) wouldn’t have had the same impacts on personal freedoms and rights as 9/11 has had since. We were at war, had been since September 1939, conscientious objectors were already being arrested and imprisoned, and anti-government talk was a no-no. What Pearl Harbor did was frighten us into the knowledge that we could be invaded, that the war was no longer in another hemisphere, far away. Air raid shelters were installed. Anti-invasion traps and guns set up all over. As our troops couldn’t return from Europe and North Africa to defend us, we welcomed American troops stationed here for the time.
Post WWII, still part of the post 12/7 era, we formed an alliance with the US and Australia called ANZUS which only fell apart over the nuclear ship disagreement. Then, the Cold War loomed large, and any direct effects from Pearl Harbor and the aftermath were lost in that larger and longer-lasting international concern.
I’d say that the two date-events are apples and oranges, yes. Aside from the fact that they are historical landmark events, both with immediate developments associated with them and as a consequence, the same could be said for a lot of other earlier events, I’d say. “We’re doing this because of Pearl Harbor!” probably ran out of steam around 1948. Watch to see if the “Remember, this is because of 9/11!” fades away after about 2008 or so. That’ll be the biggest difference between them.
I wonder if, at the time, they named Pearl Harbor “the next <something or other>”, and if so, what?
Pearl Harbor was merely the start of World War II for the US. The actual end of the event was on VJ Day and the term for what you are asking is “postwar world.”
“The next Maine!”
12-7 did mark the end of isolationism. Before we didn’t bother to get involved in foreign wars
unless under extreme pressure to do so. After we became the World’s Policeman, for good or ill.
But Pearl Harbor woke the Sleeping Giant. That was a big turning point.
Not that we let that stand on our way to bombing the hell out of some country.
10-4-57 doesn’t get a lot of respect now, but the first Sputnik launch was a big shock back when it happened.
Sure, stripping Japanese-Americans of their Constitutional rights and putting them in internment camps might seem a little rough, but 12/7 changed everything. In a post 12/7 world, we have to give our gov’t a little more leeway than a strict view of the Constitution might imply. 12/7 12/7 12/7.
As Ice Wolf mentioned, the important date for anyone in Britain, Australia, or New Zealand should be 3/9/39.
If we’re going to get really pedantic about it, we could get down to a “post- 28/7/14” world…
Not really. The eventual entry of the US into the war changed its course. And even if the Allies had still won, the US might not have become a superpower.
So?
The fact is, the world was changed forever by the mass slaughter on the Western Front- moreso than by 7/12/41 or 11/9/01, IMHO.
Oh, so it WAS the US Government who broke WTC? Or it was them who bombed half the fleet in Hawaii, using zeros? Who provided the zeros, the Russian mafiya?
12-7 we (most Americans) knew about the war and understood how a war works including the chance of a sneak attack.
9-11 most of us didn’t realize that OBL’s group did declare war on us (decades ago), failed to recognize their ‘semi-nation’, and their tactics.
American bear?
All our symbolism is based on eagles, so far as I know.