1.Japan starting atrocities in China since 1937/Nankin rape/ ,but USA started embargo AFTER soviets was attacked by germans.Which mean,that they redirected Japan from attacking soviets to attacking USA.
Open hostilities between Japan and China began in 1937, I don't know when the atrocities becan, but the first one there was proof the Japanese government knew about and was complicit in (as opposed to some indiviual officers, who'll be tried and punished by the Japanase authorities) ommitting attrocities was when they took Nankin in December 1937. US Embargo on Japan started in July 1,1938. Taking into account time needed to get the evidence, present it to policy makers, several cycles of escelating talks, drafting a proposal to put before congress, and everything involved with getting that voted on, that is not an unreasonable timeline.
Japanese attack on Russia was in September 1939(arguably incidents started in May of that year), i.e AFTER the US started employing sanctions against Japan.
THe US sanctions had NOTHING to do with the soviets. THat said, there's a solid argument they also had nothing to do with humanitarian concerns, but rather with Japanese attacks on US citizens and US property. If we assume that is true, then it might be possible for the US and Japan to have reached an accommodation
You've got some quote boxes screwed up there. It's difficult to figure out what you're saying and what you're responding to.
1.You do not undarstandt what you read.
Pacyfic fleet was send to America,becouse they knew that carriers could hit Hawaii.Then in 1940 FDR send Pacyfic fleet to Pearl again,so japaneese could hit it.In America they were save.
If you have any evidence to support this screwy conspiracy theory please present it.
3.Soviets air forces sucked - fact.Baku and other refineries could be easily destroyed - fact.Soviet was army of slaves who would surrender if they could - fact.
No, not fact, speculation with no basis. However granting this for the sake of argument:
1)Any evidence people at the time knew this?
2)Why didn't the Germans destroy these fields if it was so easy to do? And Remember they were much closer to those fields than American forces.
It may have only required a better balanced US approach, not letting US State and Treasury Department demands and pressures of the moment get beyond the capabilities of the War and Navy Departments at the time.
Keep in mind, at least some of the US pressure on Japan was because of how it treated US property and US citizens in and around china. While this does mean that in theory an agreement was possible if Japan tried, it also suggests the main issue was Japanese attitude towards the US, not some percieved "weak flank" in the US, or US demands from Japan.
Heck, if the Japanese hadn't fired on lifeboads of the USS Panay the American public might not have cared nearly as much about other stories of Japanese atrocities.
I will note that the Japanese barely had the means to hit Pearl and doing so required them to quite literally have fuel drums on the hangar decks of at least two carriers and all the destroyers escorting them
IIIRC it also requires several technological developments that were required to let them actually do any significant damage when they arrived.
Something with slowing down the torpedoes so they wouldn't hit the bottom of the bay, and a couple of other modifications to the planes.