I am referring to the thesis that Japan had to attack the US as active US trade restrictions (especially the embargo on oil) threatened the supply lines established in SE Asia, which were vital for the continuation of the Japanese war effort in China. How 'unprovoked' was Japan?

Also - was the US aware of the possible consequences of their embargo? They must have known it would greatly threaten Japanese sustained war effort? Were these consequences unintended?

This happening in the backdrop of the US being firmly perceived as an aggressive imperialist power - even though US official public discourse at the time conveniently decided to focus on Pearl Harbor at the exclusion of the attack on Manilla (as well as the simultaneous declaration of war on hong kong, Malaya or Singapore). BTW - why was that? Is that only because the US as a colonizing power didn't chime very well with the idea that US citizens had of their country?

Lastly - what was Japan really hoping to achieve with their attack?

I am aware that these are tropes common amongst Japanese apologists and I am not implying that US restrictions are on par with widescale invasion and not condoning any of the Japanese actions leading up to their involvement in the ww2, the litany of war crimes or the invasion of China.