Flutterby™! : Surprise, not sneak!

From Plastic I found a link to this NY Times (subcription required but free)article about Pearl Harbor, the historical event and Pearl Harbor the movie and the effects of revisionism that this is having all around. It seems the LA Times is of the opinion that the attack was a surprise attack and shouldn't be referred to by its journalist as a sneak attack.

"But there were other Americans who suffered, and they were Japanese Americans," she said, referring to the wartime relocation and internment of citizens of Japanese descent. " `Sneak' conjures up images" of the racial hatred and racial epithets of the 1940's, she added. "Particularly in the western U.S., it resonates." The preferred alternative for describing the events at Pearl Harbor in The Los Angeles Times is now "surprise attack."

Now, I'm all for forgiveness over what happened in 1941, afterall, this isn't the Middle East, and I think it is a terrible thing that we did to US citizens of Japanese descent during that time and reparations to them was in order. I don't want to offend anyone, but it just seems to me that the term sneak is very appropriate for what happened.