Research author was so set on convincing

Research Question:How significant was the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7th, 1941, to the involvement of the United States in WWII?OPCVLsHitler Attacks Pearl Harbor: Why the United States Declared War on Germany (Rank 6), Richard F. Hitler Attacks Pearl Harbor: Why the United States Declared War on Germany. Lynne Rienner, 2003. Questia School, Accessed Oct. 2018.This source is a novel named, Hitler Attacks Pearl Harbor by Richard F. Hill. The author is a historian that has a Ph.D. from Georgetown University which gives great value to this source. It shows that everything in this book came from the perspective of someone whose profession involves forming many historical opinions. Hill’s purpose for writing this book was to persuade his audience to change their perceptions of the Pearl Harbor attack, while informing them at the same time. In choosing to have the purpose of his writing be persuasion instead of just purely informing, it adds much value to the text because it makes the facts and evidence much stronger. Hill makes such a bold statement by saying that the reason the United States entered the war wasn’t because Americans had thought Adolf Hitler was the one who ordered the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor, and causing the US to immediately declare war on Germany, that he needs to back up his claims if he wants his audience to agree. The content not only focuses on this claim he makes, but is filled with evidence. This includes political speeches, newspaper editorials, and date from public polls that all support what he is saying. This adds value since the strong evidence shows that content is all true. Of course this is only a claim, but after reading excerpts from this book, I am now convinced this could all very much be true. The book says that he proved that there was actually no correlation between the Nazis and Japanese attack by using uncovered German documents on May 8,1945, proving that this reason for why the US declared war was all just a myth.Along with the great value that this source provides, it also comes with limitations. Not much with the origin because Hill is a historian and has earned his Ph.D. so he really knows what he is talking about. The problem with the purpose is that the book was more about persuading the readers rather than actually addressing what the question is. Since the author was so set on convincing his readers, he may have exaggerated to convey his message even more. The excerpts that I had read were all about how everyone’s perception of the cause for the U.S.’s involvement in the war is wrong, and while that would work out in a shorter text, this was a novel after all, so I felt it should have addressed more than just the one problem. The content of the book also started to get very repetitive and it seemed as though Hill had run out of arguments and was just prolonging every claim that he made. Also, the content of the book focused more on actually proving that what everyone thinks is true actually isn’t instead of actually explaining reasons why the United States actually entered war, which limits the amount of information provided. The fact that the name of this novel states that the book will explain why the United States declared war should at least mean that there should be sections that explain that.Reflections of Pearl Harbor: An Oral History of December 7, 1941(Rank 2) Richardson, K. D. Reflections of Pearl Harbor: An Oral History of December 7, 1941. Praeger, 2005. Questia School, Accessed Oct. 2018.This source is a book by K.D. Richardson, who put together many different letters and texts that were found and written by actual survivors of the Pearl harbor attack.This book is a collection of the stories of many children, adults, and the military that had witnessed the attack. It even contains letters from the most powerful people in American history such as President Franklin D. Roosevelt. This means this source has great value because it is a primary source and all of the information is the most accurate it can get. The purpose of this book was to inform the readers about how these AMericans saw the bombing happen, and what they personally did and saw. Since the purpose was purely to inform, it adds great value because the book is just about what these people were feeling and what they saw. The book talks about how December 7, 1941 was just any other day until they heard the bombs and saw what this tragedy was for themselves. The content is very valuable because it has people explaining their experiences of events following the attack as well and contains topics such as how the youth of the community was affected, and safracifes that had to be made. This first hand information will ensure that we get a deeper understanding of what happened that day because these people were able to witness what it was like and how society was reacting. Even though primary sources are most valuable to understanding history, they also contain a lot of bias opinions since it is people speaking about their own experiences as opposed to what was happening around the world as a whole in regards to the bombing. K.D. Richardson is American, therefore, he probably added texts in the book that is in support of The United States rather than in support of Japan, so the reader of this book would be under the impression that the Americans were innocent and being attacked by the Japanese. The purpose doesn’t cause much limitation because primary sources provide more accurate information than secondary sources,, but it can be assumed that Richardson was also trying to persuade in a way. There were no Japanese journals included in the reflections and that could mean that this book was also trying to persuade the the attack was only the Japanese’s fault. The actual content of the book shows this bias too, there is a statement from President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s message to the congress that states, “Yesterday, December 7,1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the empire of Japan. The United States was at peace with that nation, and at the solicitation of Japan, was still in conversation with its government and its Emperor looking toward the maintenance of peace in the Pacific.” This statement alone shows that the book is trying to make Japan look like the only “bad guys” in this situation and it was in no means the fault of the Americans even though that wasn’t the case. Pearl Harbor Reexamined: Prologue to the Pacific War(Rank 1), Hilary, and Harry Wray, editors. Pearl Harbor Reexamined: Prologue to the Pacific War. University of Hawaii Press, 1990. Questia School, Accessed Oct. 2018. This source is a book named Pearl Harbor Reexamined:Prologue to the Pacific War by Hilary Conroy and Harry Wray. Hilary Conroy was a history professor who earned his Ph.D. and before he became a professor he was a Japanese interpreter in military intelligence showing that he was very familiar with history pertaining to wars and both Japanese and American history. Harry Wray was an author and historian specializing in Japanese and American education. This adds great value because both authors of the book are historians and are specialized in American and Japanese history. This book was also published in 1983, it was only 42 years after the event, making the text more valuable. The purpose of this book was to inform the audience about Japanese history before the attack and their relationship with the U.S. so that people can understand why the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. When the purpose of a book is to inform, that ensures that there isn’t much bias happening because it is a factual text, rather than a fictional text. Also one of the authors has spent quite some time in Japan, so they are in no means trying to make one country look better than the other, but more so informing. The actual content of the book starts from Japanese history beginning in 1894 from when the Sino-Japanese war was ending up to the day of the actual attack. The book focuses a lot on previous tension that the U.S. and Japan had such as the United States cutting trade with Japan in 1941. This is very valuable because we are now able to understand the reasoning behind the attack much better, and if the bombing was really a main reason for the U.S. to enter the war.The origin doesn’t come with much limitation because the book focuses a great amount on both sides: the Japanese and American, so there isn’t any bias in the text itself even though both authors are American. The purpose also doesn’t come with much of a limitation because the title of the book itself shows that the book was going to be focusing on only the reason behind the atack and provide us with some more background knowledge which is exactly what it informs the audience about. It didn’t feel as though the content was showing any preference toward any one country because because the authors consider both perspective, which can be proven by a line stated in the intro of the book, “but, were Pearl Harbor and the Pacific War in fact unavoidable in the context of the times?” This just shows how open-minded Conroy and Wray were when discussing the facts about the attack and prior to the attack. Those Angry Days: Roosevelt, Lindbergh, and America’s Fight over World War II, 1939-1941(Rank 4), Richard S. “Those Angry Days: Roosevelt, Lindbergh, and America’s Fight over World War II, 1939-1941.” Military Review, vol. 94, no. 1, 2014, pp. 111+. Questia School, Accessed Oct. 2018. This source is a an academic journal article published by the military review. The title of this journal is Those Angry Days:Roosevelt, Lindbergh, and America’s Fight Over WWII, 1939-1941. The author of this text is Richard S. Faulkner who is a Historian and author of historical texts. This is a journal based on the book, Those Angry Days, and what Faulkner thinks about this book. This is not Faulkner’s only historical text that he has wrote, so it shows that he is an expert which gives this source value. The purpose of this was to inform readers about the conflict American government was having about whether or not to stay out of the war 2 years prior to the country actually entering the war, and what Faulkner’s thoughts on this are. This source is great for readers that are trying to learn about what the economic and governmental factors were that caused America to enter the war. The content of this text is heavily focused on the 2-3 years before the bombing of Pearl Harbor happened in 1941 pertaining to the government. It explains how America wanted to remain an isolationist country during the war, and not get involved, but many people disagree with this. This disagreement caused meany rivalries to emerge between isolationist and interventionists. All of this information is very useful to know when looking at the reasons for America’s entry into the war because ti shows that it wasn’t just an impulsive decision it was one that was thought out about, also meaning that there might have been several reasons that they entered the war in the first place. This source is valuable because not many other texts explain this part of AMerica’s history when talking about Pearl harbor or WWII which really helps understand what was happening even better. This academic journal was published in 2014, meaning that this was written over 50 years after the events discussed occurred. This means that Faulkner had to collect all of his information from other sources, and previous knowledge to write this,after reading the book which means it isn’t as valuable as other primary sources might be. The purpose doesn’t come with much of a limitation because it was just meant to inform the audience about the dispute caused over whether America should stay out of the war or not, so no bias was presented since this topic is not one that can be altered based on perspective. The content in this journal seemed to be too limited. This text was a review based on the the book Those Angry Days, and it contained only parts of the information that the book had, and I felt as though this journal could’ve talked about the economic problems that America was facing more in depth because Faulkner did mention it. Target–Pearl Harbor (Rank 3), Michael. Target–Pearl Harbor. University of Hawaii Press, 1990. Questia School, Accessed Oct. 2018.This source is a book titled Target–Pearl Harbor by well known AMerican historian Michael Slackman. This book was not only written by a historian that is recognized, but was also published by the University of Hawaii Press, meaning it is approved by colleges. This source’s purpose was to inform people about the attack of Pearl Harbor and how Japanese-American alliances and relationships were affected. This book would give great value to those that are trying to learn beyond just the attack and about the relationship between these 2 countries that could have caused them to have conflict. The context of this book talks about how the Japanese and Americans were already having problems, and it could be a great possibility that America would enter the war even if Japan didn’t bomb Pearl Harbor, but because they did, ti was a big reason for America to enter the war. Slackman believes that the attack was the biggest factor involved when the United States was decided whether to go to war or not. He says that “Pearl Harbor looms as a landmark in the history of one of the twentieth century’s most important bilateral relationships. We use that point of reference to triangulate the shifting course of Japanese-American relationships and to illustrate how much—or how little—progress in mutual understanding has occurred since December 7, 1941.” This shows that the book has a very broad scope and talk about many aspects such as the actual attack, the relationship between Japan and AMerica, how time has changed since then, and how significant the bombing actually was to America’s entry to the war. This means that this book is very valuable because it has a lot of information to read from. The origin of this book comes from an American author and historian, so that means it limits the information to being more bias about America even if he writing neutrality a little bit of bias is shown when he speaks of how the attack is viewed. He makes the Japanese look bad when he says that they view the Pearl Harbor bombing as “feelings of pride at the stunning blow delivered against an arrogant power”, because it makes it look like they take pride out of an event that killed many innocent Americans. The purpose was to inform, although the text does show a little bit of persuasion in it. The author is trying to persuade the audience that the Americans were completely innocent during this attack, but he also wrote about economic and military issues America was facing with Japan, so he isn’t being completely bias toward America. Also it is good that this one book is so full of information, but it also felt as though it had a little bit too much. Instead of really focusing in on one or 2 topics, the book addresses so many different aspects of the war and Japanese-American conflict that I feel like it is a bit overwhelming when first read. Mixed Emotions during WWIISoul? (Rank 5), Stacy. America’s Home Front Heroes: An Oral History of World War II. Praeger, 2009. Questia School, Accessed Oct. 2018.Mixed Emotion during WWII Soul? Is one of the many diary entries included in the book America’s Home Front Heroes: An Oral History of World War II by Stacy Enyeart. The book is a collection of primary sources from people that experienced the effect of Pearl Harbor getting bombed. This specific journal entry is by Mozelle Bearden Ivey who is from Georgia. This source is very valuable because it is a primary source and from the point of view of someone that was living in the United States during the attack. This text was written with the purpose of sharing experiences and informing readers about what America was like in 1941 and the exact day of the bombing. This is very valuable because it gives the readers the perspective of someone that wasn’t at Pearl Harbor when it was was happening but someone that was somewhere else in the country, so it makes it more effective because the person was able to see what was happening in other parts of the country. The journal included information that could not be conveyed through any secondary source. Mozelle said that the bombing “sent shockwaves over everybody” when describing what it was like to see that a bombing had happened on the news. She also briefly explained how America’s economy was at the time. She said that “Before the Second World War, the economy was in a deplorable state and I started working for $1,200 a year.” This short journal entry gives the audience a little insight on what AMerica was like in 1941, which is very helpful.Coming from a primary source, there is much limitations that this source carries other than the fact that the author could be writing with a little bit of exaggeration since she had just experienced a bombing in the country. The purpose also comes with limitations because the original purpose for this diary was for this young woman to keep to herself and now it is being used as historical evidence. This means that this source wouldn’t include as much information as another source that was meant to inform. The information has kind of a narrow scope because this entry only shows a reflection of one day and nothing else. Also she was writing more about how she was feeling and only putting in her personal thoughts, which could limit whether this source really represents what the entirety of America was feeling at that moment.