Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
BCM
User Panel

Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
Link Posted: 5/5/2023 7:44:54 PM EDT
[#1]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FMJ3:

FDR was either inept or deceitful.  
View Quote




A progressive social democrat,...so he was both.
Link Posted: 5/5/2023 10:53:12 PM EDT
[#2]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By distrflman:


I didn't count the last two Iowa class as they were not laid down until after Pearl Harbor. Yeah 3 Alaska class made it to being laid down, once again after PH. I guess plans were drawn up before.
View Quote



The last 2 Iowas were instead of 2 Montana class.
Link Posted: 6/1/2023 9:08:56 PM EDT
[Last Edit: nihilsum] [#3]
This thread made possible by a combination of hindsight, stripping out the contemporary contextual elements, and the odd tendency to attribute everything to some sort of conspiracy.

The assertion that the administration wanted an open war is quite valid. Rather than 'baiting,' seeing it as a deliberate escalatory move to elicit some sort of response, is valid.

The notion that national command authority would willingly sacrifice a significant portion of their order of battle....not just anything, but capital assets that take years to a decade in peacetime to build, years to train, and a generation to build competency... for no military gain, is not credible. The question of naval aviation vs. 'big gun' ships was not yet settled in 1941, not in 1942, and arguably not completely settled until the last one was launched.

Plenty of evidence that the administration was capable of cynical, cold, and morally questionable actions. This wasn't one of them.




Why does everything have to be a cabalistic conspiracy carried out flawlessly by the same people we accuse of gross incompetence in the next post?

Or could it be that variables exist, uncertainty and mistakes are a thing, and fighting adaptive, smart people, let alone states, is hard?

Link Posted: 6/2/2023 2:23:02 PM EDT
[#4]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By nihilsum:
This thread made possible by a combination of hindsight, stripping out the contemporary contextual elements, and the odd tendency to attribute everything to some sort of conspiracy.

The assertion that the administration wanted an open war is quite valid. Rather than 'baiting,' seeing it as a deliberate escalatory move to elicit some sort of response, is valid.

The notion that national command authority would willingly sacrifice a significant portion of their order of battle....not just anything, but capital assets that take years to a decade in peacetime to build, years to train, and a generation to build competency... for no military gain, is not credible. The question of naval aviation vs. 'big gun' ships was not yet settled in 1941, not in 1942, and arguably not completely settled until the last one was launched.

Plenty of evidence that the administration was capable of cynical, cold, and morally questionable actions. This wasn't one of them.




Why does everything have to be a cabalistic conspiracy carried out flawlessly by the same people we accuse of gross incompetence in the next post?

Or could it be that variables exist, uncertainty and mistakes are a thing, and fighting adaptive, smart people, let alone states, is hard?

View Quote


Respectfully, I wish to rebut.  To wit:

1.  The principal aerial threat to capital ship was at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack was considered to be the aerial torpedo.  Pearl Harbor was considered to be too shallow to succesfully deploy aerial torpedoes.  The British successfully attacked in shallow water in November 1940 at the Battle of Taranto so the possibility that Pearl Harbor was vulnerable *SHOULD* have been known, but the successful Japanese use of a dummy wooden nose and break-away wooden fins greatly ramped up the damage over what conventional wisdom  would have expected in such an attack, more in point 2.

2.  Again, conventional wisdom was that Japanese aircraft were inferior copies of western aircraft.  Their actual capabilites were much greater, to the point that they could carry older 40cm armor piercing battleship shells that had been converted into armor piercing aerial bombs, whihc were alsso a surpise to the West.



Consider that the battleships present were basically WWI designs, and did nto have heavy deck armor, as large armor piercing aerial bombs were not known at the time of their design, nor was long range gunnery resulting in plunging fire through the deck possible due to the limitations in range-finding and fire direction.  So the capabilies of the naval level bombers were much greater than expected, whihc also increased the damage well beyond what conventional wisdom would expect.

3.  The attack was intended to create a window of 6 - 18 months where Japan had freedom of action in the Pacific without the possibility of interference by powerful American surface elements.  Japan presumed they could negotiate a favorable recognition of a fait accompli that legitimized their gains in CHina and the Pacific.  To that end, it was a successful - but it was a failure in that it also sowed the seeds of a resolute refusal to settle for anthing less than an unconditional surrender.
Link Posted: 6/2/2023 8:40:55 PM EDT
[Last Edit: nihilsum] [#5]
Rick-Oshay-

Fantastic post. Things like this make the history forum worthwhile. I agree with everything you said and I think your arguments are on point.

Not quite sure what you're rebutting.... I was just calling out the ridiculous premise in the OP.


Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rick-OShay:


Respectfully, I wish to rebut.  To wit:

1.  The principal aerial threat to capital ship was at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack was considered to be the aerial torpedo.  Pearl Harbor was considered to be too shallow to succesfully deploy aerial torpedoes.  The British successfully attacked in shallow water in November 1940 at the Battle of Taranto so the possibility that Pearl Harbor was vulnerable *SHOULD* have been known, but the successful Japanese use of a dummy wooden nose and break-away wooden fins greatly ramped up the damage over what conventional wisdom  would have expected in such an attack, more in point 2.

2.  Again, conventional wisdom was that Japanese aircraft were inferior copies of western aircraft.  Their actual capabilites were much greater, to the point that they could carry older 40cm armor piercing battleship shells that had been converted into armor piercing aerial bombs, whihc were alsso a surpise to the West.

https://www.bulletpicker.com/images/1397-075.png

Consider that the battleships present were basically WWI designs, and did nto have heavy deck armor, as large armor piercing aerial bombs were not known at the time of their design, nor was long range gunnery resulting in plunging fire through the deck possible due to the limitations in range-finding and fire direction.  So the capabilies of the naval level bombers were much greater than expected, whihc also increased the damage well beyond what conventional wisdom would expect.

3.  The attack was intended to create a window of 6 - 18 months where Japan had freedom of action in the Pacific without the possibility of interference by powerful American surface elements.  Japan presumed they could negotiate a favorable recognition of a fait accompli that legitimized their gains in CHina and the Pacific.  To that end, it was a successful - but it was a failure in that it also sowed the seeds of a resolute refusal to settle for anthing less than an unconditional surrender.
View Quote


I like the point on lack of protection against bombs and plunging fire, also gave the rare beast that is the coastal defense mortar it's time in the sun...




On the subject of the pacific war in general, I have spent far too little time but really enjoyed this one and will read it again:






Link Posted: 6/2/2023 9:48:18 PM EDT
[#6]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By nihilsum:
Rick-Oshay-

Fantastic post. Things like this make the history forum worthwhile. I agree with everything you said and I think your arguments are on point.

Not quite sure what you're rebutting.... I was just calling out the ridiculous premise in the OP.




I like the point on lack of protection against bombs and plunging fire, also gave the rare beast that is the coastal defense mortar it's time in the sun...

https://i0.wp.com/meaderingthroughtheprologue.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/batteryway.jpg?resize=584%2C396&ssl=1


On the subject of the pacific war in general, I have spent far too little time but really enjoyed this one and will read it again:

https://m.media-amazon.com/images/P/0812968581.01._SCLZZZZZZZ_SX500_.jpg




View Quote


My apologies for not being clear.  I was trying to make the case that IF knowledge was at hand that a specific attack on PH was forthcoming, that the level of damage would be believed to be much more minor that it actually turned out to be, and thus might have been considered "worth it" to get into the war on an active basis.
Link Posted: 6/7/2023 10:43:01 PM EDT
[#7]
Pearl Harbor got us into a war with Japan.  Germany then declared war on the US.  If Germany had not done that, would the US have declared war on Germany?
Link Posted: 6/7/2023 11:38:14 PM EDT
[#8]
FDR was an anti-American Progressive statist, fuck be upon him and his wheelchair.  He needs to burn for his evil internment of American citizens and other crimes.

The Japenese attacked Pearl Harbor and should have been destroyed for it.
Link Posted: 6/8/2023 12:07:23 AM EDT
[#9]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By couchlord:
Pearl Harbor got us into a war with Japan.  Germany then declared war on the US.  If Germany had not done that, would the US have declared war on Germany?
View Quote



The U.S. was already conducting combat operations against Germany.  Hitler's declaration was a formality that recognized actuality.
Link Posted: 3/23/2024 4:08:15 AM EDT
[#10]
Originally Posted By zapthycat:
There are no "right" answers, I'm wondering what your thoughts are-

First off, it's not even a real debate, FDR not only knew about the impending attack on Pearl Harbor, he baited Japan into it by dictating the US Navy move its primary Pacific base from San Diego to Pearl Harbor, to the point where he sacked the Admiral in charge who argued that a fully-supplied US fleet in San Diego was more of a deterrence than a half-supplied fleet in Hawaii, but whatever. If you don't know what the McCollum Memo is, where it's in writing that we should "completely embargo all U.S. trade with Japan, if by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better." - that's virtually a smoking gun.

The US Battlewagons were sacrificed because they were worse than useless, they were deathtraps. If we had defended them and they hadn't sank, they would have put to sea and been wiped out by the Yamato and Musashi, and thousands and thousands of men would have died in the deep, instead of being on shore leave or able to swim to the beach 100 feet away.

QUESTION FOR YOU:
So, was FDR justified in sacrificing a few thousand men to get the deathtraps out of commission, or should he have vigorously defended Pearl Harbor, knowing that if those BBs survived and got out to fight, every man on every ship was doomed?
View Quote


FDR was a Marxist half wit who was going to lose an election so he had to stoke up fear of an outside threat to draw attention away from his failures.

He will not be remembered fondly in the future nor should he.
Link Posted: 3/23/2024 5:11:21 AM EDT
[#11]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By zapthycat:


You missed the point. This isn't arguing the obvious.

And yeah, when the gov't investigates itself when it comes to joining a world war, do you really think they're going to "find themselves guilty"? Do you oppose this because you think government is too virtuo
View Quote
You probably believe we didn't go to the Moon either, don't you?
Link Posted: 3/23/2024 1:46:11 PM EDT
[#12]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Rick-OShay:

The last 2 Iowas were instead of 2 Montana class.
View Quote

No, the original plan was to build 6 Iowa's and 4 Montana's; which were basically all designed at the same time. When it came time to plan out the dry docks, steel armor supply and guns it was decided to build the Iowa's first and the Montana's later as the drydocks were full of Essex class carriers and despite the U.S. steel plants being greatly expanded there simply wasn't enough steel to build everything authorized. The guns were another bottle neck as there wasn't equipment (huge lathes with 75 foot beds) to build enough all at once, they had to be spaced out in time.
The navy decided to build the Iowa's & Alaska's before the Montana's because we had nine battleships with 16 inch guns (3 Colorado's, 2 North Carolina's and four South Dakota's) and 11 with 14 inch guns for fighting with the Japanese battleships, but not enough ships that had the speed to escort the Essex carriers. So the fast Iowa's and Alaska's got built and the Montana's got delayed until it was obvious they couldn't be built in time for the war at which point they were cancelled along with the last two Iowa's and last four Alaska's that had been laid down.
Link Posted: 3/28/2024 11:03:50 AM EDT
[#13]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By aplomado:
I don't know anything about Pearl Harbor, but FDR absolutely was trying to bait the Japanese into attacking the USA first.

Before Pear Harbor, FDR ordered an a lightly armed Navy ship to be sent out in the midst of the Japanese fleet.  The Navy man in charge believed he was being sent on a suicide mission to provoke a war.  The Japanese attacked shortly before the ship was to leave, and the "mission" was cancelled.

I can't find the a reference now.  Does anyone else here remember reading about this?  
View Quote


I do recall reading about it in the National Enquirer of all places.
Link Posted: 3/28/2024 2:02:31 PM EDT
[#14]
I remember reading about a U.S. navy sailing vessel armed with 2 50 caliber Browning machine guns that was ordered to sail the Southeast Asian seas by FDR. The intent was to have the Japanese mistake the ship for a pirate and attack it to trigger a war between the U.S. and Japan.
Link Posted: 3/28/2024 3:19:40 PM EDT
[#15]
Trying to discern how far back into history the chain of conspiracy goes is becoming a daunting task.
Here goes:
We know that George Washington was a pawn of Big Whisky, and that Lincoln conspired to lure the Confederacy into war in order to set in motion the destruction of the Constitution so that Wilson would enter WW1 to save the Rothschild Military Industrial Complex and allow Stalin to come to power ensuring the Forever War. When Stalin started losing to the Evil Nazis, Roosevelt was ordered to get America into the war so he baited the peaceful and easily fooled Japanese into attacking Pearl Harbor, this both cleared the way for the ascendancy of Northrop-Boeing and allowed him to declare war on Hitler, so that ComIntern could finish infiltrating America's universities and launch its fluoridation assault on America's youth.
Using the foundations laid by Washington and Lincoln, Roosevelt oversaw the creation of the MIC and ordered the A-bomb to be dropped on the non-expansionist Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere because racism. Kennedy heroically tried to oppose the MIC, and so was assassinated by a cabal of the MIC, the Joint Chiefs, the CIA,the KGB, every local/state/federal LE organization in Texas, the Mafia, the Teamsters and the United Fruit Company(apparently the only people not involved were JFK and Oswald) so that the MIC could slaughter more Asians in Vietnam(Bell really needed thousands of helicopters to be shot down)and the FBI could create a phony Civil Rights movement(by assassinating both MalcolmX and MLK) thus allowing the CIA to fund itself via the Drug Trade to the black community.
The Space Race is in there somewhere to disguise the integration of Alien tech from 1947 into the CIA.
Oh, and Big Tech(actually DARPA funded, and managed and staffed by MK-Ultra zombies) finally achieved Gorgon Stare, allowing complete informational dominance over Congress, the media, SCOTUS, POTUS and the NFL.
This has been revealed to be orchestrated by Aliens, and this means we have to circle back to Atlantis, the Pyramids, the Aztecs and the Illuminati(aka the WEC/GloboHomo/NWO) whose main goal is child rape/cannibalism to
serve Lucifer in order to harvest as many souls as possible before the Rapture, currently scheduled for the January 20, 2025 inauguration of the Antichrist.
Link Posted: 3/28/2024 6:09:54 PM EDT
[#16]
It's really strange how several low post count accounts with 2020-present join dates have started posting all sorts of spicy opinions lately.


Probably just a coincidence.
Link Posted: 5/25/2024 9:10:00 PM EDT
[#17]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By FMJ3:

FDR was either inept or deceitful.  
View Quote


Inept?

Certainly not!

FDR was the greatest politician that ever lived.

Yes. I CAREFULLY chose the word POLIICIAN.
Link Posted: 5/27/2024 8:30:31 PM EDT
[#18]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By engineer61:
I remember reading about a U.S. navy sailing vessel armed with 2 50 caliber Browning machine guns that was ordered to sail the Southeast Asian seas by FDR. The intent was to have the Japanese mistake the ship for a pirate and attack it to trigger a war between the U.S. and Japan.
View Quote


The USS Panay was a small gunboat that was present (and sunk) at the beginning of the rape of Nanking. It wasn't "sailing in the middle of the fleet" and it was far too small and of little significance to start a war. Japan apologized and paid for it, and no it wasn't meant to trigger a war.
Link Posted: 5/28/2024 1:23:54 PM EDT
[#19]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By zapthycat:


The USS Panay was a small gunboat that was present (and sunk) at the beginning of the rape of Nanking. It wasn't "sailing in the middle of the fleet" and it was far too small and of little significance to start a war. Japan apologized and paid for it, and no it wasn't meant to trigger a war.
View Quote

No, the boat I read about wasn't a gun boat, it was a small sailing ship that had a couple of M2's mounted on it. The plan didn't happen because of Pearl Harbor, but it was supposed to go to what is today Indonesia and sail around the islands. It was meant to be mistaken for a pirate, and piracy has always been a problem in those waters, and if it had been sunk FDR wasn't going to let it slide but  use it for an excuse to declare war.
Link Posted: 6/1/2024 7:42:54 PM EDT
[#20]
Hadn't seen it mentioned, but I had read Stalin was breathing down Roosevelt's neck to get something going on in the pacific.
Link Posted: 6/2/2024 6:54:26 PM EDT
[#21]
My grandfather served in the European theater, but he was always pretty insistent that we had knowledge of the attack, and that the fact that the Carrier was on maneuvers at the time of the attack was pretty proof postie.  You can loose a fleet, but you cant loose a flagship.  Anyway that was his thinking.  Thta, and the economic benefits of getting into the war were irresistible (thats NOT a conspiracy, thats the birth of the MIC).  He was a cynical man, and an ultra-conspiracist.  I cant verify whether the carrier was away, but if it was, then there;s something to consider.
Link Posted: 6/2/2024 7:32:25 PM EDT
[#22]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Lavaspit11:
My grandfather served in the European theater, but he was always pretty insistent that we had knowledge of the attack, and that the fact that the Carrier was on maneuvers at the time of the attack was pretty proof postie.  You can loose a fleet, but you cant loose a flagship.  Anyway that was his thinking.  Thta, and the economic benefits of getting into the war were irresistible (thats NOT a conspiracy, thats the birth of the MIC).  He was a cynical man, and an ultra-conspiracist.  I cant verify whether the carrier was away, but if it was, then there;s something to consider.
View Quote

There were two carriers stationed at Pearl at the time, Lexington and Enterprise. They were both delivering Marine fighter aircraft to Midway and Wake. Enterprise was scheduled to be back in Pearl Harbor when the attack happened. It was delayed by weather. It doesn't prove anything.
Link Posted: 6/2/2024 8:17:09 PM EDT
[#23]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Bigger_Hammer:



The US had only THREE aircraft carriers in the Pacific at the time of Pearl Harbor

Bigger_Hammer
View Quote


The Saratoga was at San Diego. They other two, which were home ported at Pearl, were at sea, without surface ship escorts. US Navy aircraft carriers NEVER GO ANYWHERE without escorts.
Link Posted: 6/7/2024 12:41:20 PM EDT
[#24]
Wait, Enterprise and Lexington didn't have their escorts when they were ferrying the planes?  They went alone?  That makes no sense.
Link Posted: 6/9/2024 6:28:38 PM EDT
[#25]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By redleg13a:
Wait, Enterprise and Lexington didn't have their escorts when they were ferrying the planes?  They went alone?  That makes no sense.
View Quote

They had their normal cruiser and destroyer escorts.
Link Posted: 6/10/2024 12:14:58 PM EDT
[#26]
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By tstorms:

They had their normal cruiser and destroyer escorts.
View Quote


That's what I thought,  I've never seen anywhere that said they didn't have escorts.  That would be crazy and I don't see any task force, task group or carrier commander agreeing to go out without escorts.  That would be very stupid.
Page / 2
Next Page Arrow Left
Close Join Our Mail List to Stay Up To Date! Win a FREE Membership!

Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!

You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.


By signing up you agree to our User Agreement. *Must have a registered ARFCOM account to win.
Top Top