Intel reports

[witpqs]

ORIGINAL: War History

If Midway were indeed the "success" that everyone thinks it was, why didn't the allies know the names of the ships and their target of the Aleutian force? Wasn't this sent in the same codes as the Midway force? And where please is it written that the Midway force ship IDs were known and target? Not saying it doesn't exist, but I certainly have never seen it. Have you?

Your logic here is that because (you assert) they did not know about (or enough about) the Aleutians operation, that means that Midway was not a code-breaking success.

Gaining critical information about the Midway operation that allowed the destruction of 4 enemy carriers to the loss of 1 friendly carrier, plus repelling the planned enemy invasion of Midway atoll - that was NOT a success because they didn't know enough about the Aleutians operation? That is not at all logical.

1) The Midway battle was a clear and decisive Allied victory.
2) Allied code-breaking was vital to that victory, meaning that the victory would not have been secured without it.
Ergo, Midway was a major code-breaking success.

There is plenty of information available about the code-breaking efforts involved involved in the battle of Midway. I'm sure you can find lots, I am not going to go looking for you.

Bye.
[8D]

[War History]

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: War History

The only FACT that can be proved in any way is that the Japanese NEVER in the entire war got any code breaking intelligence that they could make military use of. That is the fact...

Well, like I said earlier, there is little point in trying to prove anything to a close minded individual like you, but I will point out the Japanese announced via Tokyo Rose the Kiska landing force to the man, and they had pulled off the island 3 weeks prior to the landing. So if that doesn't count as "acting on that information" to you, I may as well just press the little green button on you right now. Have a nice life.

[Dobey455]

ORIGINAL: War History

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: War History

The only FACT that can be proved in any way is that the Japanese NEVER in the entire war got any code breaking intelligence that they could make military use of. That is the fact...

Well, like I said earlier, there is little point in trying to prove anything to a close minded individual like you, but I will point out the Japanese announced via Tokyo Rose the Kiska landing force to the man, and they had pulled off the island 3 weeks prior to the landing. So if that doesn't count as "acting on that information" to you, I may as well just press the little green button on you right now. Have a nice life.

Firstly I do like the way you keep asking everyone for documented evidence of their claims while providing nothing but anecdotal evedence of your own. But that is another matter.

In regards to the passage underlined above; define announcing the landing force "To the Man". Did she name every company and platoon and the CO's name, or, as I suspect, just the parent divison \ regiment. Considering the relatively small number of units deployed in Nor Pac I don't think guessing the name of the most likely offensive formation would take much effort.

[War History]

ORIGINAL: Dobey

Firstly I do like the way you keep asking everyone for documented evidence of their claims while providing nothing but anecdotal evedence of your own. But that is another matter.

In regards to the passage underlined above; define announcing the landing force "To the Man". Did she name every company and platoon and the CO's name, or, as I suspect, just the parent divison \ regiment. Considering the relatively small number of units deployed in Nor Pac I don't think guessing the name of the most likely offensive formation would take much effort.

Well I ask because I CAN document what I say:
http://canadianheroes.org/henri/the-battle-for-kiska-story.htm

4th paragraph under "Initial Panic:"

As the Canadians at Adak accustomed themselves to the harsh environment and received extensive training in battle drill, patrolling tactics, weaponry, hill climbing and amphibious assault, more than 30,000 American troops boarded heavily armed ships in California and began steaming west for what was officially still a secret mission. The success of the mission, they were told, would depend largely on the element of surprise. The men on the ships played pinochle and endless card games, told stories and wrote to sweethearts and wives as they made preparations for battle. Rumours circulated that they were bound for enemy-occupied Burma or the Japanese island of Hokkaido or maybe the Aleutian Islands. The ships made a sudden turn to the north. Any doubts about their destination were dispelled. Tokyo Rose interrupted the sweet warblings of the Andrews Sisters on shortwave radio. "All you boys headed for Kiska Island," she warned, "are in for a big surprise." She then listed their unit names, location and numbers, as well as the size of their assembling fleet at Adak, and informed the men of the exact time and date of their secret invasion.

Note: the source is Canadian.

This passage alone in my opinion is justification for the Japanese getting at least the ability to discover unit names / locations / prep targets. The other example I used is one from my father. He was in the 96th infantry division. The day they were scheduled to land at Yap, Tokyo Rose had reported the division wiped out on the beaches. My father heard this broadcast on the transport enroute to Leyte. Clearly Japanese intel knew the division was SUPPOSED to go there. Their orders were changed days before the landing to Leyte.

[Smeulders]

That would actually fall under the anecdotal evidence. It also tells us absolutely nothing about how the information was obtained by the Japanese or whether they even had the information. As someone said before, there weren't that many large formations in the Northern Pacific, if you see an invasion fleet coming there's a pretty good chance you can guess which unit is on it. Note that according to your information the Tokyo Rose announcement was only given after the turn North, it wouldn't exactly take a genius to find out where they were headed after that.

[War History]

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

That would actually fall under the anecdotal evidence. It also tells us absolutely nothing about how the information was obtained by the Japanese or whether they even had the information. As someone said before, there weren't that many large formations in the Northern Pacific, if you see an invasion fleet coming there's a pretty good chance you can guess which unit is on it. Note that according to your information the Tokyo Rose announcement was only given after the turn North, it wouldn't exactly take a genius to find out where they were headed after that.

Does it matter how the allies got the info in the game? No it does not. Should it matter in the game? No it should not. And you posted before my edit about the 96th at Yap. And most of the Kiska force came from California, not the Aleutians. Also, you presume that force was somehow spotted by the Japanese. What spotted them? The Japs had already pulled out of the island (presumably because they knew it was coming and they couldn't hold). Your attempt at explaining this example away fails.

[Smeulders]

Of course it matters. When my opponent sent out his last offensive against Sian, I could have told you 80% of the divisions that were that force. Why? Because I knew what was in that area from previous battles and I could see the size of the attacking force. No SigInt required. The Japanese may very well have made the same deduction about the invasion of Kiska. Do you think that because the Japanese were capable of simple deductions they should get better SigInt in game ?

I'd even grant that Japanese SigInt was better in RL than it is in the game. However, the same is true for the Allies, both sides get less information than they do in real life. If you want historical capabilities, argue for them for both sides.

[War History]

I have already said the allied capibility is below what it should have been. Suggest you know what you are saying before you say it next time

[mike scholl 1]

ORIGINAL: Smeulders

That would actually fall under the anecdotal evidence. It also tells us absolutely nothing about how the information was obtained by the Japanese or whether they even had the information. As someone said before, there weren't that many large formations in the Northern Pacific, if you see an invasion fleet coming there's a pretty good chance you can guess which unit is on it. Note that according to your information the Tokyo Rose announcement was only given after the turn North, it wouldn't exactly take a genius to find out where they were headed after that.

The fact that he keeps using "Tokyo Rose" as an example, even though NO JAPANESE during the entire war ever broadcast under that name, demonstrates the "depth" of his knowledge. It's useless to argue with someone whose "facts" all come from admitted propaganda broadcasts...

[Smeulders]

ORIGINAL: War History

I have already said the allied capibility is below what it should have been. Suggest you know what you are saying before you say it next time

That's why you started the thread with the following question, to suggest Allied intel should be improved ?

Should the Japanese player get as good or nearly as good intel reports as the allied player?

[War History]

ORIGINAL: War History

Midway was the presumed target "AF". It was estimated that 4 carriers would spearhead the assault. Now as for allied intel being weaker than historical, I would agree with that statement. The allies for the most part knew every Japanese formation and its commanders, where they were, where they were going (but not in all cases and not always when they needed this info). I am not disputing any of this.

My contention is that the Japanese player in the GAME deserves more than "heavy volume of radio signals at San Francisco". And the other examples of failures I pointed out to show that the allies indeed did not know everything, that their information was as faulty on occasion as it was accurate at other times. Seemingly some people seem to think everything the allies did in the war was based on rock solid intel, and this simply was not the case.

The simple FACT that Tokyo Rose on occasion after occasion reported forces that were heading to a beachead shows the Japanese player SHOULD BE awarded some kind of signals intel in the game. That FACT can not be disputed. (Ed: except by AFBs that dispute any kind of a change that would make the game more even or in other words "help" the Japanese player without justification for their opposition).

Like I said, know what you are talking about.

[Smeulders]

Which doesn't mean you're arguing for stronger Allied intel in game. Otherwise your first post would have been "Should SigInt for both sides be improved" instead of arguing for (near) parity as you did.

[War History]

I'm not. All I am saying is the Japanese should get SOMETHING. Are you saying they shouldn't?

[Smeulders]

They do get something, it's less than in real life, but it's the same for the Allies, so yes, I'm saying they shouldn't get any more.

[War History]

Enough said then [:D]

[Smeulders]

What exactly is the problem with that stance ? Either you argue for historical capabilities for both sides, or you argue for weakened capabilities, but in proportion to what they had in real life. Arguing for historical capabilities for one side while accepting weakened capabilities for the other seems to be a bigger problem.

[War History]

Explain these 2 things (reasonably):

1) How did the Japanese know the units date and time of the Kiska landings. You presume Japanese intel was useless yet you can't explain how they had this information.

2) How did the allies NOT know that the Japanese had pulled off the island 3 weeks before the landings? You presume that allied intel was so good they knew everything yet sig int and aerial recon both failed to detect the lack of Japanese troops on the island for 3 weeks! With a landing force on the way to invade the island, they had no idea the Japanese had pulled out. Explain it.

So explain it AFB. Then tell me again how the Japs should get no more than they have and yet the allies should get more. I need the laugh. Ed: Know what? don't bother. Just going to green button you as well.

[Smeulders]

Just in case you haven't green buttoned me.

ORIGINAL: War History

Explain these 2 things (reasonably):

1) How did the Japanese know the units date and time of the Kiska landings. You presume Japanese intel was useless yet you can't explain how they had this information.

I gave a possible alternative explanation. Actually, at least one other person already did so before me. I also said that it was possible that they got the information by SigInt, though there is no proof for that.

ORIGINAL: War History
2) How did the allies NOT know that the Japanese had pulled off the island 3 weeks before the landings? You presume that allied intel was so good they knew everything yet sig int and aerial recon both failed to detect the lack of Japanese troops on the island for 3 weeks! With a landing force on the way to invade the island, they had no idea the Japanese had pulled out. Explain it.

So explain it AFB. Then tell me again how the Japs should get no more than they have and yet the allies should get more. I need the laugh. Ed: Know what? don't bother. Just going to green button you as well.

I never said Allied SigInt was perfect, it is kind of strange to hear such a misrepresentation of my posts from a person who was attacking me because I was allegedly doing the same. I only said Allied SigInt was better in RL then it is in game, just like the Japanese SigInt.

I never said the Allies should get more, I said either they both get more, or neither gets more.

[KenchiSulla]

Now now guys, just take out that aggresion on your PBEM opponent [:D]

[War History]

Well, like I said to Mike before I hit the green button on him, when someone is going to approach something like this with a totally closed mind, all you can do is hit the button and move on [;)]