Quote:
|
Japan has signed mutual defence treaty with Germany and Italy in 1940 so technically was on opposite said of equation l before attack on Pearl Harbor.
|
Errrr...mr pinnacle of academic thinking
1. mutual defence treaty...terms and conditions apply, it ain't in play unless those terms and conditions are met and the parties agree that they are in play.
Its like saying Britain was at war with France when Russia and Japan were argueing over Manchuria and Korea in 1904
2. explain how how any of the countries at war with Germany or Italy before Pearl Harbour were at war with Japan?
Oh sorry you don't do thinking do you,
Quote:
|
These two paragraphs show a common problem encountered when discussing history. On one hand you are right and I agree: as soon as you say that something is "accepted", someone will give you a truckful of sources and arguments for why you are wrong, dumb and smell bad.
|
Quote:
|
This paradigm becomes accepted because at the moment it's the best we have. Unless someone challenges it convincingly enough and the science moves forward likes sciences do.
|
Thats the point, there isn't really an "accepted" version and it is never stable as it is always evolving and there is always new information coming to light.
Take for an example the AVG, I think it was during Clintons time that they finally got there full service period recognised and got all their dues that were owed.
Does that recognition that they were at all times serving US miitary personel working for the US government mean that the US was really at war with the Empire of Japan in China before Pearl?