How to judge Japan's attack without the benefit of hindsight?

[Phanatikk]

Zaquex was correct...

- Lend Lease was unconstitutional.
- FDR was an anglophile.
- FDR was dying to get into the European War to help England.
- FDR illegally ordered U.S. escorts to escort convoys to/from England, despite the U.S. being a Neutral. He wanted an incident.
- The U.S. public was overwhelmly against getting into another European War. A few U.S. escorts were sunk/damaged in the Atlantic, but public opinion didn't change.
- Capt. Arthur McCollum gave FDR the Eight Action Plan to provoke the Japanese into a preemptive strike, which would unify the public into getting into the war. FDR utilized all eight.
- U.S., Dutch, and British signals collection sites around the Pacific had decoded Japanese Naval codes, not just the diplomatic code. Documents proving this have either been removed/trashed or classified to prevent exposure. They can be inferred though from other sources. Many documents were never shown to any of the Pearl Harbor commissions, even as late as today, that indicate prior knowledge of the attack.
- The Japanese recalled every maru they owned months before Dec 7th, which is a certain sign a nation is going to war.
- It was naval doctrine that any attack on Oahu would come from the north.
- The U.S. government issued a "Vacant Sea" order just weeks before Dec 7th. This emptied the North Pacific of all shipping along the strike route. Even Kimmel was ordered to halt search exercises he was performing on the exact spot the Japanese would launch from, just 1 week prior.
- The U.S. government denied Kimmel and Short signals/intelligence that would have indicated an imminent attack.
- The two carrier groups were ordered out of pearl with every new ship still in the Pacific. The ships in port on Dec 7th were all older, less useful vessels.
- Japan was running out of oil. It was essentially fight and die honorably and hope for the best, or an abject surrender of national sovereignty and accept U.S. demands.
- No one doubts that Nanking was a bad time. But ask the citizens of Badajoz if christ-loving Europeans are immune to abusing civilians.
- There is no direct evidence that Yamamoto ever made the "sleeping giant" comment.
- General Short was "ordered" to treat sabotage as the greatest threat to his command, which is why the planes were lined up so neatly and other precautions were not taken.
- Contrary to "common knowledge," the strike force did not maintain complete radio silence. the subs, for instance, reported their positions. as did the escort. they were tracked across the pacific.
- Hitler did FDR a favor by declaring war on the U.S., but then I believe he was compelled to by the Axis treaty.
- General Macarthur (whom I personally dislike) correctly understood the "first overt act" message from Washington. Why do you suppose the U.S. got caught with it's shorts down in the P.I. hours after Pearl? Macarthur was an a$$, but not that incompetent.
etc, etc, etc.
It would have been interesting as to what FDR would have done to get the U.S. in the war, if the Japanese had not attacked the U.S., but simply gone for the resources.

[Canoerebel]

[8|]

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: koontz

Also if FDR knew about the attack what the hell did USN have 2 CV west of PH[&:][&:][&:]

The USN expected war, and had the carriers out in positions where they could screen, scout, and deal with raiders. There were also some CAs doing the same. WPO had CVTFs and CA-based SAGs scouting and screening while the Battle Fleet moved to a position near Wake.

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

[8|]

You got that right. [8|]

[USSAmerica]

ETA to thread locking...... 6 posts.... [:D]

[Historiker]

There isn't a single war that came unexpected... - at least when you live some decades later...

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: Canoerebel

[8|]

You got that right. [8|]

Me three. [8|]

[scout1]

ORIGINAL: fbs

Hindsight is 20/20, so nowadays everybody think "Whaaaaat were the Japanese thinking? Didn't they know that the US could produce aircrafts by the hundreds of thousands? carriers by the hundred? Hoooooow could they be so blind?"

Well, consider this: say we didn't know a priori the power the USA was going to have in 1945. Imagine you are looking from a 1940 Japan's point of view, with data available from 1938-1939. The US didn't look all that hot by then. This is a nice set of statistics from the League of Nations 1926-1944, that are quite interesting:

League of Nations 1926-1944

The US population in 1937 was estimated at 129m people, Japan had 71m people. The US had 11.9m tons of shipping in 1938, Japan had 5.0m tons (about 1:2). The US produced 18.3m tons of cement in 1938, Japan produced 5.5m tons (1:3.5 or so), so what's the point of US's vast consumer industries if our Japan is no more than 1:4 worse in basic industries? Of course, the US had much more railways and cars, but what could these do on a war half world away?

The primary sectors where the US has an out-of-this-world advantage are oil: 164m tons in 1937, against 0.4m tons for Japan; and steel: 51.4m tons in 1936, against 5.8m tons for Japan. Even DEI's oil cannot compete: only some 8.5m tons or so, total. So one can expect a huge surplus of oil by the US, but how that would benefit the US if it takes many years to build the ships?

So, if I have a nice, experienced army with the Japanese spirit, some really hot aircrafts, a comparable Navy, and then I destroy the US's navy in the first strike and grab the oil in the region... and the US is limited by shipping in the same way as Russia was in 1905... then who in Japan could predict nothing worse than a tough war, but one with a chance of victory? Even more if the US will be divided with a war in Europe too - one that of course Germany was going to win.

I mean, could anyone, even in the US, really have predicted the overwhelming superiority in ships and aircrafts the US would have by 1945?

To your last question. There actually was a study conducted by the IJN prior to the start of the war. Fairly good assessment made by the IJN ..... better win within 6 months or so, cause they are going to kick our arss .... paraphasing, but the projected manufacturing/build capability was extremely one sided, even in the IJN study. Only those who chose to ignore it as it probably wasn't politically correct at the time would have proceeded .......

[Bullwinkle58]

ORIGINAL: Phanatik

Zaquex was correct...

- Lend Lease was unconstitutional.
-

Huh?

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Phanatik

Zaquex was correct...

- Japan was running out of oil.

- It was essentially fight and die honorably and hope for the best, or an abject surrender of national sovereignty and accept U.S. demands.

Warspite1

I repeat - why was Japan running out of oil? Anything to do with the Japanese decision to wage war in China? Or did the evil Roosevelt secretly give the green light to Tokyo and so force them into a trap? [8|]

What surrender of national sovereignty was that?

[noguaranteeofsanity]

ORIGINAL: Phanatik
- Lend Lease was unconstitutional.

That makes no sense.

- FDR was an anglophile.
- FDR was dying to get into the European War to help England.
- FDR illegally ordered U.S. escorts to escort convoys to/from England, despite the U.S. being a Neutral. He wanted an incident.
- The U.S. public was overwhelmly against getting into another European War. A few U.S. escorts were sunk/damaged in the Atlantic, but public opinion didn't change.
- Capt. Arthur McCollum gave FDR the Eight Action Plan to provoke the Japanese into a preemptive strike, which would unify the public into getting into the war. FDR utilized all eight.

These are just various historical facts, that in no way actually prove that FDR or the US had prior knowledge of the Pearl Harbour attacks.

-U.S., Dutch, and British signals collection sites around the Pacific had decoded Japanese Naval codes, not just the diplomatic code. Documents proving this have either been removed/trashed or classified to prevent exposure. They can be inferred though from other sources. Many documents were never shown to any of the Pearl Harbor commissions, even as late as today, that indicate prior knowledge of the attack.

So the lack of available evidence that the US had prior knowledge of the Pearl Harbour attacks, is evidence that they had prior knowledge of the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbour? How does that make any sense?

- The Japanese recalled every maru they owned months before Dec 7th, which is a certain sign a nation is going to war.

That doesn't prove that FDR or the US knew they would attack Pearl Harbour. It just proves the Japanese were preparing for war.

- The U.S. government denied Kimmel and Short signals/intelligence that would have indicated an imminent attack.

MacArthur had full access to all the signals intelligence and I suspect MacArthur would of been the first to call a press conference and announce this, had he seen an attack on Pearl Harbour as being imminent.

- Japan was running out of oil. It was essentially fight and die honorably and hope for the best, or an abject surrender of national sovereignty and accept U.S. demands.
- No one doubts that Nanking was a bad time. But ask the citizens of Badajoz if christ-loving Europeans are immune to abusing civilians.
- There is no direct evidence that Yamamoto ever made the "sleeping giant" comment.
- General Short was "ordered" to treat sabotage as the greatest threat to his command, which is why the planes were lined up so neatly and other precautions were not taken.

Again, none of that proves that the US had prior knowledge of the Japanese plans to attack Pearl Harbour, it is just a collection of historical facts.

- Contrary to "common knowledge," the strike force did not maintain complete radio silence. the subs, for instance, reported their positions. as did the escort. they were tracked across the pacific.

The KB left their radio operators in Japan, to transmit to make it appear as if they were still in home waters and even removed the fuses or valves from their radios, to ensure they maintained radio silence. Numerous Japanese sources support this claim. Besides even if transmissions from subs were detected, it doesn't prove that Japanese carriers were en route to attack Pearl Harbour.

- Hitler did FDR a favor by declaring war on the U.S., but then I believe he was compelled to by the Axis treaty

Incorrect and to quote the Tripartite Pact:

ARTICLE 1. Japan recognizes and respects the leadership of Germany and Italy in the establishment of a new order in Europe.

ARTICLE 2. Germany and Italy recognize and respect the leadership of Japan in the establishment of a new order in Greater East Asia.

ARTICLE 3. Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict.

Note the section in bold, which clearly states that Pact only comes into effect if Italy, Germany or Japan is attacked, not if they attack another nation. Otherwise why hadn't Japan already declared war on Britain or the Soviet Union by December 1941?

- General Macarthur (whom I personally dislike) correctly understood the "first overt act" message from Washington. Why do you suppose the U.S. got caught with it's shorts down in the P.I. hours after Pearl? Macarthur was an a$$, but not that incompetent.

Read a few historical accounts, the planes had been in the air circling in case of an attack, while a strike was being prepared against Formosa. They had to land to refuel and arm themselves, before launching that strike. The bombers were actually dispersed and the fighters were taxiing when the Japanese attacked.

[Torplexed]

ORIGINAL: Phanatik

- The two carrier groups were ordered out of pearl with every new ship still in the Pacific. The ships in port on Dec 7th were all older, less useful vessels.

The heavy cruisers Salt Lake City, Pensacola, Chester and Northampton which were out with with the carrier groups all dated from 1929. In Pearl Harbor itself were the modern light cruisers Phoenix, Helena and St. Louis which dated from 1938.

But why let annoying facts mess up a good conspiracy theory. [8|]

[tigercub]

I think it was know that the japan was going to attack...but i dont think they were thinking Pearl Harbor would be a target!

Tigercub!

[xj900uk]

Agreed. Everyone expected war by around March-April '42 along traditional 'european' lines (which is what MacArthur had been told to expect by Washington, he reckoned by then the PI defence forece would just about be properly trained up and equipped OK so that the islands could defend themselves without too much aid/support from the mainland) although US Naval Intelligence had not discounted the idea of a surprise sneak attack by the IJN before an official declaration of war. However everyone thought it owuld be in the Phillipines. The idea of the KB just sailing into Hawaiian waters completely undetected and launching a massive devestating carrier strike just didn't enter the minds or imagination of the US politicians or planners.

How the US air force in the PI came to be caught on the ground and on the open several hours after the attack on PH (and had been forearmed and warned to expect an attack at any time) is a very interesting issue, one which MacArthur managed to extricate himself from with some difficulty but is still worthy of debate even today...

Re Yamamoto's 'sleeping giant' comment, although he didn't record it in his memoirs or letters (of which he wrote quite substantially), it was recorded by an aide taking notes at a staff conference/meeting to discuss the post-mortem on the 'Hawaiian Operation', so I guess it is true...

[Phanatikk]

Nog,

- The U.S. was a NEUTRAL country, arming one side of the conflict. - illegal- If not unconstitutional, against U.S. codes or international law. I'm not a lawyer, nor do I play one on t.v., but I know it's illegal.
- There are archival documents referring to other documents, that have been removed from the archives and never replaced. there are archived documents that refer to collected japanese radio traffic documents that would implicate an attack, that actually say that they were removed due to their explosive nature. A lack of access is not a lack of evidence.
- When the japanese merchant fleet is recalled to japan for conversion to troop carriers, and then those troop carriers are reported as moving to positions to attack U.S. possessions, a la the P.I., and Wake, Tarawa, etc, then YES, it's evidence the Japanese are going to attack the U.S.
- I don't know if you know anything about radio traffic collection and analysis, but individual radio operators and their equipment can be identified by their "style" and their "sound" which can't be duplicated. The radio operators were NOT left in Japan as a decoy. If japan had operators in Japan pretending to be KB operators, they would not have fooled anyone. KB operators, the callsigns for the ships, and their equipment were tracked crossing the northern pacific. The civilians were particularly bad, as they were chatty. The navy referred to them as "Gunzoku." the signals collection documents are in U.S. archives. Go get a FOIA and find out. The only detail is that the government claims they weren't decoded until after the attack due to the volume. but there is also evidence this isn't true. And yes, japanese sub signals traffic IS important when it's tracked to Hawaiian waters, even if that were all there was.
- As I said about Germany declaring on the U.S., Hitler did FDR a favor. I said I believed he was compelled. Then again, I don't intend to parse "attack," which could possibly mean declared war upon. And I really doubt the Japanese signed the pact because they were concerned England or France was going to attack them in the Pacific. Japan's only real enemy in the Pac was the U.S.
- Yes, I have read a few historical accounts, thanks. I know about the abortive attack on Formosa. Uh, why wasn't MacArthur cashiered for screwing up so badly? Kimmel/Short at least had the excuse of being completely surprised. And, yes, I know he was liked in the P.I.
- The historical information was included to show FDR's intent and motives.
Some quotes for you:
from Stimson's diary "The question was how we should maneuver them into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves. It was a difficult proposition."
"In spite of the risk involved, however, in letting the Japanese fire the first shot, we realized that in order to have the full support of the American people, it was desirable to make sure that the Japanese be the ones to do this, so that there should remain no doubt in anyone's mind as to who were the aggressors."

FDR and some of his staff actually dicussed the morality of the U.S. president allowing an attack on U.S. servicemen, but decided the Big Picture would permit it.

Look up Morimura's (Yoshikawa) espionage activities at Pearl before the attack, including the Bomb Plot and the All clear messages.

There is a lot more evidence to implicate FDR to some extent. I provided the info from my original post off the top of my head while reading the thread because someone offhandedly poo-poo'd any possiblility of foreknowledge. At some point, it comes down to the "If it looks like a Duck Theory."

[Historiker]

THat's BS

[LoBaron]

Yes, but admittedly rather funny. [:D]

Looking forward how this developes in case USS Americas prediction is wrong...

[Historiker]

To lock this wouldn't be nice. Surpressing others opinions shouldn't happen, even if they are considered to be "anti-US" in a US forum.

[LoBaron]

No. Wouldn´t be nice. And not funny.

[Grfin Zeppelin]

Maybe Stalin was behind it all ? He tricked Japan into a war with the U.S. because he knew Germany will then declare war on the U.S. too wich helps him alot ? *snickers*