[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_leading_to_the_attack_on...

Secondly, even if it were remotely true, there would have been significant incentives for any involved parties to alter or hide any evidence. History continues to be written by the victors, and crackpots continue to doubt it.

The typical line of thinking with conspiracy theories seems to be the less substantiated the theory, the more credence it should be lent, under the logic that the government is suppressing evidence.

So basically the less evidence, the more believable. Beautiful, isn't it?

And where do statements of indeterminate truthfulness fit in?

If allowing Japan to continue its (quite brutal) invasion of China is what you call justice, I'm not sure we are seeing eye to eye here.

Entering the war made a mess, but so would have staying out of it. The mess was already in motion, it was too late to avoid it either way.

There are many instances of Allied forces breaking codes but not acting on them, because to do so would have signalled to the enemy that their codes had been broken and the advantage would be lost. This comes back to my post further down, most individuals simply don't know the bigger picture!

It's true the US had an isolationist movement, and even business ties to Germany, but it would have eventually entered the war against Nazi Germany. After all, it was already supporting its allies (UK, Soviet Union, etc) via materiel through the Lend-Lease program, before the attack on Pearl Harbor ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-lease )

Also, without wanting to diminish the participation of the US in the war, most of the effort was done by other countries, such as the Soviet Union.

Doubtless the final shape of Europe would have been different if the US had entered the war later, but Germany would have been defeated anyway.