Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
warspite1ORIGINAL: mind_messing
ORIGINAL: warspite1
Btw how can you be a warmongerer and a good man?
That depends.
Do you consider Churchill a "good man"?
[;)]
warspite1ORIGINAL: HansBolter
ORIGINAL: DeZanic
ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard
It's important to note several things about Pearl Harbor: the Japanese did not fully expect the attack to be a surprise. They anticipated the possibility of facing an alerted enemy. They figured to lose two carriers. In that regard, they were surprised themselves. There's always been speculation that had the US battleship fleet received adequate warning that getting underway and out into deep water might have resulted in a greater loss of life had the Japanese found them. The shallow depth of Pearl Harbor ensured many ships would fight again.
Equally importantly is that most of the conspiracy theories about Pearl Harbor display a lot of ex post facto knowledge. The idea, for example, that FDR would sacrifice what were later seen as outdated warships (second-generation battleships and older destroyers). At the time, carrier operations were entirely new, and very few nations had mastered them. Not even the Japanese conceded the seas to carriers...the plan for Midway six months later called for the coup de grace to be delivered not by Nagumo's carriers, but by Yamamoto's powerful battleship division, led by the Yamato. If a war was going to be fought, the planners of 1941 expected it to be fought by those second-generation battleships lined up at Pearl Harbor, with the carriers in a supporting role.
There's also the point that tethering the battleships at Hawaii without torpedo nets was not as stupid as it sounded. The torpedoes the Japanese used in the attack were new and highly secret. The potency of Japanese torpedoes came as a shock to the US throughout the first months of the war.
And if Pearl Harbor is the subject of so many conspiracy theories, then the Battle of Savo Island, on August 8/9, 1942, should be even more controversial. Four Allied cruisers sunk, 1,000 bluejackets drowned, with no damage inflicted on the Japanese in return. That was nine months into the war, and the US Navy still was operating with a complacent mindset nine months after "The Day of Infamy." You see the same comedy of errors, missed intelligence and luck as at Pearl Harbor, but you never hear conspiracy theories on how the Japanese got the drop on the USN in the midst of an important counteroffensive.
The bottom line to me on Pearl Harbor is that the Americans underestimated the Japanese in 1941 as diminutive yellow men in buck teeth and spectacles who bowed a lot and made cheap imitation goods. In the racial environment of the 1940s the idea of an Asian people striking the USN in a safe port thousands of miles from the expected area of conflict was inconceivable. It took many months for that mindset to dissipate, which is why a lot of the conspiracy theories which popped up right after the attack inferred German planning or even outright participation in the attack.
I do feel that General Short and Admiral Kimmel got a harsher deal from Washington than they deserved. MacArthur lost all of his planes in the Philippines the following day, and became a hero. Short and Kimmel were not colorful characters or brilliant leaders, but they were unfairly treated when compared with MacArthur and Brereton. Their talents -- and Kimmel's were pretty considerable -- should not have been left to waste. As Prange wrote, "There was enough blame to go around at Pearl Harbor."
Wow I am suprised what you learn in school is not objective in your history books. I bet you dont even discuss alternative reasons for this attack and just push on with the official version without even criticizing or discussing it. Just like accepting it. That is intersting how your school system teaches your children not to make their own conclusions and stick with the mainstream. Anyway..
I am aware of many of the facts but some cannot be concluded for sure. I am an academic person that reads and estimates all the facts objectively. I am fully neutral and I dont accuse neither the US or Japan for the escalation of WWII. Fully neutral.
What put this this theory into my head was after reason George C. Marshalls diary pages published on the net by the archives. Remarkable is a comment in October 1941 where its said something like if the US are to go to war against Japan it would be better to let the Japanese make the first move.
And by the way how do I remove posts in this thread not having anything to do with the topic?
Nice try there, but you failed miserably to establish your neutrality.
If you were truly neutral you wouldn't be responding with the typically condescending attitude of an academic attempting to revile those who assert your premise is flawed.
Old Jack loved lemons. Maybe it came from his time in Mexico. He had an abiding love for those poeple and their culture. An admirer, in Florida, would send him boxes of lemons. You could always see old Jack sucking on a lemon when there was work to be done. Nice to know his namesake ship carrys on this little bit of history. Ciao. JWEORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
In USS Stonewall Jackson's wardroom, on the top of the heart-shaped "coffee table" in the forward part of the compartment away from the main dining table, there was a tile mosaic glued firmly to the steel surface of the table. It showed his saber, his gloves, crossed, and a small pile of lemons. The lore was it was commissioned by his great-great-granddaughter, the boat's sponsor. It really didn't fit with the rest of the room.
ORIGINAL: Symon
Old Jack loved lemons. Maybe it came from his time in Mexico. He had an abiding love for those poeple and their culture. An admirer, in Florida, would send him boxes of lemons. You could always see old Jack sucking on a lemon when there was work to be done. Nice to know his namesake ship carrys on this little bit of history. Ciao. JWEORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58
In USS Stonewall Jackson's wardroom, on the top of the heart-shaped "coffee table" in the forward part of the compartment away from the main dining table, there was a tile mosaic glued firmly to the steel surface of the table. It showed his saber, his gloves, crossed, and a small pile of lemons. The lore was it was commissioned by his great-great-granddaughter, the boat's sponsor. It really didn't fit with the rest of the room.
ORIGINAL: Symon
Sorry to Canoerebel for responding to his post. It was just the last one in the thread.
Canoerebel is an historian and editor/publisher of an historical magazine. As such, he is bound by factual matters, of historical significance. That is his paradigm.
Mine is different. Fat, smelly, pimply faced, 12 year-olds, that can’t get a date no matter how much money they offer, just ain’t in it, so they have to play the tin foil hat card and make pronunciamento about conspiracies, in order to validate their pathetic existence.
This is a forum dealing with the Pacific War. Take your fat, smelly, conspiracy crap, shove it up your brown spot, and go away. JWE
ORIGINAL: DeZanic
ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard
ORIGINAL: DeZanic
AND what if these carriers would have been spotted in time, would the US intervene? Would there be any war declaration anyway. What was the Japanese plan B in case the task force got discovered? I mean certainly the US would have increased the presence of patrols around Pearl Harbor to prevent the Japanese trying to come close again if this first attempt would have failed. So what would have happened if the carriers got discovered?
Lets discuss.
It's important to note several things about Pearl Harbor: the Japanese did not fully expect the attack to be a surprise. They anticipated the possibility of facing an alerted enemy. They figured to lose two carriers. In that regard, they were surprised themselves. There's always been speculation that had the US battleship fleet received adequate warning that getting underway and out into deep water might have resulted in a greater loss of life had the Japanese found them. The shallow depth of Pearl Harbor ensured many ships would fight again.
Equally importantly is that most of the conspiracy theories about Pearl Harbor display a lot of ex post facto knowledge. The idea, for example, that FDR would sacrifice what were later seen as outdated warships (second-generation battleships and older destroyers). At the time, carrier operations were entirely new, and very few nations had mastered them. Not even the Japanese conceded the seas to carriers...the plan for Midway six months later called for the coup de grace to be delivered not by Nagumo's carriers, but by Yamamoto's powerful battleship division, led by the Yamato. If a war was going to be fought, the planners of 1941 expected it to be fought by those second-generation battleships lined up at Pearl Harbor, with the carriers in a supporting role.
There's also the point that tethering the battleships at Hawaii without torpedo nets was not as stupid as it sounded. The torpedoes the Japanese used in the attack were new and highly secret. The potency of Japanese torpedoes came as a shock to the US throughout the first months of the war.
And if Pearl Harbor is the subject of so many conspiracy theories, then the Battle of Savo Island, on August 8/9, 1942, should be even more controversial. Four Allied cruisers sunk, 1,000 bluejackets drowned, with no damage inflicted on the Japanese in return. That was nine months into the war, and the US Navy still was operating with a complacent mindset nine months after "The Day of Infamy." You see the same comedy of errors, missed intelligence and luck as at Pearl Harbor, but you never hear conspiracy theories on how the Japanese got the drop on the USN in the midst of an important counteroffensive.
The bottom line to me on Pearl Harbor is that the Americans underestimated the Japanese in 1941 as diminutive yellow men in buck teeth and spectacles who bowed a lot and made cheap imitation goods. In the racial environment of the 1940s the idea of an Asian people striking the USN in a safe port thousands of miles from the expected area of conflict was inconceivable. It took many months for that mindset to dissipate, which is why a lot of the conspiracy theories which popped up right after the attack inferred German planning or even outright participation in the attack.
I do feel that General Short and Admiral Kimmel got a harsher deal from Washington than they deserved. MacArthur lost all of his planes in the Philippines the following day, and became a hero. Short and Kimmel were not colorful characters or brilliant leaders, but they were unfairly treated when compared with MacArthur and Brereton. Their talents -- and Kimmel's were pretty considerable -- should not have been left to waste. As Prange wrote, "There was enough blame to go around at Pearl Harbor."
Wow I am suprised what you learn in school is not objective in your history books. I bet you dont even discuss alternative reasons for this attack and just push on with the official version without even criticizing or discussing it. Just like accepting it. That is intersting how your school system teaches your children not to make their own conclusions and stick with the mainstream. Anyway..
I am aware of many of the facts but some cannot be concluded for sure. I am an academic person that reads and estimates all the facts objectively. I am fully neutral and I dont accuse neither the US or Japan for the escalation of WWII. Fully neutral.
What put this this theory into my head was after reason George C. Marshalls diary pages published on the net by the archives. Remarkable is a comment in October 1941 where its said something like if the US are to go to war against Japan it would be better to let the Japanese make the first move.
And by the way how do I remove posts in this thread not having anything to do with the topic?
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Matters of history are often up for discussion, interpretation and study. But certain things are beyond dispute because they are so well established. To dispute settled matters and, in so doing, to actually besmirth the reputations of historical people, can be pretty darn offensive.
ORIGINAL: jeffk3510
ORIGINAL: DeZanic
ORIGINAL: Bo Rearguard
It's important to note several things about Pearl Harbor: the Japanese did not fully expect the attack to be a surprise. They anticipated the possibility of facing an alerted enemy. They figured to lose two carriers. In that regard, they were surprised themselves. There's always been speculation that had the US battleship fleet received adequate warning that getting underway and out into deep water might have resulted in a greater loss of life had the Japanese found them. The shallow depth of Pearl Harbor ensured many ships would fight again.
Equally importantly is that most of the conspiracy theories about Pearl Harbor display a lot of ex post facto knowledge. The idea, for example, that FDR would sacrifice what were later seen as outdated warships (second-generation battleships and older destroyers). At the time, carrier operations were entirely new, and very few nations had mastered them. Not even the Japanese conceded the seas to carriers...the plan for Midway six months later called for the coup de grace to be delivered not by Nagumo's carriers, but by Yamamoto's powerful battleship division, led by the Yamato. If a war was going to be fought, the planners of 1941 expected it to be fought by those second-generation battleships lined up at Pearl Harbor, with the carriers in a supporting role.
There's also the point that tethering the battleships at Hawaii without torpedo nets was not as stupid as it sounded. The torpedoes the Japanese used in the attack were new and highly secret. The potency of Japanese torpedoes came as a shock to the US throughout the first months of the war.
And if Pearl Harbor is the subject of so many conspiracy theories, then the Battle of Savo Island, on August 8/9, 1942, should be even more controversial. Four Allied cruisers sunk, 1,000 bluejackets drowned, with no damage inflicted on the Japanese in return. That was nine months into the war, and the US Navy still was operating with a complacent mindset nine months after "The Day of Infamy." You see the same comedy of errors, missed intelligence and luck as at Pearl Harbor, but you never hear conspiracy theories on how the Japanese got the drop on the USN in the midst of an important counteroffensive.
The bottom line to me on Pearl Harbor is that the Americans underestimated the Japanese in 1941 as diminutive yellow men in buck teeth and spectacles who bowed a lot and made cheap imitation goods. In the racial environment of the 1940s the idea of an Asian people striking the USN in a safe port thousands of miles from the expected area of conflict was inconceivable. It took many months for that mindset to dissipate, which is why a lot of the conspiracy theories which popped up right after the attack inferred German planning or even outright participation in the attack.
I do feel that General Short and Admiral Kimmel got a harsher deal from Washington than they deserved. MacArthur lost all of his planes in the Philippines the following day, and became a hero. Short and Kimmel were not colorful characters or brilliant leaders, but they were unfairly treated when compared with MacArthur and Brereton. Their talents -- and Kimmel's were pretty considerable -- should not have been left to waste. As Prange wrote, "There was enough blame to go around at Pearl Harbor."
Wow I am suprised what you learn in school is not objective in your history books. I bet you dont even discuss alternative reasons for this attack and just push on with the official version without even criticizing or discussing it. Just like accepting it. That is intersting how your school system teaches your children not to make their own conclusions and stick with the mainstream. Anyway..
I am aware of many of the facts but some cannot be concluded for sure. I am an academic person that reads and estimates all the facts objectively. I am fully neutral and I dont accuse neither the US or Japan for the escalation of WWII. Fully neutral.
What put this this theory into my head was after reason George C. Marshalls diary pages published on the net by the archives. Remarkable is a comment in October 1941 where its said something like if the US are to go to war against Japan it would be better to let the Japanese make the first move.
And by the way how do I remove posts in this thread not having anything to do with the topic?
Don't sweat it man. People here just rape "newbies". Heaven forbid you have an opinion. You'll find out just how much fun it is.
ORIGINAL: General Patton
From what I have read and heard over the years, IF the US knew the japanese were of of PH, there wasn't much they could do. If they sortied the BB's to attack the KB, with of without the 2 CV's in the area, they would of taken large losses in men and machines. Much higher than just letting them get bombed in PH. There's a lot more to it. This is from a special I saw on Discover or military channel a few years back. My $.02....GP
ORIGINAL: Canoerebel
Your wife?
1. How can I be a sailor? You ever seen a canoe with a sail? (Large Slow Target might have, come to think of it....)
ORIGINAL: geofflambert
I didn't mean to besmirth Canoerebel but he should feel free to besmirth me.
Canoerebel, that should be a word. [:D] I'm going to do my part in getting dictionaries to acknowledge that.
ORIGINAL: witpqs
You can't besmirth CanoeRebel, he's out shopping:
That's a chimera. You can't depict such things in this forum. Just imagine, canoes having assignations with catboats, what an abomination!
