Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: samtheman

“wouldn’t our planes have been able to defend against the Pearl Harbor attack? “

It was SURPRISE attack. The idea was to bomb the carriers before any planes could take off, not to mention we had no way to find the Japanese carriers. Besides, there were airfields full of hundreds of planes at Pearl then that never got off of the ground either and got bombed and strafed on the ground. Only a hand full of our planes ever made it off the ground.


111 posted on 06/08/2014 7:29:53 AM PDT by catnipman (Cat Nipman: Vote Republican in 2012 and only be called racist one more time!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies ]


To: catnipman

I understand all that I was just wondering if it wouldn’t have been beyond the capability of the Jap attackers to keep all the planes from taking off if those carriers had been in port. I’m not trying to argue the point, just wondering if our ability to defend against the surprise attack would have been different if we had had those carriers with their planes available to respond.

Everyone always assumes that it was bad for the Japs that they missed the carriers. I’m just wondering if it would have also been bad for them if the carriers had been there to fight back against the attack.

I’m not saying... just wondering.


113 posted on 06/08/2014 7:50:18 AM PDT by samtheman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson