Jamie Laird

Pearl Harbor vs. September 11th

The Unites States has experienced the repletion of history through two very awful

attacks, Peal Harbor and September 11th. These attacks were deliberately planned and brought a

state of shock and terror throughout the entire nation. In both situations, the United Sates was

neutral; they did not side with a specific country. Because these attacks were so similar, the

media compared the reactions of Americans, the government, as well other nations. The

comparison that was made most, however, was the reactions of the presidents in both situations.

Two very strong and determined leaders, Franklin Roosevelt and George Bush, were tested for

their reaction, and two very different reactions were taken.

Franklin Roosevelt and George Bush both delivered a speech to make the public aware of

the devastating events that had just occurred and to calm the terrified people of the nation. The

objective of the speeches were the same, however, the two presidents took a different approach

in delivering their message. President Roosevelt’s speech in response to the bombing of Peal

Harbor is abrupt and to the point. Although some may not like the conciseness of his speech in

response to the massive attack, Roosevelt clearly outlines his point. On the other hand, Bush’s

speech is less concise, and too wordy to clearly portray his point. His speech is indeed

comforting and reassuring, but the meaning of the speech becomes unclear by the end as Bush

thoroughly explains each point.

Roosevelt was more effective in delivering his speech as he identified with the public

opinions and aired his sympathy. Roosevelt was more confident and spoke with more

determination; his simple declarations made an outstanding effect on the people. Roosevelt states

that “we will make very certain that this form of treachery shall never endanger us again.” This

one statement is strong enough to comfort the people and reassure them of their safety. On the
contrary, Bush does not speak as positively as the future. He states, “It is my hope that in the

months and years ahead life will return to almost normal.” Although Bush’s statement is more

realistic, (it is difficult to return to a normal life after a massive attack), his words do not echo

with the confidence that people, especially at a time of distraught, want to hear.

The two speeches also describe the similarities and differences existing between the two

attacks. The United States, holding a neutral position in world affairs, is unfamiliar to attacks on

American soil. The bombing at Pearl Harbor and the September 11th attacks were both surprise

attacks that took place on American soil. They caused great damage to big cities and many lives

were lost through these attacks. The Japanese only attacked the military bases, thus only killing

those who were active in the military. However, on September 11th, the lives of numerous

innocent civilians were lost. In addition, both attacks were not justified. In an effort to remain

neutral among world affairs, the United States froze all Japanese assets. Thus, the United States

slightly provocted the attack on Pearl Harbor. The September 11th, attacks however, were solely

hate crimes. The Islamic faith were strongly devoted to Allah and believed that their religion was

far more superior to any other, therefore Al Qaida believed that inflicting pain on our society,

people, religion, and democracy was a way to show there power. The September 11th attacks

were more personal compared to the attack on Pearl Harbor which was an act of war.

Roosevelt believed that we must end isolation to begin the task before us. This is true

because it is impossible to remain neutral, stay isolated, and keep peace. Ending isolationism did

not lead to future attacks such as 9/11. Hatred between countries will always exist, thus ending

isolationism did not impact future attacks.