El Destructo

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

Re the WWII preparedness thing - FDR had been trying to engage in the war, as he thought it was both inevitable and unavoidable, much of the congress and the country thought that it was "their" problem, over in Europe, or Asia, or wherever. I'm pretty sure that the American military was aware that it was a real war and had plans.

The country at large had managed to ignore the war. Pearl Harbor was a complete surprise to my father's family. They really didn't believe that it was a real war that could possibly affect their lives. December 7 changed that perception, my dad was in line down at the courthouse on December 8.

My mother's parents were living in Buenos Aires, Mother was at nursing school in St. Louis, and she'd been unable to go home to her parents for a couple of years because none of them were willing to risk meeting a U-boat at sea. They were less surprised by the war, per se, but still shocked by the Pearl Harbor attack.

I'm not surprised that the military was expecting involvement in the war - they have a different perspective than civilians do. As long as the military is subject to civilian control, as ours is, all they can do is prepare as well as they can within the available funding, and hope for the best. Preparedness is the military's obligation.

It was not so much a matter of delaying engagement until we were ready, as not believing we'd need to engage at all. There was a major disconnect between those who felt that America was isolated by those nice wide oceans and those who felt part of the world at large.

[OperaTenor]

Shap, are you telling me the carriers were away from Pearl because we knew Pearl was going to be attacked?!
Every book I've read on the subject states it was sheer luck they were out at the time of the attack.
Besides, we had no idea as to the value of aircraft carriers until they were blooded in the war. They were thought of more as defense support for the real fighting ships, the battleships, not the centerpiece of an offensive strike force.

There is a fundamental difference between the end of WWII and what's going on now: In WWII, the countries involved formally surrendered to us. Such has not been the case in either Iraq or Afghanistan, and Iraq people keep dying in increasing numbers.

Just because our founding fathers were noble, and I admire that about them tremendously, doesn't mean they were confident of beating the British. As a matter of fact, wasn't our change in fighting style more a product of necessity and desperation than of superior strategic thinking?

As for me, I don't know if I have what it would have taken to lead then, but I certainly would have joined.

PS. Selma, as usual, is right on the money.

<small>[ 06-03-2005, 01:58 PM: Message edited by: OperaTenor ]</small>

[Shapley]

OT,

As I said in the initial post, there are those who believe that the attack was known about in advance:

http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=408

I also said I don't know enough about it to say so one way or the other. However, I do believe the simultaneous construction of four battleships in 1940 was unusual for a nation not expecting to go to war.

Regarding carriers, there was a school of thought that carriers would replace battleships as the pre-eminent force in naval warfare, and many of those carrier proponents held prominent positions within the military structure. It was an argument that wasn't settled until World War II was ended. The conspiracy theorists conclude they protected the carriers by keeping them afloat, sacrificing the battleships, which were due for retirement one the Iowa Class hit the seas anyhow.

V/R
Shapley

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

Ahem. While we're on about "those who believe", I'd like to point out that:

There are those who believe Elvis is still alive.

There are those who believe in Aliens.

There are those who believe Elvis is an Alien.

There are those who believe in Sasquatch.

There are those who believe Elvis is a mutant Sasquatch.

There is somebody who believes almost any silly thing you'd care to name, and somebody else silly enough to argue with them rather than simply giggle. Entirely too many of them manage to find space in the MIB's favorite news publications. Conspiracy theorists, those whom I've been unable to avoid meeting, seem loosely wrapped at best.

[OperaTenor]

Hi Shap,

This is a review on Amazon.com of the book the article you linked is based on, from a former cryptologist who seems to be very familiar with the facts:

"A Navy Cryptologic Veteran's Review of Day of Deceit, November 26, 1999
Reviewer: Philip H. Jacobsen "k6fw" (San Diego) - See all my reviews
The author made a thorough search of many repositories and contacted numerous persons to justify his long held belief that President Roosevelt actively fomented war with Japan as a pretext to aid Britain in its fight with Hitler. The book further alleges that through conspiracies continuing today FDR not only kept the Hawaiian commanders from obtaining information on the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor but ordered or had ordered actions that prevented those commanders from discovering the attacking force and adequately defending Pearl Harbor. In the book, FDR's co-conspirators include General Marshall, Admirals Stark, Ingersoll, Captain Turner and Commander McCollum and by implication Admiral Noyes, Captain Redman, Commander Rochefort and many others even though these persons are long dead and cannot defend themselves. The book misinterprets several new documents including then Lt. Cmdr McCollum's response to the enactment of the Tripartite Pact and two well established documents of the Pearl Harbor arena. For the first time, it claims one well known message was sent part in code with the location Hitokappu Wan (the sailing port of the Pearl Harbor attack force) being sent in the clear within the message even though its decrypt clearly shows JN-25B code was used and such an anomoly in the super encipherment JN-25B system is absurd and unprecidented. No authority for such claim is provided. Next, the book implies the famous message "Climb Mt. Niitaka 1208" was sent in the clear from one Japanese historian's report while Yamamoto's biographer says it was encoded in a five numeral code and the decrypt in the National Archives clearly has the code designation JN-25B on the face of the document. The book misleads the uninitiated reader by lumping the relatively simple JN-25A code and cipher system that took 14 months to read with the much more complicated JN-25B system together as "Code Book D." Thus, the final successes of JN-25A are imputed to JN-25B even though the first significant reported decrypt of the latter much more complicated code and cipher system was in early 1942. The book omits the fact that the November and December 1941 raw intercepted messages from Corregidor, Guam and Hawaii on which so much is relied were actually enroute to Washington DC by ship and rail on 7 December 1941 and thus were not decrypted until 1945-46 and the most promising of those decrypts were translated in 1946-47 and are available in the National Archives today. Also not discussed is the fact that Station Hypo in Hawaii under Rochefort was only permitted to work on the unproductive Admiral's code system before Pearl Harbor and was not given the go ahead to work on JN-25B until a week or so after the attack. It is claimed that unkown censors are holding back vital decrypts in the National Archives or elsewhere because certain Station Message Serial (SMS) numbers and original versions of messages appearing on Japanese naval broadcasts are missing. However, the so called "missing" messages can be attributed to the fact that less than 60 percent of Japanese naval messages were intercepted and many were originally sent by land-line, cable or visual means when tied up at docks or anchored in a Japanese harbor. To the book's credit it does not repeat the old revisionist conspiracy theory that the Winds Execute message was received and covered up. However, it does regurgitate the old story of Seaman Robert D. Ogg's report of commercial operators hearing transmissions from the North Pacific. However, when deposed by Commander Newman, Ogg was not sure whether such transmissions were Japanese or Russian. Similar hearsay reports by dead Dutch cryptographers of signals in the North Pacific are repeated although now the book says they came from the Kuriles. Nevertheless, this book will sell well among Roosevelt haters, many Admiral Kimmel and General Short supporters as well as dedicated revisionist conspiracy theorists.
"

He pretty much debunks most of the allegations in the book.

[Shapley]

I don't get why you're wasting time debunking it. I've already said I didn't know one way or the other, and I really don't care. You asked, and I provided.

My first point was simply that preparations for war, in the guise of extensive shipbuilding, were underway for over a year before Pearl Harbour. I have no data on construction of tanks, artilery, or other materiel.

My second point is that Sun Tzu's statement obviously does not apply to situations in which you are the recipient of the aggression, since that is beyond your control. Unless you want to be like the French, and surrender, you fight, prepared or not, when you are invaded. Sun Tzu's statement refers to the criteria under which offensive action should be carried out, not defense.

My third point, as Nicole pointed out moment's ago on the air, is that it way past time for some Watkin's Ale, and all that it leads to.

V/R
Shapley

[Shapley]

Selma,

Surely you're not trying to tell me that Elvis is dead. Ha, Ha, Ha, the things some people will believe.

And he is a mutant sasquatch alien.

And a member of PNAC.

And the Tri-Lateral Commission.

And he lives in a boarding house run by Amelia Earhart. Bruce Lee lives there, too.

V/R
Shapley

P.S., This is d*** good ale!

<small>[ 06-03-2005, 05:30 PM: Message edited by: Shapley ]</small>

[rwcrooks]

It seems to me that the battles in the months following Pearl Harbor are the last ones the Japanese won. From then on, their empire continually shrunk.

Also, have you ever seen a picture of the USS Arizona? She was launched in 1915 and battleships of her class were so far behind the technology curve it wasn't funny. The next time you're in HI, go to the memorial and look at the pics of the Arizona and then go aboard the Missouri and see the difference. If she wasn't sunk on 7 Dec, it would only have been a matter of time.

All of the carriers were untouched. All of the oil stored in the Islands was also untouched. There was no manufacturing base in HI. It was basically a naval base and the Japanese couldn't even finish it off. Here's a trivia question for all of you Googlers ... How many of the ships at Pearl were sunk for good (not refloated and brought back into service during the war)?

Even Yamamoto knew it was a mistake to attack the US. I firmly believe that FDR knew we could win the war. Heck, we basically beat the Japanese with one hand tied behind our back (otherwise engaged in Europe.)

As for the minutemen, wasn't it Washington's strategy to create an insurgency and tie up 2/3 of the British Army and most of its fleet until they ran out of money? It worked. I fear the insurgents in Iraq may have read a little history.

Japan was an island nation trying to hold a conquered empire together already bogged down from war.

[Shapley]

Rich,

Only three ships, all battleships, were not refloated. Of these, the UTAH, had already been converted from wartime use, and was officially categorized as an auxiliary. She was a loss before the attack.

V/R
Shapley

[shostakovich]

From Shap:
Selma,

Surely you're not trying to tell me that Elvis is dead. Ha, Ha, Ha, the things some people will believe.

And he is a mutant sasquatch alien.

And a member of PNAC.

And the Tri-Lateral Commission.

And he lives in a boarding house run by Amelia Earhart. Bruce Lee lives there, too.
--------------------------------------------------------

I didn't know this. Boy, it really pays to keep an eye on Fox News. I wonder if Elvis would accept the nomination for UN ambassador. He's very popular, and sings much better than John Bolton. Voinovich was right. We CAN do better than John Bolton.
Relieved to Know