Japanese internment by the U.S. during WW2 was justified

No, we don't need to argue semantics. I think me and con are on the same page now, unless I misunderstood something. I am using Danielles sources. Numbers will refer back to those, while links will be new one. I also am disappointed by the use of citations outside of the debate, as doing that destroys some of the point of character limitations, but she can continue to do so.Racism Con says: "Racism against the Japanese was alive and well during this time; my opponent cannot contest this"I can't nor would I try to contest it. Unlike the rest of the world, America is ashamed of it's racist history and admits to it, as it should. Maybe the president, and his generals were racist. There may have been some good racist reasons to support Japanese internment. However, being racist does not mean you cannot act for national security concerns. To use an analogy, because I suck at explaining things. I can be the most amish hating person on the planet, and an Amish person could come up and put a gun in my fiance's face, and I would blow his brains out. That would not make the action racist against the Amish. Having people of Japanese descent becoming a serious national security concern can happen in both a racist America, and a non racist America. The beliefs of a person does not make an action racist, only the motivations of a person can do that. Internment Camps FDR did initially request that the Japanese just moved inland, no camps or anything. However the racism of state governments (not federal) made that plan blow up, and so FDR ordered relocation centers to accomodate those of Japanese ancestry.(5) We have been conflating the term internment camp (WCCA) with relocation center (WRA), but the two are quite different though both are fair game for this debate. The relocation centers were for Japanese American citizens who could not relocate any other way from the west coast in a timely manner. The internment camps were for non American citizens or captured spies and patrolled by border agents. The constitution only applies to American citizens, and not to aliens. We also have less rights once we are arrested and have either been convicted of or are awaiting a trial for crime. These camps were also the ones used to house German and Italian spies. https://en.wikipedia.org... When my opponent brings up the suppression of speech, or religion she is specifically referring to the Tulle Lake facility (3). The people in the Tule Lake facility when that suppression began were either aliens or those who vulontarily chose to renounce their citizenship. according to the other source she uses (5), the people in relocation centers (Ones the constitution protects) were treated better. Here is what her source says: "Meanwhile, WRA officials developed center regulations. On the one hand, compared to the WCCA, these were considerably less invasive. Inmates enjoyed the right of free assembly, and were not restricted in their use of the Japanese language in camp. Furthermore, inmates were detailed to police themselves inside camp—soldiers were not called in except in case of emergencies—and were free from arbitrary searches of their barracks. Unlike in the assembly centers, there was no prior restraint by official censors on camp publications." We can see that the ones actually entitled to constitutional protections, received them. There were some restrictions on freedom, like requiring passes to come and go for security reasons, but those restrictions were mild. I grew up in some hurrican prone areas, and when the government has forced me and my family to relocate, I have been in some relocation centers that had similar restricions if not worse. Nobody said the government was rounding up Floridians and putting them in concentration camps. It is unfortunate but occasionally temporary measures need to be taken to ensure the security of people. My opponent has not made the case that people who asked for due process were relocated. Her source does not back that up, if I missed it, I ask she quote the part for me. I see no souces for anything after the 2nd amendment, but assume my opponent is once again conflating the relocation camps and internment facilities. MagicCon says there is no specific compelling reason to think that the Japanese provided useful intelligence before the war. I am not going to contest that, that is the case now. It was the intelligence they would likely provide after the war that is concerning. There is a such thing as sleeper agents, or just highly valuable people they thought they could flip to their cause like they did in Niiahau, just through some sweet talking and racial sympathy. There was no doubt Japanese spying, which is why the attack on Pearl Harbor was perfectly timed. Takeo Yoshikawa, is the one who provided that intel. http://www.historynet.com...;Not that what was discovered in the Japanese archives after their surrender matters. The United States did not have access to the Japanes archives, prior to their surrender. The only thing FDR could rely on was the events in Niiahu and the Magic decrypts. If the Magic decrypts stated that there were Japanese-American spies, then that is what The U.S. had to believe. It was war time, and decisions needed to be made fast. FDR only had those Magic decrypts to rely on, not the Japanese archives. Had the Japanese given him access to the archives, I'm sure his decision would have been different. My opponent is using her perfect vision from the future to judge events in the past. We should put ourselves in FDR's shoes. He saw that the Japanese on Niiahau island betrayed their country with very little prodding. He couldn't exactly test that condition on every island to see if it would repeat. He had access to the Magic decrypts where the Japanes boasted of their extensive spy networks of 2nd and 3rd generation (1/16) Japanese Americans. When you're listening into the Japanese internal communications, and they are bragging to each other about all the spies they have in America which are 2nd and 3rd generation citizens, you should take their word for it and take precautions. That is what FDR did. He took precautions. I know I am repeating myself, but FDR did not have access to Japanese archives, he had access to a bit of their inside communication, and had no reason to think that the intel was false. Some historians now think that the Japanese over estimated the loyalty of Japanese Americans, but the United States at the time had no reason to think they were over estimating. NiiahauMy opponent mentions children and the mentally ill being interned. Let me be lear that the Japanese whose father's and husbands were sent to internment camps were given the option to join them there, something they could have refused. The relocation camps and their reasoning were already discussed.The Niihau incident though a small sample size was the only available information we had on what would occur in a Japanese invasion. We couldn't exactly let them invade to see if what percentage of Japanese Americans would assist them either passively or actively. Both which are dangerous. It may have been a small sample size but it was the only one we had. Con says I can not use one incident to judge hundreds of thousands of people, but it isn't judging. After 9/11 300 million people had to go through increased airport security. We were not judging 100 million people on the action of a few hijackers. This isn't judging the 100 million airplane travellers. We did not restrict them because they were worse than the 200 million non airport travellers. The air travellers posed a higher risk of crashing planes into buildings, so we took some precautions. The Japanese had actually attacked America, so their descendents were asked to move away from the West Coast. C/P"the government could have simply barred them from specific military and industrial sites" That is precisely what caused the internment and relocation though. Executive order 9066, is what caused large portions of California to be called sensitive military and industrial sites. https://en.wikipedia.org...;Though obviously picking up and leaving causes the need for relocation camps to accomodate the newly created refugees, especially when the inner states were doing everything in their power to discourage relocation there. My opponent's counter plan would have the same results as executive order 9066, because her C/P is executive order 9066. Germans and Italians were also put in internment camps when they were not American citizens or when they were captured spies, they were just not put into relocation camps. Japan was the only one of those countries to actually bring the fight to the U.S., so they were less of a threat. We also had no decrypts at the time of Germany or Italy bragging about a large network of spies. Conclusion The federal government attempted to move citizens in land, but state governments did not cooperate, and even if they did the government should still provide thome some free shelter. This isn't much different to the times my family was ordered to temporarily relocate during and after a hurricane. Like many of the Japanese we had nowhere to go, so we went to a government run facility for food and shelter. We had rules, once we were there we could not leave whenever we felt like, we had rations. we had crowded conditions. In times of emergency civil liberties have to be restricted a bit, especially for those of us who have to go to a government run facility, and make no mistake somebody coming to your country and dropping bombs is a special circumstance. FDR made the correct decision given the facts he had or he thought he had. He had the Magic Decrypts and Niiahau, no access to google or Japanese archives. Don't use the goggles of the present to judge the past.