Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Did FDR Provoke Pearl Harbor?
Townhall.com ^ | December 6, 2011 | Pat Buchanan

Posted on 12/06/2011 3:32:36 PM PST by Kaslin

On Dec. 8, 1941, Franklin Roosevelt took the rostrum before a joint session of Congress to ask for a declaration of war on Japan.

A day earlier, at dawn, carrier-based Japanese aircraft had launched a sneak attack devastating the U.S. battle fleet at Pearl Harbor.

Said ex-President Herbert Hoover, Republican statesman of the day, “We have only one job to do now, and that is to defeat Japan.”

But to friends, “the Chief” sent another message: “You and I know that this continuous putting pins in rattlesnakes finally got this country bit.”

Today, 70 years after Pearl Harbor, a remarkable secret history, written from 1943 to 1963, has come to light. It is Hoover’s explanation of what happened before, during and after the world war that may prove yet the death knell of the West.

Edited by historian George Nash, “Freedom Betrayed: Herbert Hoover’s History of the Second World War and Its Aftermath” is a searing indictment of FDR and the men around him as politicians who lied prodigiously about their desire to keep America out of war, even as they took one deliberate step after another to take us into war.

Yet the book is no polemic. The 50-page run-up to the war in the Pacific uses memoirs and documents from all sides to prove Hoover’s indictment. And perhaps the best way to show the power of this book is the way Hoover does it -- chronologically, painstakingly, week by week.

Consider Japan’s situation in the summer of 1941. Bogged down in a four year war in China she could neither win nor end, having moved into French Indochina, Japan saw herself as near the end of her tether.

Inside the government was a powerful faction led by Prime Minister Prince Fumimaro Konoye that desperately did not want a war with the United States.

The “pro-Anglo-Saxon” camp included the navy, whose officers had fought alongside the U.S. and Royal navies in World War I, while the war party was centered on the army, Gen. Hideki Tojo and Foreign Minister Yosuke Matsuoka, a bitter anti-American.

On July 18, 1941, Konoye ousted Matsuoka, replacing him with the “pro-Anglo-Saxon” Adm. Teijiro Toyoda.

The U.S. response: On July 25, we froze all Japanese assets in the United States, ending all exports and imports, and denying Japan the oil upon which the nation and empire depended.

Stunned, Konoye still pursued his peace policy by winning secret support from the navy and army to meet FDR on the U.S. side of the Pacific to hear and respond to U.S. demands.

U.S. Ambassador Joseph Grew implored Washington not to ignore Konoye’s offer, that the prince had convinced him an agreement could be reached on Japanese withdrawal from Indochina and South and Central China. Out of fear of Mao’s armies and Stalin’s Russia, Tokyo wanted to hold a buffer in North China.

On Aug. 28, Japan’s ambassador in Washington presented FDR a personal letter from Konoye imploring him to meet.

Tokyo begged us to keep Konoye’s offer secret, as the revelation of a Japanese prime minister’s offering to cross the Pacific to talk to an American president could imperil his government.

On Sept. 3, the Konoye letter was leaked to the Herald-Tribune.

On Sept. 6, Konoye met again at a three-hour dinner with Grew to tell him Japan now agreed with the four principles the Americans were demanding as the basis for peace. No response.

On Sept. 29, Grew sent what Hoover describes as a “prayer” to the president not to let this chance for peace pass by.

On Sept. 30, Grew wrote Washington, “Konoye’s warship is ready waiting to take him to Honolulu, Alaska or anyplace designated by the president.”

No response. On Oct. 16, Konoye’s cabinet fell.

In November, the U.S. intercepted two new offers from Tokyo: a Plan A for an end to the China war and occupation of Indochina and, if that were rejected, a Plan B, a modus vivendi where neither side would make any new move. When presented, these, too, were rejected out of hand.

At a Nov. 25 meeting of FDR’s war council, Secretary of War Henry Stimson’s notes speak of the prevailing consensus: “The question was how we should maneuver them (the Japanese) into ... firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.”

“We can wipe the Japanese off the map in three months,” wrote Navy Secretary Frank Knox.

As Grew had predicted, Japan, a “hara-kiri nation,” proved more likely to fling herself into national suicide for honor than to allow herself to be humiliated.

Out of the war that arose from the refusal to meet Prince Konoye came scores of thousands of U.S. dead, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, the fall of China to Mao Zedong, U.S. wars in Korea and Vietnam, and the rise of a new arrogant China that shows little respect for the great superpower of yesterday.

If you would know the history that made our world, spend a week with Mr. Hoover’s book.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs
KEYWORDS: americalast; blameamericafirst; buchanan; godsgravesglyphs; history; patbuchanan; pearlharbor; pitchforkpat; skinheads
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last

1 posted on 12/06/2011 3:32:42 PM PST by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Just like Poland provoked Hitler.


2 posted on 12/06/2011 3:35:58 PM PST by SunTzuWu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Not this **** again.
Someone tell Buchanan we’ve been hearing this **** for over 50 years.


3 posted on 12/06/2011 3:36:59 PM PST by La Enchiladita (Newt says amnesty isn't amnesty.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I supposed not handing over Hawaii to the Japanese could have been considered to be a “provocation” in some people’s eyes.


4 posted on 12/06/2011 3:37:29 PM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

My father, a Navy veteran of Veracruz and WW-I, was called back to active duty in the US Navy in April 1941. Our nation was most definitely preparing for war eight months before Pearl Harbor.


5 posted on 12/06/2011 3:37:56 PM PST by OldNavyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; writer33; SunkenCiv; Homer_J_Simpson

The US refused to concede the Pacific to the Japanese, so of course we started it. lol.

Stupid isolationists


6 posted on 12/06/2011 3:39:42 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mears

bfl


7 posted on 12/06/2011 3:39:48 PM PST by Mears (Alcohol. Tobacco. Firearms. What's not to like?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I’ll spare posting the pictures from the “Rape of Nanking” and “Unit 731”. But you get my point.


8 posted on 12/06/2011 3:40:30 PM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Interesting. But I wonder how much of this was deliberate on FDR’s part. There was no doubt that FDR was fixated by the threat from Hitler’s Germany. Also, there was a strong “China Lobby” within the US State Department. Perhaps it was a case of US policy toward Japan “being on autopilot”.


9 posted on 12/06/2011 3:41:00 PM PST by Tallguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

The whole Pacific, not just Hawaii


10 posted on 12/06/2011 3:40:59 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
The whole Pacific, not just Hawaii

Including California.

11 posted on 12/06/2011 3:42:44 PM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I don’t know how peace was possible given that Japan was committing crimes against humanity in China. FDR’s problem, however, was that he engaged in a series of provacative actions against Japan, yet did not prepare for war. As a result, the Japanese thought America was so weak, they felt confident enought to sail halfway across the Pacific and try to blow up our Navy. Had they gone back for a successful 3rd strike on Dec. 7, one wonders how the war would’ve turned out.


12 posted on 12/06/2011 3:42:44 PM PST by Lou Budvis (Newt/Marco '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

years ago read the book A Republic, Not an Empire by Pat Buchanan. He was under the opinion that FDR antagonized the Japanese


13 posted on 12/06/2011 3:43:47 PM PST by BillGunn (Bill Gunn for Congress district one rep. Massachusetts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy

Remember also, Japan was targeting Britain’s Asian colonies, as well.

I think they figured, Hitler was so mired with Russia, he couldn’t help Japan, and therefore, Japan wasn’t as much of a threat.


14 posted on 12/06/2011 3:44:55 PM PST by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I still don’t know why Lithuania provoked the Germans to bomb Pearl Harbor.


15 posted on 12/06/2011 3:46:22 PM PST by SkyDancer ("If You Want To Learn To Love Better, You Should Start With A Friend Who You Hate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

The RMS Lithuania was sunk by an Australian submarine in 1915, wasn’t it?


16 posted on 12/06/2011 3:51:27 PM PST by Larry Lucido
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

Maybe we *were* preparing for war with Japan, but how do you separate normal preparation and escalation between increasingly hostile countries with deliberate provocation?

By this logic, we are preparing for war with China now. Within our government I am pretty sure Obama and the democrats do not want war with China. If there is anyone deep inside the Pentagon that wants war, it’s because we want to fight them now before we get relatively weaker, but it is probably not a significant number.

This whole argument does not recognize the axiom “if you want peace, prepare for war”.


17 posted on 12/06/2011 3:52:11 PM PST by ReveBM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BillGunn
years ago read the book A Republic, Not an Empire by Pat Buchanan. He was under the opinion that FDR antagonized the Japanese

He's right, FDR did "antagonize" the Japanese.

He's wrong, however, in his belief that FDR shouldn't have done it. Quite frankly it was the "America First" Pat Buchanans of the era who impeded FDR's efforts and almost lost the West to Fascism and Japanese militarism.
18 posted on 12/06/2011 3:53:01 PM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Probably, and FDR was probably a jackass, but the jackass did good in kicking the Japanese in their behinds.


19 posted on 12/06/2011 3:55:14 PM PST by blueunicorn6 ("A crack shot and a good dancer")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

Explain this:

“At a Nov. 25 meeting of FDR’s war council, Secretary of War Henry Stimson’s notes speak of the prevailing consensus: “The question was how we should maneuver them (the Japanese) into ... firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves.””


20 posted on 12/06/2011 3:59:31 PM PST by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
FDR's economy was not gaining steam and his poll numbers were starting to slip badly.

I can easily believe that he may have considered war an antidote to this problem.

21 posted on 12/06/2011 4:00:58 PM PST by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

“Did FDR Provoke Pearl Harbor?”

The cruise of the Great White Fleet under Theodore Roosevelt’s administration was partially a message to check Japanese expansionism. The Japanese were determined to dominate Asia- they proved that by thrashing China in 1895, and then Russia in 1905, their seizure of Germany’s Asian possessions in WWI, and then their expansion into China after 1931. Opposition to this expansion- and that was the general thrust of US policy beginning with T.R.- pretty much set Japan against the US, regardless of what FDR thought or did.


22 posted on 12/06/2011 4:07:55 PM PST by GenXteacher (He that hath no stomach for this fight, let him depart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunTzuWu
"Just like Poland provoked Hitler."

Thank you for that. I get so sick of this garbage. I despise FDR, but I think he was in the minority to see the extreme dangers posed by Germany and Japan. The "FDR-Knew-In-Advance" is one of of the lies in my book "48 Liberal Lies About American History" and, yes, it was started by a liberal (a Marxist, actually) Charles Beard.

23 posted on 12/06/2011 4:08:42 PM PST by LS ("Castles made of sand, fall in the sea . . . eventually." (Hendrix))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin; All

Had we not faced the Japanese after 12/7/1941 we would have faced them later when they were stronger. FDR was right.


24 posted on 12/06/2011 4:10:01 PM PST by arrogantsob (Obama must Go.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BillGunn
FDR antagonized the Japanese

You, and other FReepers who want to make up your own minds would do well to follow Homer_J_Simpson's daily retrospective on the NY Times from 70 years ago. Don't just start tomorrow with the news of the attack on Pearl Harbor. Go back two months and read, and see what you think.

ML/NJ

25 posted on 12/06/2011 4:10:12 PM PST by ml/nj
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Larry Lucido

I think you’re thinking of the RMS Titanic which was rammed by a Russian sub in the Bering Sea in 1952.


26 posted on 12/06/2011 4:10:55 PM PST by SkyDancer ("If You Want To Learn To Love Better, You Should Start With A Friend Who You Hate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Lou Budvis
Had they gone back for a successful 3rd strike on Dec. 7, one wonders how the war would’ve turned out.

The third strike would be to take out the oil storage facilities at Pearl which speculation says would have extended the war by 2 years.

27 posted on 12/06/2011 4:12:55 PM PST by Recon Dad ("The most important rule in a gunfight is: Always win and cheat if necessary.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon; Homer_J_Simpson; writer33

lol. The Japanese had been planning and practicing the attack on Pearl Harbor for a decade. They trained naval pilots with a mock-up of Pearl Harbor.

The Japanese were going to attack sooner or later whether the US did anything or not. The Japanese were planning to conquer the entire Pacific. Or did Borneo, Philippines, Singapore and all those other places also “maneuver” the Japanese into attacking them?


28 posted on 12/06/2011 4:13:57 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Attack on PH *caused* the Vietnam War.

Umm.....ok. Yeah, right.


29 posted on 12/06/2011 4:14:17 PM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj; Homer_J_Simpson

Yes, it has been very enlightening. He has been doing this for over a year... maybe two.


30 posted on 12/06/2011 4:17:01 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: gaijin

I do think that Japans’ invasion and rape of China helped topple the nationalists and bring about Red China. Maybe we should make Japan fix that?


31 posted on 12/06/2011 4:20:42 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: OldNavyVet

One thinks that they could have done a better job. I wonder what the “Cheney is Evil Agent of Halliburton” crowd thinks about this question. After all, “truth is the first casualty in war”, you know.


32 posted on 12/06/2011 4:21:39 PM PST by yup2394871293
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: GenXteacher

The Japanese considered TR to be an honest broker as a result of his efforts to end to Russo-Japanese war. TR was the only statesman with good relations with all the leaders of the WWI beligerents at the beginning of the war. Too bad he wasn’t elected in ‘12, if there was anyone who could’ve brought all sides together and averted the tragedy of WWI, it was TR.


33 posted on 12/06/2011 4:23:47 PM PST by Lou Budvis (Newt/Marco '12)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lou Budvis
Had they gone back for a successful 3rd strike on Dec. 7, one wonders how the war would’ve turned out.

I have often wondered what would have happened if the Japanese had invaded only the Dutch East Indies--the source of the oil they wanted--and maybe Thailand, proclaiming the move a "peacekeeping operation," and not attacked the US or crossed into British territory. Would we have done anything? Or how about if they had invaded the Society Islands, which include Tahiti, New Caledonia, the Marquesas Islands and other French possessions? The French most likely would have surrendered without firing a shot, but would we have done anythng?

Similarly, what would have happened if Japan had attacked only the US and that the air, ground and naval forces used to attack British and Dutch possessions had been used to attack Hawaii, the western Aleutians or other US targets. Could they have knocked us out?

34 posted on 12/06/2011 4:26:45 PM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

We didn’t start the war —I’m happy we won.

But did FDR *want* to war on Japan with no moral responsibility for STARTING it? Why, yes —that’s absolutely true.

And Churchill very badly wanted FDR in the war, and the two had been working for quite some time on how to manage it, when presto, finally the Japanese threw the solution right into their laps.

Did Japan deserve to get whipped? Oh sure..!

They didn’t attack just the USA —they attacked Hong Kong, Singapore, Malasia, Vietnam, Australia, the British, and others, and ALL AT ONCE.

In fact, in Singapore when they took over the hospitals, they went from bed to bed, simply bayonetting doctors and patients. They even shot nurses and doctors performing surgery.

It also turned out that the IJA had made absolutely NO PLANS AT ALL for provisioning for POWs and conquered peoples —nothing at all.


35 posted on 12/06/2011 4:32:48 PM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunTzuWu
Just like Poland provoked Hitler.

I like how the article doesn't criticize Japan for invading other nations and committing horrendous atrocities, but criticizes the US for freezing Japan's assets here in the US and denying Japan access to the oil it needed to continue conquering other nations and committing those atrocities.

What's next? Is the author going to claim that the US was being mean for denying Japan access to ports in Hawaii or Alaska? Is the author going to criticize the US for helping Australia against Japan?
36 posted on 12/06/2011 4:34:06 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lou Budvis
"Our nation was most definitely preparing for war eight months before Pearl Harbor."

China invaded by Japan in '37.

Germany invaded Poland in '39.

Lend-lease started in '41.

No doubt somebody at the War Department was taking notice.

37 posted on 12/06/2011 4:36:59 PM PST by radioone ("2012 can't come soon enough")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: LS

but I think he was in the minority to see the extreme dangers posed by Germany and Japan.

Below are two paragraphs taken from, Daniel Yergin’s “The Prize”.

All that day, the reports flowed into Washington from Pearl Harbor disjointed, fragmentary, and finally, dismal. “The news coming from Haawaii is very bad.” Stimson noted in his diary at the end of that long Sunday. “It has been staggering to see our people there, who have been warned long ago and were standing at alert, should have been so caught by surprise.” How could such a disaster have occurred.
Senior American officials had fully expected a Japanese attack, and imminently. But they expected it to be in Southeast Asia. Virtually no one, whether in Washington or Hawaii, seriously considered, or even comprehended, that Japan could - or would- launch a surprise assault against the American fleet in its home base. They believed, as General Marshall had told President Roosevelt in May of 1941, that the island of Oahu, where Pearl Harbor was located, was “the strongest fortress in the world.” Most of the American officials seemed to have forgotten-or never knew-that Japan’s great victory in the Russo-Japanese War have begun with a surprise attack on the Russian fleet at Port Arthur.


38 posted on 12/06/2011 4:38:35 PM PST by Recon Dad ("The most important rule in a gunfight is: Always win and cheat if necessary.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ml/nj
Thanks for posting that link. I was gonna mention it. It's been really interesting reading the diplomatic reports. Ominous when you know what's coming.

I second the recommendation. Very interesting stuff.

39 posted on 12/06/2011 4:38:46 PM PST by Huck (LIBERTY is the object.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
The die was cast when the US cut off oil to Japan. They had about a month's worth to keep their industry going. With no other choice than pulling out of China (no small matter BTW) they used their oil to OPEN THE ROUTE TO INDONESIA which had the oil they needed.

Pearl Harbor was intended to keep the US from doing anything about it.

Boy did they screw up.

Now, let's say that didn't happen and we kept feeding them oil. They had an atom bomb program under way ~ not many results at the time but they understood the concepts behind several different possible atom bombs.

It was just a matter of time and it could have been the Japanese making sure we did not achieve hegemony over the Pacific ocean through adroit threats to use atom bombs on us.

Should I say it ~ naw, wouldn't be fair, naw, go ahead, say it anyway ~ the East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere would have included China, Siberia, Yakutia, Manchuria, SE Asia and probably everything East of the Ganges.

You'd seen Harry Truman signing a START treaty with Japan that would make the US a Nuclear Free Zone.

40 posted on 12/06/2011 4:42:32 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Billy Mitchell predicted Japan would attack back the 20s


41 posted on 12/06/2011 4:46:32 PM PST by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

As usual, PB expresses some truths mixed with incomprehensible morality.

The US pursued a policy of non-conciliation with the Empire of Japan. In my opinion, this policy was moral and correct.

There is a legitimate argument that it was not wise, at least in the short run. There is no question that a more conciliatory policy could have prevented war, but it also would have been arguably immoral.


42 posted on 12/06/2011 4:47:11 PM PST by Jim Noble (To live peacefully with credit-based consumption and fiat money, men would have to be angels.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lou Budvis
No matter what TR could have done there was going to be a war. The Japanese knew that without access to oil their war in Asia would have ground to a halt in 4 weeks. They attacked us- so they could attack the East Indies where all the Asian oil was located.
43 posted on 12/06/2011 4:48:51 PM PST by Recon Dad ("The most important rule in a gunfight is: Always win and cheat if necessary.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

gee I thought it was in response to japans aggression and ethnic cleansing in china that caused us to slap japan with a boycott that led to pearl harbor


44 posted on 12/06/2011 4:48:51 PM PST by Charlespg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tallguy
Interesting. But I wonder how much of this was deliberate on FDR’s part. There was no doubt that FDR was fixated by the threat from Hitler’s Germany. Also, there was a strong “China Lobby” within the US State Department. Perhaps it was a case of US policy toward Japan “being on autopilot”.

FDR was seriously hampered by the isolationists, by treaties we tried to abide by, and by the situation in England.

We were going to have it out with Japan. There was just no way we weren't going to butt heads with them. I had an uncle who was a China Marine, thank God he was out of China by late 1941, and they knew that war with Japan was brewing. He was pretty sharp, as are all of the Marines I've been fortunate enough to be related to, and I'm not just saying that because my son is a Marine, heh, and he said a lot of the Americans in China knew, and the Japanese they talked to knew, that war was coming. Yes, the Marines in China talked to Japanese troops - there was an odd period of time before the war where both US Marines and Japanese troops were in very close proximity to one another.

People also forget that the US was trying to stick to its treaties, which left us in a bad naval situation. Read up on the USS Wasp to get a better grasp of what sticking to treaties got us.

USS Wasp CV-7

Wasp was a product of the Washington Naval Treaty. With the construction of Yorktown and Enterprise, the U.S. still had 15,000 long tons (15,000 t) available to flesh out its carrier fleet.

The Navy sought to squeeze a large air group onto a ship with nearly 25% less displacement than the Yorktown-class. In order to save weight and space, Wasp was constructed with low-power machinery (compare Wasp's 75,000 shp (56,000 kW) machinery with Yorktown's 120,000 shp (89,000 kW), Essex's 150,000 shp (110,000 kW), and the Independence-class' 100,000 shp (75,000 kW)). Additionally, Wasp was launched with almost no armor, although this may have been upgraded after completion. More significantly, Wasp had an almost complete lack of protection from torpedoes. The end result was a ship with major inherent design flaws. These flaws, combined with a relative lack of damage control experience in the early days of the war, were to prove fatal.



45 posted on 12/06/2011 4:49:08 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

We didn’t start the war —I’m happy we won.

But did FDR *want* to war on Japan with no moral responsibility for STARTING it? Why, yes —that’s absolutely true.

And Churchill very badly wanted FDR in the war, and the two had been working for quite some time on how to manage it, when presto, finally the Japanese threw the solution right into their laps.

Did Japan deserve to get whipped? Oh sure..!

They didn’t attack just the USA —they attacked Hong Kong, Singapore, Malasia, Vietnam, Australia, the British, and others, and ALL AT ONCE.

In fact, in Singapore when they took over the hospitals, they went from bed to bed, simply bayonetting doctors and patients. They even shot nurses and doctors performing surgery.

It also turned out that the IJA had made absolutely NO PLANS AT ALL for provisioning for POWs and conquered peoples —nothing at all.


46 posted on 12/06/2011 4:53:24 PM PST by gaijin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gaijin
Part of the reason for Japan's early success with their plan was very simple ~ they had their main capital ships in certain places and their carriers in others ~ and their oil tankers available in yet other places.

Some genius (and I say genius since these things usually happen with just a single planner) realized that he had to use the existing resources to acquire oil in just about 30 days, so some things were possible and others weren't.

There was little margin for error so the planner simply chopped off all the "nice to have" stuff ~ leaving himself with an air attack on Pearl Harbor, main battle groups to Singapore, Philippines, Malaysia, Indonesia, and as soon as that was clear the tankers were sent to the oil fields ~

Later on, in the exuberance of victory somebody else sent units to the Aleutians, Sakhalin and beyond, and to screw around in the South Pacific.

They ended up with a great deal of their ground combat units bogged down on islands we never attacked nor needed to attack. The Japanese were forced to supply those troops on those islands with ships that were probably needed to support activity in China. The Chinese venture continued, and then got worse when the US used safe areas in China as landing pads for bombings of the Japanese Home islands.

One thing led to the next and the US ended up with the whole enchilada!

If the Japanese could have counted on a 6 month supply of oil back in 1941, they'd spent more time planning the attack because that was going to happen anyway whether we cut off their oil or kept sending.

All the theories that place the blame on FDR necessarily assume the Japanese didn't know how to plan major war movements ~ and that's just crazy talk!

47 posted on 12/06/2011 4:55:42 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: LS
The "FDR-Knew-In-Advance" is one of of the lies in my book "48 Liberal Lies About American History" and, yes, it was started by a liberal (a Marxist, actually) Charles Beard.

Ah, good old Charles Beard, whose book An Economic Interpretation of the Constitution (New York; Macmillan, 1913) portrayed the Constitution as the product of a rich men's plot. Robert E. Brown demolished this view in his book Charles Beard and the Constitutuin (Princeton, NJ: Princeton, 1956).

Beard's pupil William Appleman Williams, who also taught at Wisconsin, blamed the Cold War on the US in his book The Tragedy of American Diplomacy (New York: Marzani & Munsell, 1959), which inspired a generation of "revisionist" historians who blamed the US for all of the world's problems.

48 posted on 12/06/2011 4:59:14 PM PST by Fiji Hill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
In 1908 Teddy Roosevelt handed over Korea to the Japanese. They had no reason to expect any higher level of morality out of American governments, particularly those ruled by the Roosevelt clan (putting it all into the Japanese worldview).

All they needed to do was make it expensive for the US to move into or return to the Western Pacific basin and we were out of the war permanently (their thinking, not mine).

49 posted on 12/06/2011 4:59:34 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: uncbob
Billy Mitchell predicted Japan would attack back the 20s

Don't forget that not only did he predict Japan would attack the United States in 1925 with mention of Pearl Harbor, but it was part of a 325 page report. It wasn't some off-hand remark - Mitchell made a clear and detailed case that Japan was going to attack and that carriers were going to play a major role.

There were missteps on both sides - Japan believed that attacking British colonies would bring the US into the war, and they believed they HAD to attack the US first because of that. Had they know that the US would allow some British colonies to be lost, it might have changed things. FDR believed that reinforcing the Philippines would make Japan think twice about further invasions.

In addition to Billy Mitchell predicting war in the 1920s, there was a group within the US military preparing for war with Japan. The "Orange" war plan started to be formulated in either 1918 or 1919, and the people involved with designing it were discussing war with Japan in 1905 and how to get ships to the Pacific from the Atlantic quickly. An Admiral Rogers laid out plans in 1911 that ended up being used in the 1940s.

People on both sides knew war was going to happen.
50 posted on 12/06/2011 5:02:15 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-93 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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