It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


The Parallels Of Events Preceding Pearl Harbor And Present Day Affairs

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 02:44 PM
Yesterday was a very important day in geopolitical affairs concerning Obama freezing Iran assets which mimics Roosevelt's move to freeze Japan assets less than 5 months before the attack on Pearl Harbor. I decided to make some comparisons, since the media is banging hard on its war drum with exponentially increasing coverage of this Iran war or attack propaganda. So I'll start with some events before Pearl Harbor and then follow up to present day.

The Era of WWII

July 28, 1939 - the United States terminated the 1911 commercial treaty with Japan..

July 2, 1940 - Roosevelt signed the Export Control Act, prohibiting the export of essential defense materials.

July 1941 - Roosevelt embargoed the export of such grades of oil as still were in commercial flow to Japan. The British and the Dutch followed suit, embargoing exports to Japan from their colonies in southeast Asia.

July 26, 1941 - Roosevelt Froze Japanese assets in the United States.


December 7, 1941 – Japan attacked Pearl Harbor.


Present Day & Iran

July 1, 2010 – President Obama signed the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountabily, and Divestment Act of 2010. Results in the rescission of the authorization for Iranian-origin imports.

November 2011 – President Obama signs Executive Order 13590 which prohibits non-U.S. persons that provide support to Iran's energy sector.

January 2012 – US/EU Oil Embargo On Iran.

February 6, 2012 – Obama freezes Iran assets in the United States.



Sanctions!! Sanctions!! Sanctions!!

I do hold the opinion that the US attacking Iran would essentially be the start of WWIII, whether they call it that or not. But yesterday, the freezing of Iran assets in the US really shocked me. I also question how this war train could be used as Obama's re-election ticket.

Another interesting bit:

Roosevelt, acutely aware of strong isolationist sentiment in the U.S., promised there would be no involvement in foreign wars if he were re-elected. Willkie conducted an energetic campaign and managed to revive Republican strength in areas of the Midwest and Northeast. However, Roosevelt won a comfortable victory by building strong support from labor unions, big-city political machines, ethnic voters, and the traditionally Democratic Solid South


Pearl Harbor happened not too long after Roosevelt won his third term in 1940.

Your thoughts?
Good day...

edit on 7-2-2012 by rstregooski because: beer

edit on 7-2-2012 by rstregooski because: more beer

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 02:58 PM
reply to post by rstregooski
Iran claims that $10 billion that was frozen in 1979 was never released.

We did release most of the 1979 money in 1981 after the hostages were released .

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 03:00 PM
Just a quick comparison on the two timelines. Step one to step 2 took a little longer with Iran but step 2 to step 3 occurred a lot faster. Step 3 to Step 4 is just almost exactly the same amount of time. Step 4 to attack in WWII was approx 4 mos. after assets were frozen.

So, do we have 4 to 6 months before it kicks off?

6 months would be August. Election would be starting to really heat up about then.
edit on 2/7/2012 by TXTriker because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 03:01 PM
Japan WWII is somewhat similar to Iran today, both are governed by leaders who said be god/representing god, and both societies are industrious and suffer from government mindset.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 03:02 PM
reply to post by rstregooski

I couldn't resist....

Yes it's true.

Those that fail to learn history are destined to repeat it.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 03:14 PM
reply to post by rstregooski

S&F for connecting the dots.

It has been my belief that the U.S. administration has been purposefully provoking a military response by Iran for the past several months. That would be the only way the public (sheeple) would accept yet us getting into yet another war. It's an election year and wartime presidents are usually re-elected.

posted on Feb, 7 2012 @ 03:32 PM
I wouldn't put all that much stock in the presidential campaign/desire to be re-elected playing an important role in what happens with Iran. The President --- no matter who that might be --- is a mere puppet for the people who are behind all this. There are vast amounts of money to be made in any war that might happen, many economic crimes and future uncertainty that would be erased. The fact that lots of people will die and lives will be ruined is inconseqeuntial to these people. Look around the world at all the tensions being stoked. It's not just Iran. This is a systematic global agenda.

top topics


log in