1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
ddd [48]
3 years ago
15

Was president Roosevelt justified in ordering executive order 9066 which resulted in the internment of Japanese American citizen

s
History
2 answers:
LiRa [457]3 years ago
5 0

Answer:

here's my essay I wrote for this question on edge:

    Was President Roosevelt justified in ordering Executive Order 9066? No, he was not. All it did was result in the internment of Japanese American citizens, even though that wasn't what was specified in the order. Roosevelt was not justified in making this decision because it led to splitting up families, arresting innocent people, and denying their rights.

      The Executive Order 9066 authorized the military to keep out “any or all persons from areas of the United States designated as military areas.” However, the order did not identify any particular group, but Roosevelt used it to remove and imprison Japanese and Japanese-American citizens. It ended up condemning almost 70% of imprisoned Japanese-American Citizens. Even if they were American but had some sort of Japanese descent, they would incarcerate them. All of this was okay because of the Executive Order 9066.

      Where did these innocent citizens go when they were removed and imprisoned? They were brought into wartime camps and were suspended of their rights under Fifth Amendment. The order Roosevelt passes, allowed the suspension and so, the Japanese Americans were denied their rights. The Fifth Amendment states that 'no person shall be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process.' This is a world-wide known right. Yet, Roosevelt just takes it away because he simply feels he needs to? That's scary knowing that the president could take everybody's rights away in a second if they wanted to. Not is it only scary, but it is not justified.  

      However, many people believe that Roosevelt was under good reasoning when passing the order. Some people will argue it helped public safety. People who are on that side of this argument tend to believe that he was also justified because of the hatred and fear against the Japanese Americans after the Japanese had attacked Pearl Harbor. This theory continued to expand, leading to a common belief that the Japanese-Americans had been of help to the Japanese in planning the attack.  

      Despite those beliefs, Roosevelt was impartially wrong in his ordering of Executive Order 9066. While it may have been true that many Americans were fearful of the Japanese, this is not a reason of why Roosevelt was justified. This is because they did not only intern Japanese and Japanese-Americans. They also interned thousands of others including Italian and German-Americans. So, even though people were supposedly scared of the Japanese, fear was obviously not the only reason they interned innocent American citizens.

      It's understandable how, on impulse, people can believe that Roosevelt was justified in interning millions of Americans. But, if you look deeper into it, that is clearly not the case. Executive Order 9066 was an inhumane and unjustified order that ruined many Americans lives and tore apart thousands of families. So, in conclusion, Roosevelt was not justified in issuing Executive Order 9066.

hope this helps! for plagiarism reasons.. change it up a bit so that u don't get in trouble by ur teacher ahaha good luck!

kifflom [539]3 years ago
4 0

The correct answer to this open question is the following.

Although there are no options attached we can say the following.

No, I don't think so. President Roosevelt was not justified in ordering executive order 9066 which resulted in the internment of Japanese American citizens. It is true that some of his cabinet members -such as the Secretary of Defense- believed that the executive order was necessary and justified. However, that order treated Japanese American people as a prisoner of war, isolated in the interim camps such as Manzanates, California, and that was not a way to treat an American citizen.

For some historians, those camps resemble in concept, the Nazi camps of World War II, taking into consideration the proportions of this comparison.

Besides, there was no real evidence that proved that these Japanese Americans were species or had ties with the Japanese Army.

You might be interested in
(HC)Which statement explains why a follower of laissez-faire capitalism would argue that the economy grows when government avoid
Kazeer [188]
<span>In a free market economy, prices and wages rise from natural forces. Laissez-faire capitalism is when the government separates itself from the economy, much like the government (in the US at least) currently distances itself from the church through separation of church and state.</span>
3 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Based on the table, what can you infer about Truman's goal for the nuclear attack on Japan?
Mashutka [201]

Answer: A) Truman wanted to disrupt Japan's ability to wage war.

Explanation:

After the collapse of Italy and Germany, Japan was the only one to continue the war. And if over 60% of Japan's cities were destroyed, Japan was still planning military attacks. The United States lost a large number of troops in the fight against Japan. Therefore, the United States government called on Japan to capitulate to avoid further losses. Japa continued to ignore the United States' demands, so the Americans opted for an unconventional approach to war using nuclear weapons. The first bomb was dropped on Nagasaki on August 6, 1945. while the other was thrown on Hiroshima three days after that event. Realizing the power of atomic weapons, Japan decided to surrender unconditionally.

8 0
3 years ago
Which statement best describes the speakers point of view?
bazaltina [42]

Answer:

it might be c idk but i think that it's right

Explanation:

4 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
The supreme court has original jurisdiction in any criminal case where controversies over the death penalty are involved.
Minchanka [31]
The answer is false.
8 0
3 years ago
ASAP!!
Anon25 [30]

Answer:

To form a new government

Explanation:

4 0
4 years ago
Other questions:
  • For impeachment proceedings to begin, a president has to be accused of A. a crime. B. going to war. C. lying. D. not listening t
    11·1 answer
  • What was the most notable achievement of marie-elisabeth vigée-lebrun?
    14·2 answers
  • Describe how the Navajo returned home from Bosque Redondo.
    12·2 answers
  • Please help (ss/history question)
    10·1 answer
  • What is an accurate description of monarchy A. The people rule. B small group rules. C. No one rules. D. A king or queen rules.
    14·2 answers
  • I need a paragraph about how human trafficking is the same thing as slavery​
    7·1 answer
  • What was the turning point in Greek history considered to be
    13·1 answer
  • How did the French Revolution become radical
    10·2 answers
  • Which statement describes a cause of the Cuban Missile Crisis?
    10·1 answer
  • Which of the following was not a kingdom after alexander died
    5·2 answers
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!