Pearl Harbor was allowed so as to break US isolationism?

to be more specific: there are three possibilities: first, and one that nobody can really argue - that Washington was blissfully unaware of Japanese aggression. second - that Washington was aware of Japanese aggression, knew that it was going to turn into a shooting war, and was determined to for Japan into the role of the aggressor by refusing to fire the first shot; but didn't pay enough attention to figure out the first shot would be an attack on pearl harbor. third: that the administration knew about Japanese aggression, got and understood enough information to know that Japan had committed to a plan to attack pearl harbor, and decided to allow the attack to succeed, because they thought it would take that extreme an incident to break the US out of its reluctance to go to war.

I am arguing the second. and I am under the impression that you are arguing the third.

I have a fellow firefighter (well, he's off doing other things, now)who did two tours in Baghdad. the rules of engagement for the second tour were to make them be the aggressor. yes, it's more stressful than being allowed to shoot first, but it's a valid ROE.

Harvard also did a study of why Kimmel and his army counterpart were scapegoated. their conclusion was that it was so Roosevelt could save face. but it also included this conclusion:


from this paper
dash.harvard.edu/bitstream/handle/1/37365049/GRIMALDI-DOCUMENT-2020.pdf?sequence=1

great, you have motive. now you only have to prove opportunity and intent. opportunity requires proof that the boffins in Washington knew the attack was aimed at pearl harbor. then you have to show proof that there was an order given to allow the attack to succeed.

and no, covering their own failure by scapegoating someone else is not proof. otherwise you've just proven that captain nope committed an attempted genocide of liberals in the US with COVID in order to secure his reelection.

I'm having trouble finding the citation, perhaps you could give me a better link to where the diary said "we want Japan to carry out a successful sneak attack at pearl harbor and destroy all but two of our battleships in the pacific and put us at a huge disadvantage before we go to war against them."

I've already pointed out that there is a difference between forcing your opponent to make the first move, and allowing your opponent to make an unopposed devastating first strike. wanting japan to strike first proves NOTHING except that Roosevelt wanted clear proof that Japan was the aggressor in the pacific.

you're claiming they did. by claiming their decision to force Japan to fire the first shot proves they knew about the pearl harbor attack and decided not to do anything about it; that is exactly the claim you are making.

the answer that gives is that Washington was culpable for dropping the ball.

You don't know what "answer that gives" until Biden has made his case for any correction.

But, I guess you are better than Biden. Or at least you think you know better than him. Because you sure don't think the Kimmel's deserve a do over.

With the available elements it would LOOK like it's building to that.

But, I don't know. Thus, the question.


And.. by the way...

I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT ALL YOU'VE SAID IN HERE BECAUSE THIS THREAD IS NOW UTTERLY JACKED!!! WOULD TAKE DAYS TO GO THROUGH IT ALL AGAIN!!

I'd almost agree if your statement included something about it being suspicious. Suspicious enough that papers are written about it, even til this day. And, admirals aren't in agreement that Kimmel deserved being blamed, etc.

Because knowing FDR desired a Japanese first strike, knowing that FDR himself was not a military man, and things start looking horribly suspicious when you look at the rest of it...

Like many other regular Americans, FDR likely thought in terms of battleships rather than aircraft carriers due to memories of world war one. But, by 1940, many in the navy were starting to realize what aircraft carriers could do.

Due to striking differences between FDR and some in the military, it certainly looks as though FDR underestimated what could happen if he got what he wanted with a Japanese first strike... and may have been going further against certain Naval commanders by ordering the delay of certain communications... the return of the fleet back into Pearl instead of leaving the fleet near the northern islands...


But, we've never seen a president in disagreement with his military. No. Never.

Many things have been said to counter the notions proposed here: the Japanese were thought to be unable to make it that far without being detected. Well, they were detected just as predicted. But, the information became suspiciously delayed. Another argument has been that most thought Japan didn't have the technology to make such an attack. Well, the Japanese fleet and capabilies of their fleet had been carefully looked at by 1940, at least by the military it had. Perhaps non military, including the president still thought in terms of world war one strategy, but military was certainly getting up to speed. And, lastly, it was argued that the prevailing thought at the time was that Japan would hit the Philippines. However, there were articles showing up November 30, 1941 in commonplace news papers all throughout Hawaii discussing how Japan could hit and hit by the coming weekend. So it doesn't sound like everyone discounted the Pearl as a target.

There was a huge turn around that needed to happen:

FDR campaigned to the American public on promises to stay out of the war. Most of the world since as early as 1905, including America, wanted little to do with the rise of Communism, even going as far as helping the new kid on the block who promised to directly fight communism: Adolf Hitler. That's right. A lot of people outside Germany backed him, at least until 1936 or so. Apparently, it was believed to be better to support a fascist than try to take on a communist.

But, by 1940, (and even three years before that) FDR, Churchill and others could see that we needed desperately to reverse course. Fight fascism rather than back it, enter the war against it rather than sitting idly by.

To make THAT 180 degree turn would require being hit, and being hit first. Would military appreciate the concern for an atmosphere of supportive public opinion when soldiers and assets were at risk for such a strike? Likely not.

The president wanted a political strike somewhere against the U.S. He mismanaged and underestimated what he was asking for, and military, like Kimmel & Stark, dealt with it the best they could...

The highest level in U.S. allowed Japan to hit Pearl Harbor not realizing what force Japan had. Meanwhile, Japan took that bait not realizing what force it would awaken.