Do Freedom of Information Act Files Prove FDR Had Foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor?

Independent Institute ^

[jamaksin]

The timeframe regarding Dewey is 1944 ... Col. Clarke visits Dewey twice, each time with a letter Marshall.

Dewey decided to "keep quiet" ...

[Irontank]

To assert that a US President would want to provoke an overt act of agression as a means to make entry into war politically feasible is "certifiably nuts"?

Stinnett mentions an October 7, 1940 memo written by Lieutenant Commander Arthur McCollum of the Office of Naval Intelligence...which was endorsed by two of FDR's closest military advisors, Walter Anderson and Dudley Knox (google "McCollum Memo" and you can find scanned versions of the original online)....in it McCollum outlines the danger of the Axis and notes it is not believed that in the present state of political opinion the United States government is capable of declaring war against Japan without more ado; and it is barely possible that vigorous action on our part might lead the Japanese to modify their attitude. Therefore, the following course of action is suggested...

Then McCollum details an 8-point plan to provoke the Japanese into committing an overt act of agression (every point of which was implemented in the next year)...in fact, the memo explicitly states:

If by these means Japan could be led to commit an overt act of war, so much the better. At all events we must be fully prepared to accept the threat of war.

Don't be naive

[The Great RJ]

While it is true that decoded radio intercepts gave some warning of an imminent attack, the information was not sufficient at the time to precisely identify where and when the attack might occur. Note that US forces in the Philippines and even in Hawaii were put on alert prior to December 7th, but did not know the nature of the attack. Admiral Kimmel and Gen. Short assumed that the most likely means of attack in Hawaii was by saboteurs or small landing forces and thus planes were lined up wing to wing to make defense against such attacks easier. The notion that Japanese carriers could deliver an airborne attack across the Pacific was just not considered as a possibility.

It's easy to see how all the pieces pointed to an air attack at Pearl Harbor after the fact, but at the time it was just not considered plausible.

[jamaksin]

Your ...

" ...He should have appreciated that we had a large number of assets assigned to his command, and he should have used some of them to establish adequate pickets and responses."

neglects some specific facts.

For example, during 1941 fully a third of the Pacific Fleet was transferred to the Atlantic to support the convoying of Lend-Lease war materiels - these included the majority of Fleet's oilers. In this same period, over 200 PBYs also went to the USSR, again under Lead-Lease, while Pearl Harbor got very few and even less spare parts, ..., etc.

For more details on the types/numbers of "assets" and their fighting capacity - see Gannon's "Pearl Harbor Betrayed" from 2001.

[BenLurkin]

The suggestion that FDR had foreknowledfge of the impending Japanese attack prepdates Stinnet by decades.


His response: What else could FDR do? If they had sallied the fleet it would have been sunk in open waters with an even greater loss of life and no opportunity for salvage. (some of the BBs sunk at Pearl harbor were in fact raised and used later in the Pacific war.)

At least the carriers were tucked away out of danger.

[KevinDavis]

It seems that every Pearl Harbor consists of the isolationist crowd blames FDR or complained that FDR could have done something about it.

[peyton randolph]

Then McCollum details an 8-point plan to provoke the Japanese into committing an overt act of agression

That is different than Stinnett's contention that they wanted a successful Japanese act of aggression. To buy into Stinnett's argument, one must believe that FDR intentionally planned the slaughter of thousands of Americans through acts of omission. By any definition, this is treason. In addition to branding FDR a traitor, it also ignores his close ties to the U.S. Navy, including his prior service as Assistant Secretary of the Navy.

Don't be naive

Don't be a Moonbat.

[brothers4thID]

I know that's my point- Dewey keeping quiet about Pearl intelligence in 1944 was worrying about the cow getting out long after the barn door had been opened. The codes had been changed so many times by then the Jappanese wouldn't have cared if we had cracked their 1941-42 codes.

[ARCADIA]

neglects some specific facts.

None of which could have been remedied on November 25th, in time to stop the December 7th attack. But, there were still many protective steps which were not taken, and Kimmel was responsible for the posture of his command.

[BenLurkin]

Well, FDR did surreptitiously maneuver the US into WWII. He did it cynically and methodically at the same tie as he said "I hate war. Elanor hates war. I will never send American boy to die in foreign conflicts."

He was a typical slimy lying democrat hack who cared not a whit for the will of the American public.

That said I don't see that we had much choice but to get into WWII eventually -- and the timing might have been less fortuitous had FDR waited for public opinion to come around.

It was the FIRST world War that we should never have entered. Significantly -- that fiasco was orchestrated by another dishonest scheming democrat hack: Woodrow Wilson. Wilson ran for re-election in 1916 with the campaign slogan "He kept us out of war" and at the same time was arranging our entry into the war in cahoots with Her Majesty's Secret Service. No joke.

[jamaksin]

" ...it also ignores his close ties to the U.S. Navy, ..."

That is interesting, as the US was a declared neutral country prior to the Pearl Harbor attack.

And, yet, US ships (e.g., USS GREER) are torpedoed in the Atlantic, FDR orders the "pop up" cruises into Japanese waters, and Hart's "three little ships" get verbal orders to sail ...

Those do not seem like a "loves the Navy" kind of thing?

[R. Scott]

I can only surmise that FDR was the stupidest President in history.

If the claim of foreknowledge is true, FDR was an astute politician. The American People were very isolationists and wanted no active part in a European war. If we were to be attacked by a sneaky enemy that would change. Japan pulled off the attack, but FDR’s main focus was on Europe – not Japan.

[rellimpank]

--and Wilson had plenty of help from the banks who were on the hook for British war loans and from Teddy Roosevelt who wanted to take a hundred thousand volunteers and charge in like he did Cuba--

--Thomas Fleming's book Illusion of Victory is excellent on Wilson--

[Semper Paratus]

What else could FDR do?

Could have put the Armed Forces in the Pacific on an immediate war footing with CAP, armed and ready anti-aircraft. Would not have had entire air-wings blown to hell at airbases in the Philippines and Ohau by being parked out in the open wing to wing. If the exact timing of the attack was known the fleet could have moved out of Pearl under darkness. The IJN battle plan assumed the fleet would be parked exactly as it was every weekend. They did not have the fuel to search and even if they found some ships it's a lot harder to hit a moving target.

That said with no naval targets they would have gone after the fuel storage parks and docking facilities that would have really crippled Pearl a as base for a lot longer than it actually was. Also knowing that their attack was no surprise they would not have had a second strike fearing for the safety of their carrier fleet.

[KevinDavis]

I agree with you on WW I.. In a way we are still paying for Wilson screw up..

[jamaksin]

" ... But, there were still many protective steps which were not taken, ... "

Given the information and direction Kimmel had at the time, those would have been?

[ASA Vet]

MI PING

WW II Intercept stuff.
If true, Candidate Dewey was a patriot.
Who here believes Comrade Kerry would not have disclosed such classified information?

[BenLurkin]

What I left off from that post in an unfortunate edit was that this comment was made to me back in the 70s by a WWII generation relative in response to my outrage at hearing the FDR had information of the pending attack.

[TChris]

Roosevelt and Clinton: Spiritual Brothers in Treason

[Stevenc131]

The author continually refers to the fact certain messages were intercepted before Dec. 7, which they were, but the problem is that the U.S. had not broken all the different codes used by the Japanese, so many of the military messages remained unread. There were plenty of clues in the codes that we had broken, i.e. the diplomatic code, but hindsight has provided a clarity that wasn't there prior to the attack.

'And I Was There' by Edwin T. Layton is required reading and contains much information on the abilities of U.S. intelligence prior to and during the first part of WWII. As the title suggests, Layton, who was the Fleet Intelligence Officer at Pearl Harbror, was indeed there. He personally knew a great number of the members of the military intelligence community both in Hawaii and in Washington and his account of the goings on prior to both the Pearl Harbor attack and Midway are real eye-openers.