Posted on 02/19/2012 1:55:11 PM PST by the scotsman
'It's 70 years since Japanese bombers swooped on Darwin, in northern Australia, sinking Allied ships in the harbour and killing hundreds of people. For years the attack was rarely mentioned, but now the story is finally being told.
If 7 December 1941 is "a date that will live in infamy" for the United States, then 19 February 1942 is surely one that will join it in the annals of shame for Australia.
That was the day, just 10 weeks after the attack on Pearl Harbor, when the same carrier-based Japanese force turned its attention to the small northern town of Darwin, with equally calamitous results.
But the world remembers one and barely recalls the other.
The seven-volume Official History of the Australian Army in World War II devotes only two pages to the attack on Darwin.
Yet in truth, Darwin was Australia's Pearl Harbor - a morning attack carried out on an unsuspecting population that ended with the deaths of hundreds of people and the sinking of numerous Allied ships.'
(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...
ping
Gratuitous:given unearned or without recompense
A historical article from 70 years ago and the opposite side of the earth. How does our dear leader fit in to all of this?
I think it is a good idea to make sure people know about this attack on Darwin (especially outside Australia) but the article engages in some hyperbole.
In the linked article: “That was the day, just 10 weeks after the attack on Pearl Harbor, when the same carrier-based Japanese force turned its attention to the small northern town of Darwin, with equally calamitous results. But the world remembers one and barely recalls the other.”
I would disagree that the attack on Darwin was as equally “calamitous” as the attack on Pearl Harbor, given the following information:
Darwin:
250–320 killed
300–400 wounded
23 aircraft destroyed
10 ships sunk
25 ships damaged
Pearl Harbor:
4 battleships sunk
3 battleships damaged
1 battleship grounded
2 destroyers sunk
1 other ship sunk
3 cruisers damaged[nb 1]
1 destroyer damaged
3 other ships damaged
188 aircraft destroyed
155 aircraft damaged
2,402 killed
1,247 wounded
The article also said: “...a morning attack carried out on an unsuspecting population...”
I find it hard to imagine the population could have been “unsuspecting”. I would think a more appropriate adjective might be “unexpected”. From what I know of those times in Australia, I think the Australians suspected pretty strongly they were going to be attacked or invaded.
My criticism of the article does not mean I think it is an insignificant event (it certainly wasn’t) I just don’t think Pearl Harbor and Darwin were in any way equal strategically or cost-wise from a human, military or material level.
Lost interest when the article depicted our putative president and quoted his mouthings. Otherwise interesting history, but not sure what’s “shameful” (for our side, at least) about something the Japanese (like Obama) were expert at: scurrilous sneak attacks.
American Soldiers are going to be stationed in Australia? Oh, that’s why they have to count the number of days a Soldier is actually getting shot at. Doesn’t Australia have a progressive in charge now? If they have American Soldiers in Australia, at the expense of American taxpayers, then she (the Prime Minister) can spend Australian taxpayer money on more important things like buying votes. The Australian Socialists say “Good onya!” to their friends the American taxpayers for paying to protect them while they implement socialism.
It's not a "scurrilous sneak attack" if it occurs two months after the war starts.
Pearl Harbor occurred while the US and Japan were still technically at peace. The war ultimatum having been delayed by decoding and slow typing at the Japanese embassy. That's why it was an outrage.
The Darwin attack took place just days after the Japanese captured Singapore and were invading the Dutch East Indies. Australia and the whole of the British Empire and Commonwealth had been at War with Japan since the early hours of December 8th, Australian time.
After the war starts, every attack is supposed to be a sneak attack. Indeed, if your attack is not a sneak attack, you're doing it wrong.
Been to Darwin on R&R as a Marine from Vietnam; wonderful. Served with Aussies in Vietnam. Europeans who were saved by America were never as kind to me once during my time of service there as were the Australians on every occasion, and the best night I ever had in Europe was in the company of New Zealanders in Florence, Italy. If I were still a Marine on active duty with an opportunity to be stationed anywhere in the world, it would be in Australia or New Zealand among people who are easy to like.
Been to Darwin on R&R as a Marine from Vietnam; wonderful. Served with Aussies in Vietnam. Europeans who were saved by America were never as kind to me once during my time of service there as were the Australians on every occasion, and the best night I ever had in Europe was in the company of New Zealanders in Florence, Italy. If I were still a Marine on active duty with an opportunity to be stationed anywhere in the world, it would be in Australia or New Zealand among people who are easy to like.
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.
