|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 14, 2020 12:58:47 GMT
I said previously that the American public needed its isolationism turned. Well, I also said people were giving Hitler money because Hitler wanted to fight Russian Communism. (And because they were buying his book too, but anyway) It turns out companies were working with the Germans during the 1930s. Many people felt a responsibility for punishing Germany as being the sole reason for world war one. Many knew the continued collapse of the Ottoman Empire and expansion into, and changes within, that Empire were also a huge cause for the first world war too, however. That, and many industry leaders feared Communism by 1936. So working with the Germans,... paying Germans, seemed better than becoming red. Here's an example of some companies willing to help the Germans during the 1930s: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htmAlso, the earliest Panzer tanks were actually assembled in Russia of all places somewhere in the late 1920s, I've heard. So the money German was pulling in during the decades prior to the war had cast a widespread spell, even upon Hitler's worst enemy. www.historynet.com/devils-bargain-germany-and-russia-before-wwii.htmPoint is, FDR wasn't just turning an attitude of isolation. He was also asking industry heads to bail on contracts and see their best customer as the enemy now. It was a huge turnaround. To think that during 1937, 38, 39, 40 certain leaders within America didn't have their eyes upon the situation... the ENTIRE situation (including the Japanese, Chinese, etc) is foolish. This didn't happen over the course of a weekend, after all. They weren't hypnotized by actions on the Atlantic. The American leadership established spies in Japan, well before December, 1941. And, as I say, were holding sea trails and training in the Pacific 1937. American leadership watched the entire Axis build up. It also watched as industry helped. These leaders needed a clear means to turn the country 180 degrees, and another scrap or battle wasn't going to apparently do it. A dirty sneak attack, a "surprise" might, though. And one was falling directly into their lap. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 14, 2020 14:18:20 GMT
I said previously that the American public needed its isolationism turned. Well, I also said people were giving Hitler money because Hitler wanted to fight Russian Communism. (And because they were buying his book too, but anyway) It turns out companies were working with the Germans during the 1930s. Many people felt a responsibility for punishing Germany as being the sole reason for world war one. Many knew the continued collapse of the Ottoman Empire and expansion into, and changes within, that Empire were also a huge cause for the first world war too, however. That, and many industry leaders feared Communism by 1936. So working with the Germans,... paying Germans, seemed better than becoming red. Here's an example of some companies willing to help the Germans during the 1930s: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/daily/nov98/nazicars30.htmAlso, the earliest Panzer tanks were actually assembled in Russia of all places somewhere in the late 1920s, I've heard. So the money German was pulling in during the decades prior to the war had cast a widespread spell, even upon Hitler's worst enemy. www.historynet.com/devils-bargain-germany-and-russia-before-wwii.htmPoint is, FDR wasn't just turning an attitude of isolation. He was also asking industry heads to bail on contracts and see their best customer as the enemy now. It was a huge turnaround. To think that during 1937, 38, 39, 40 certain leaders within America didn't have their eyes upon the situation... the ENTIRE situation (including the Japanese, Chinese, etc) is foolish. This didn't happen over the course of a weekend, after all. They weren't hypnotized by actions on the Atlantic. The American leadership established spies in Japan, well before December, 1941. And, as I say, were holding sea trails and training in the Pacific 1937. American leadership watched the entire Axis build up. It also watched as industry helped. These leaders needed a clear means to turn the country 180 degrees, and another scrap or battle wasn't going to apparently do it. A dirty sneak attack, a "surprise" might, though. And one was falling directly into their lap. your argument is still that they wanted an attack from Japan to turn opinions against germany. |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 14, 2020 14:32:18 GMT
They SAW an attack that would finally change attitudes, if that attack were bad enough.
Not that they wanted some attack, specifically from Japan.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrfatso on Nov 14, 2020 16:23:23 GMT
It had previously been argued, rather firmly, that the U.S. was not yet at war. So U.S. alert levels were low and contact not a consideration for Hawaii, December 1941. It turns out we were at war. Worse, it was on the Atlantic coast, nearer the U.S. war department such that officials there would be in constant awareness of war. So, as it turns out, entering 1941 alert levels were high. (At least within the war department and FDRs offices they were) There is absolutely NO excuse for any "denied intelligence" December, 1941, denied Hawaii command by U.S. War Department officials in Washington. Yes but you were not in a declared war and certainly not a declared war in the Pacific with Japan at the time, it’s still possible to be on a more relaxed footing in the Pacific. |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 14, 2020 16:38:27 GMT
They SAW an attack that would finally change attitudes, if that attack were bad enough. Not that they wanted some attack, specifically from Japan. you are still making assumptions about their prejudices based on your prejudices. according to Wikipedia there was still a prejudice in the strategy group that there was no way Japan could make a successful attack, despite the admirals in the pacific feeling there was a risk. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Events_leading_to_the_attack_on_Pearl_Harbor |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 14, 2020 16:40:29 GMT
It had previously been argued, rather firmly, that the U.S. was not yet at war. So U.S. alert levels were low and contact not a consideration for Hawaii, December 1941. It turns out we were at war. Worse, it was on the Atlantic coast, nearer the U.S. war department such that officials there would be in constant awareness of war. So, as it turns out, entering 1941 alert levels were high. (At least within the war department and FDRs offices they were) There is absolutely NO excuse for any "denied intelligence" December, 1941, denied Hawaii command by U.S. War Department officials in Washington. Yes but you were not in a declared war and certainly not a declared war in the Pacific with Japan at the time, it’s still possible to be on a more relaxed footing in the Pacific. This - |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 14, 2020 16:43:31 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 14, 2020 16:46:00 GMT
I already said it has it's own page
..
Look back for what I said regarding that
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 14, 2020 16:48:57 GMT
I already said it has it's own page .. Look back for what I said regarding that I'd already forgotten it, then. I found it as a see also on the page about the leadup. |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 14, 2020 16:51:50 GMT
Just wait til Biden, now President Biden finishes what he promised the Kimmel family he'd do.
Can we just agree to that?
Seems far more simple than trying to twist and spin endlessly, for what looks like to me as face-saving retorts at this point.
|
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 14, 2020 16:59:42 GMT
Just wait til Biden, now President Biden finishes what he promised the Kimmel family he'd do. Can we just agree to that? Seems far more simple than trying to twist and spin endlessly, for what looks like to me as face-saving retorts at this point. I do agree that clearing Kimmel's name is in order. reasons aside, we can agree that the ball was dropped at the highest levels. |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 14, 2020 17:27:34 GMT
Just wait til Biden, now President Biden finishes what he promised the Kimmel family he'd do. Can we just agree to that? Seems far more simple than trying to twist and spin endlessly, for what looks like to me as face-saving retorts at this point. I do agree that clearing Kimmel's name is in order. reasons aside, we can agree that the ball was dropped at the highest levels. Biden's pardon would be the first of many steps. Will need qualified historians to follow up and complete the story once and for all. Give it its due time. |
|
|
|
Post by Cybermortis on Nov 15, 2020 22:02:24 GMT
Some notes;
Pearl Harbor WAS on alert. The problem was it had been on alert for quite some time when the attack came in, and as a result the personal had understandably gotten somewhat complacent; You can see the same habit with the current Covid situation.
Both the US and UK expected the Japanese to launch an attack at some point, its why Singapore got a new commander and fresh troops just prior to Pearl Harbor and why Pearl had been on alert. However they expected the attacks to take place in the Philippines and Dutch East Indies where the oil was located.
Logically it makes no sense to 'allow' the attack to gave gone ahead for a couple of reasons;
1; The thinking at the time was that the primary strength of a naval force rested in its battleships with carriers being secondary support units. In this light the absence of the American Carriers is bizarre. If you knew an attack was coming in, why would you leave the battleships in port but send the Carriers away? Surely you'd either send all of your ships to sea or just the Battleships?
2; If the oil stores at Pearl had been destroyed it would have crippled the USN's ability to conduct operations in the Pacific until they could be repaired or rebuilt. Either you are gambling on the Japanese not attacking or destroying your fuel stores. Which makes zero sense. Or you know the Japanese will ignore the fuel tanks, which implies the Japanese were somehow in on the plan. Which makes even less sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 15, 2020 22:29:27 GMT
Seems U.S. had been trying for some time to get Japan to "take the first shot" Battleships had apparently been moved "out of port (Pearl)" out to safer waters... but, uh huh, were ordered by Washington to get back inside Pearl. All detailed very well in this article: www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/12/07/commentary/japan-commentary/pearl-harbor-sneak-attack-hardly-surprise/I don't know how much sense it all makes. When you are attempting to get suckerpunched the odds are naturally against you. But, Admiral Kimmel was clear: he was utterly and intentionally left out of the loop with denied intelligence |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 15, 2020 22:39:00 GMT
Seems U.S. had been trying for some time to get Japan to "take the first shot" Battleships had apparently been moved "out of port (Pearl)" out to safer waters... but, uh huh, were ordered by Washington to get back inside Pearl. All detailed very well in this article: www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/12/07/commentary/japan-commentary/pearl-harbor-sneak-attack-hardly-surprise/I don't know how much sense it all makes. When you are attempting to get suckerpunched the odds are naturally against you. But, Admiral Kimmel was clear: he was utterly and intentionally left out of the loop with denied intelligence and again: the top brass thought pearl was too shallow to drop torpedoes from airplanes. they had submarine nets, so they were safe from submarines. and they knew any strike would include battleships, so no worries about a sneak attack. the real big question was how many things between japan and hawaii would the japanese push them off of before they could get the public behind going to war. |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 15, 2020 22:50:59 GMT
Seems U.S. had been trying for some time to get Japan to "take the first shot" Battleships had apparently been moved "out of port (Pearl)" out to safer waters... but, uh huh, were ordered by Washington to get back inside Pearl. All detailed very well in this article: www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/2016/12/07/commentary/japan-commentary/pearl-harbor-sneak-attack-hardly-surprise/I don't know how much sense it all makes. When you are attempting to get suckerpunched the odds are naturally against you. But, Admiral Kimmel was clear: he was utterly and intentionally left out of the loop with denied intelligence and again: the top brass thought pearl was too shallow to drop torpedoes from airplanes. they had submarine nets, so they were safe from submarines. and they knew any strike would include battleships, so no worries about a sneak attack. the real big question was how many things between japan and hawaii would the japanese push them off of before they could get the public behind going to war. Highly suggest you read an article before commenting on it. Yes. Japanese article. Are we going to say that they are biased and therefore they have nothing researched in their article? I'll remind you, I am an ex Long Range Surveillance team leader. The old dogs who taught us were LRRP from the Vietnam era. It was well understood you could be used to draw enemy fire ... get THEM to take the first shot (though not something officially admitted). Calling fire in on yourself wasn't a goal, but was a familiar option. This technique is not new to the United States (whether it makes sense or not) |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 15, 2020 23:53:43 GMT
and again: the top brass thought pearl was too shallow to drop torpedoes from airplanes. they had submarine nets, so they were safe from submarines. and they knew any strike would include battleships, so no worries about a sneak attack. the real big question was how many things between japan and hawaii would the japanese push them off of before they could get the public behind going to war. Highly suggest you read an article before commenting on it. Yes. Japanese article. Are we going to say that they are biased and therefore they have nothing researched in their article? I'll remind you, I am an ex Long Range Surveillance team leader. The old dogs who taught us were LRRP from the Vietnam era. It was well understood you could be used to draw enemy fire ... get THEM to take the first shot (though not something officially admitted). Calling fire in on yourself wasn't a goal, but was a familiar option. This technique is not new to the United States (whether it makes sense or not) from the article: so based on that, there was no need to allow the attack to get the people to support the war. it also mentions that the US had pretty much cleared out of the pacific to provide the japanese with targets. |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 16, 2020 1:26:32 GMT
Highly suggest you read an article before commenting on it. Yes. Japanese article. Are we going to say that they are biased and therefore they have nothing researched in their article? I'll remind you, I am an ex Long Range Surveillance team leader. The old dogs who taught us were LRRP from the Vietnam era. It was well understood you could be used to draw enemy fire ... get THEM to take the first shot (though not something officially admitted). Calling fire in on yourself wasn't a goal, but was a familiar option. This technique is not new to the United States (whether it makes sense or not) from the article: so based on that, there was no need to allow the attack to get the people to support the war. it also mentions that the US had pretty much cleared out of the pacific to provide the japanese with targets. You are improving. You made it three paragraphs in. Keep reading... as in - According to a diary entry of Secretary of War Henry Stimson, President Franklin D. Roosevelt stated in late November 1941 that the problem at hand was how to “maneuver” the Japanese “into firing the first shot,” thus enabling the American government to gain the full support of its people. Stimson’s post-Pearl Harbor reaction was that the “Japs” had “solved the whole thing.” |
|
|
|
Post by the light works on Nov 16, 2020 14:00:07 GMT
from the article: so based on that, there was no need to allow the attack to get the people to support the war. it also mentions that the US had pretty much cleared out of the pacific to provide the japanese with targets. You are improving. You made it three paragraphs in. Keep reading... as in - According to a diary entry of Secretary of War Henry Stimson, President Franklin D. Roosevelt stated in late November 1941 that the problem at hand was how to “maneuver” the Japanese “into firing the first shot,” thus enabling the American government to gain the full support of its people. Stimson’s post-Pearl Harbor reaction was that the “Japs” had “solved the whole thing.” cyber has already addressed that: |
|
|
|
Post by rmc on Nov 16, 2020 15:44:01 GMT
You needed something as a backing up of my claim that we allowed the Japanese attack.
If the memos and documents showing that Washington intended to allow Japan a first strike isn't enough for you, then that is your problem. (Said memos, notes from diary, etc. were the stated standard requested of me previously)
I've done my job.
Again, wait for Biden to respond to the Kimmel family.
Besides, to speculate an answer for what Cyber stated, all I can say at this point is can you think of some examples elsewhere in history where a standing president asks his generals to do things that the generals think is not going to work or be wise? I sure can.
|
|
