awww cmon your trying to tell me that the administration didn't know what a war would do to thousands upon thousands of innocent people? Then saying its worth getting a handfull of people, then not being able to produce some of them?
Off that tangent...
Yes, and I feel a two party is almost worse than a one party at times. Instead of being under one force you have two tearing you from side to side like two rabid wolves and a bone
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->awww cmon your trying to tell me that the administration didn't know what a war would do to thousands upon thousands of innocent people? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I said they want to avoid it when possible and weren't trying to kill civilians.
<!--QuoteBegin--Burncycle+Sep 13 2003, 05:39 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Burncycle @ Sep 13 2003, 05:39 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->awww cmon your trying to tell me that the administration didn't know what a war would do to thousands upon thousands of innocent people? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I said they want to avoid it when possible and weren't trying to kill civilians. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> OK, the attacks on the WTC were done in the early morning, when very few (comparatively) people were in the buildings. The terrorists could have attacked us midday, probably killing 2 to 5 times as many people. As I stated earlier, considering the WTC attacks killed 1500 to 3000 innocent US civilians, and the US killed 6000 to 8000 innocent Iraqi civilians, I think the terrorists did a better job at avoiding 'collateral damage' than the United States.
but, yeah, that's a tangent again. As for what Nem said about this being a thread comparing the US to Nazi Germany, and not comparing the leaders or the wars, I guess the only similarities between the countries themselves is that they're both superpowers of their times, and they both have populations easily swayed by government propaganda.
Germany wasnt a Super Power at its time. It was short of resources and such especially gases and oil. Hence trying to take over Afrika. Even though they did have a 4 hour parade showing its army to hitler (on his birthday?)
Its pretty funny though when you watch ww2 videos. Im more into learning about Germany more than anything in ww2 so I have quite a few videos I love to learn about daggers,tanks, anything basically. Secret weapons and vidoe footage. Kinda sad when I watch these things sisters friend will be like "Is that Hitler? Omg thats so mean to be downloading that stuff."
I dunno about some people but I love to watch videos and such. Watch the great speaches. Found one of the best sites that has to do with Germany during ww2. With one guy who was in the HJ who actually got to hear Hitler speak. You hear some amazing stories that most people go "Meh stupied nazi stuff rawr."
www.thirdreichforum.com for anyone if they are interested. Also check the amazing collections some people have XD
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->OK, the attacks on the WTC were done in the early morning, when very few (comparatively) people were in the buildings. The terrorists could have attacked us midday, probably killing 2 to 5 times as many people. As I stated earlier, considering the WTC attacks killed 1500 to 3000 innocent US civilians, and the US killed 6000 to 8000 innocent Iraqi civilians, I think the terrorists did a better job at avoiding 'collateral damage' than the United States.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
They didn't attack at night or on the weekend so they didn't try very hard now did they? We can go round and round about this, but my point was that they TARGETED civilians and we did not. Which still stands.
All these people bemoaning civilian casualties are becoming a bit like a broken record in many respects. If you want a compeletely pointless loss of civilian life look AT World War 2. The allies, to send a message to the Soviets to not advance to far into eastern Europe, chose a town to bomb. Although I can't remember the name off hand, the bombing raid was one of the largest in history and cost the lives if OVER <b>three million</b> people. The town was of no strategic importance, they just did it because they wanted to send a message.
Compare that to the war in Iraq where the Americans tried their damndest to keep casualities as low as possible, and amazingly did. I think of anything they can be congradulated for not blanket bombing the Iraqis, because not doing so certainly made things harder for their troops on the ground.
Put in perspective, even a number as high as 10,000 is a HANDFUL compared to the civilian casualties that were inflicted by the allies in WW2 in a SINGLE attack. The NAZI government couldn't care less about civilian casualties they inflicted either! There is, in this respect utterly no comparison between America then and today, or the NAZI German then or today.
But of course, the usual responce to 'logic' is to assert that any civilian casualties are too much, which is a pretty silly statement to begin with for any war. As this is the first tangent on the road to a parallel topic, is war right, I'm just going to end this here.
<!--QuoteBegin--Burncycle+Sep 14 2003, 02:25 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Burncycle @ Sep 14 2003, 02:25 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Dresden is what your probably referring to. I agree that it was pointless <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes, that is the one. Can never remember its name off hand for some odd reason.
<!--QuoteBegin--DiscoZombie+Sep 13 2003, 07:36 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (DiscoZombie @ Sep 13 2003, 07:36 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> As for what Nem said about this being a thread comparing the US to Nazi Germany, and not comparing the leaders or the wars, I guess the only similarities between the countries themselves is that they're both superpowers of their times, and they both have populations easily swayed by government propaganda. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> All populations are swayed by propaganda, it's a human trait. It's basically an extension of the "lab coat effect", which is demonstrated in <a href='http://www.roddriver.com/foreign_990618.html' target='_blank'>one of my favorite psychology experiments</a> of all time. Basically, as long as there is an authority figure urging you onward, there is a very good chance that you will do whatever he or she says. There are exceptions, obviously, but by and large the human race is rather easily led. If the driving force also makes references to nationalistic ideals, it's even easier to get a mob mentality going. Just look at the opinion polls after 9/11 (unfortunately I have no links offhand, but I'll check)- suddenly Bush was doing better at <i>everything</i>. Not just how he reacted to terrorism, but also the economy, education, you name it. It's rather sad that humans are so easily swayed, but that's just The Way Things Are™.
While there may be certain concepts where the US seems similar to Nazi Germany, overall I would say the similarity is somewhat stretched at best. The political and social backgrounds of the two countries are drastically different, a few of the methods of governmental control over the population might be the same but by and large the Nazis were capable of far more manipulation than even this somewhat autocratic administration. The takeover of the Nazi regime was also decidedly undemocratic with little respect for the system in place, while by contrast the Bush election was controversial but accomplished within the established system (and said system was not destroyed after the fact).
Well heres another way they were the same. Both countrys were racist. America was highly racist to the japs. Handed out "Kill the Japs" paper to people throughout the war. Made cartoon making fun of the japs aka "You're a sap Mr.Jap" Banned in America a Popeye cartoon. They had a thing on the history channel about American Soldiers in the pacific about that stuff.
And well you know about Germany and who they were a bit racist to.
Well im just comparing that both countrys were racist at the time...Paton hated Germans a lot also... So racism was in both of the countrys at time v.v
<!--QuoteBegin--absentic+Sep 14 2003, 05:01 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (absentic @ Sep 14 2003, 05:01 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> You forgot one small detail there Duo. Jew's didnt cowardly attack a Nazi fleet base and kill many a soldier. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually I am 100% confident that the Americans knew about the attack on Pearl Harbour. Just a certain person needed to have breakfast....
GrendelAll that is fear...Join Date: 2002-07-19Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
<!--QuoteBegin--absentic+Sep 15 2003, 09:37 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (absentic @ Sep 15 2003, 09:37 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Yeah, that's one of those never ending conspiracy theories. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Actually, there's a fair bit of reasoning to believe it's true.
Or to turn it on its head:
How likely is it that a massive Japanese attack force can leave port, potter over the pacific and attack America without anyone having a clue in an age of wireless communication, air power and submarines?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->How likely is it that a massive Japanese attack force can leave port, potter over the pacific and attack America without anyone having a clue in an age of wireless communication, air power and submarines?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The japanese spent months in preperation to avoid just that.
OT: Tora, tora, tora had an interesting reasoning behind it all. Meaning that Japanese had sent the declaration of war but it was never opened and forgotten on a desk somewhere. Good movie anyway.
GrendelAll that is fear...Join Date: 2002-07-19Member: 970Members, NS1 Playtester, Contributor, NS2 Playtester
edited September 2003
<!--QuoteBegin--Burncycle+Sep 15 2003, 01:49 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Burncycle @ Sep 15 2003, 01:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->How likely is it that a massive Japanese attack force can leave port, potter over the pacific and attack America without anyone having a clue in an age of wireless communication, air power and submarines?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The japanese spent months in preperation to avoid just that. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> And how did they do that exactly?
Psychically detected all HUMINT? Built rubber replicas of the ships in port? Made the actual fleet invisible? Wrapped cotton wool around the propellors?
Do you have even the slightest concept of how impossible it is to conceal a large number of ocean going vessels with thousands of crew, weighing tens of thousands of metric tons?
Irrelevant point anyway.
Just to be clear, I disagree with the topic entirely. The US, despite a political stance somewhere to the right of Mr Schickelgruber, does not resemble Nazi germany at all.
If you actually look at the political make-up of the country, the motivations behind foreign policy and the rhetoric used, you'll find that the USA is currently almost identical to Britain or France around the turn of the first millenium. The parallels between Bush and Urban are many.
<!--QuoteBegin--Grendel+Sep 15 2003, 08:57 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Sep 15 2003, 08:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And how did they do that exactly?
Psychically detected all HUMINT? Built rubber replicas of the ships in port? Made the actual fleet invisible? Wrapped cotton woll around the propellors?
Do you have even the slightest concept of how impossible it is to conceal a large number of ocean going vessels with thousands of crew, weighing tens of thousands of metric tons?
Irrelevant point anyway. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> LOL, before you call it "impossible", hit up google.com for some quality information on how exactly they hid their plan. <i>Play nice or don't play at all</i>
<!--QuoteBegin--absentic+Sep 15 2003, 01:06 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (absentic @ Sep 15 2003, 01:06 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--Grendel+Sep 15 2003, 08:57 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Grendel @ Sep 15 2003, 08:57 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And how did they do that exactly?
Psychically detected all HUMINT? Built rubber replicas of the ships in port? Made the actual fleet invisible? Wrapped cotton woll around the propellors?
Do you have even the slightest concept of how impossible it is to conceal a large number of ocean going vessels with thousands of crew, weighing tens of thousands of metric tons?
Irrelevant point anyway. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> LOL, before you call it "impossible", hit up google.com for some quality information on how exactly they hid their plan, you dork. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Absentic you are going to have to start conducting yourself better on these boards or get out, this is a place for respectful discussion not a place where you can mouth off all the time. Please be respectful.
Onto the topic at hand, we DID know about the attack but the information got lost "in transit" I forget the exact information, saw it on the History Channel a few months ago I believe. I'll look it up and see if I can find it.
We knew there might be an attack. We did not, however, know the nature of this attack.
As for HUMINT; given the social nature of the japanese culture (very loyal, nationalistic at the time), it is not entirely unfeasable that we could not aquire reliable HUMINT sources, and if they did, theres no garuntee the HUMINT sources understood where their fleet was going. The fleet practiced in secrecy, definately a step taken to minimize the possibility of a spy revealing their plan. The ships did not go directly to hawaii, they went roundabout north, away from shipping lanes. They did not all simply gather in one port and leave, more likely they left seperate ports and rendevoued after they left.
Now, assuming we had good HUMINT, assuming their secret practices failed to hide the plan of the attack, assuming that the HUMINT was aware of the danger of a few ships leaving port seemingly routinely, assuming the HUMINT was in contact with other HUMINT units and realized that ships are leaving all the ports at once and heading in a generally similar direction, assuming those HUMINT knew that those ships would almost certainly rendevous with each other en route to their destination, and assuming that the HUMINT knew this was an attack rather than the standard maneuvers and patrols.......... perhaps they could have effectively gathered together a warning message and sent it somehow.
Thats alot of assumptions. Thats alot of things that need to happen before adequite warning can be compiled and sent.
And en route, the message could always be lost or late. This is not the age of email and instant messaging. Turns out that was one of the problems, japan themselves would warn us and declare war immediately before the attack, but it was too late.
Now, even if japan did not warn us at all and just attacked, we thought there might be some hostility so we prepared. Thats what at least one of the carriers were doing: transporting aircraft to one of the islands to reinforce it from possible attack. But we didn't know the attack would come from the air, as in this stage, carrier airpower was in its infancy still, and only the british who had done something so bold. Battleships were still queen of the seas. We didn't even know if it was POSSIBLE to successfully strike at such a major system by air yet. And we all know of the clumping together of aircraft to let us guard them more effectively and how that backfired when we realized they attacked by air, but I digress. The point is, pearl should have technically been able to defend itself even given no political warning. Its a major military installation equipped with multiple airfields, fighter squadrons, and radar for advance warning. We all know the fluke that rendered the radar useless; we mistook the attackers as B-17's and it went downhill from there. Many things had to go wrong in quick succession for us to get beat so badly and many things did go wrong in simulatiniously, both on the strategic level, political level, and tactical level. And quite frankly, you are not going to be able to convince me that all of that was set up as a big conspriricy, there are just too many unknowns that the politicians would have had to know. They would have HAD to know the b-17's were coming in, staged it, and they would have HAD to know that the radio operator in central command would be a **** and blow off the warning. Anywho, only a couple battleships were permanently destroyed and japan didn't even attempt to hit the vital oil reserves. The net result is that it **** us off; it did cripple us for a few months but we got back into the game and by the end of the war we had over 100 carriers of various types.
Wanna know the real kicker? In the 30's we simulated an attack by air on pearl harbor in an excercise. Caught the navy guys by surprise then too.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->We knew there might be an attack. We did not, however, know the nature of this attack.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes, because it was a really clever idea. Using carriers to move planes into striking distance of an enemy fleet was just sheer brilliance.
However, while this kind of assault might not have immediately occured to the Americans, putting the base on Alert and perhaps moving some of the ships out may have prevented disaster. I was also reffering to the many indications of an attack on pearl harbour that were ignored. An intercepted radio transmission (that never went anywhere), an Admiral who had breakfast instead of checking out a radar signal and a Japanese sub being sunk the day before ALL smell of something. Saying the Americans did NOT know is a LOT harder to support, because there is a lot to the contrary.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->more likely they left seperate ports and rendevoued after they left. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You are correct, and they also staged a fake attack somewhere too. Can't remember exactly where.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thats alot of assumptions. Thats alot of things that need to happen before adequite warning can be compiled and sent.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't see why you find that so odd. The battle of midway for example was won because a pilot got lost. While lost and wondering where they hell they were they spotted the Japanese carries. The rest is history.
A sighting here, a radio signal here and many other factors can contribute to a surprise attack. The Americans DEFINITELY had warning of Pearl Harbour, they just chose to ignore it. It would of been the perfect thing to get a 1940's American public annoyed enough to want to go to war.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->japan themselves would warn us and declare war immediately before the attack, but it was too late.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And the diplomats were snubbed too <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And quite frankly, you are not going to be able to convince me that all of that was set up as a big conspriricy, <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I never did O_o. I asserted the Americans knew about the attack, this is probably 100% historical fact. You filled in the conspiracy blanks yourself. I just blambe it on stupidity and possibly over confidence.
Comments
Off that tangent...
Yes, and I feel a two party is almost worse than a one party at times. Instead of being under one force you have two tearing you from side to side like two rabid wolves and a bone
I said they want to avoid it when possible and weren't trying to kill civilians.
I said they want to avoid it when possible and weren't trying to kill civilians. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
OK, the attacks on the WTC were done in the early morning, when very few (comparatively) people were in the buildings. The terrorists could have attacked us midday, probably killing 2 to 5 times as many people. As I stated earlier, considering the WTC attacks killed 1500 to 3000 innocent US civilians, and the US killed 6000 to 8000 innocent Iraqi civilians, I think the terrorists did a better job at avoiding 'collateral damage' than the United States.
but, yeah, that's a tangent again. As for what Nem said about this being a thread comparing the US to Nazi Germany, and not comparing the leaders or the wars, I guess the only similarities between the countries themselves is that they're both superpowers of their times, and they both have populations easily swayed by government propaganda.
Its pretty funny though when you watch ww2 videos. Im more into learning about Germany more than anything in ww2 so I have quite a few videos I love to learn about daggers,tanks, anything basically. Secret weapons and vidoe footage. Kinda sad when I watch these things sisters friend will be like "Is that Hitler? Omg thats so mean to be downloading that stuff."
I dunno about some people but I love to watch videos and such. Watch the great speaches. Found one of the best sites that has to do with Germany during ww2. With one guy who was in the HJ who actually got to hear Hitler speak. You hear some amazing stories that most people go "Meh stupied nazi stuff rawr."
www.thirdreichforum.com for anyone if they are interested. Also check the amazing collections some people have XD
They didn't attack at night or on the weekend so they didn't try very hard now did they? We can go round and round about this, but my point was that they TARGETED civilians and we did not. Which still stands.
Compare that to the war in Iraq where the Americans tried their damndest to keep casualities as low as possible, and amazingly did. I think of anything they can be congradulated for not blanket bombing the Iraqis, because not doing so certainly made things harder for their troops on the ground.
Put in perspective, even a number as high as 10,000 is a HANDFUL compared to the civilian casualties that were inflicted by the allies in WW2 in a SINGLE attack. The NAZI government couldn't care less about civilian casualties they inflicted either! There is, in this respect utterly no comparison between America then and today, or the NAZI German then or today.
But of course, the usual responce to 'logic' is to assert that any civilian casualties are too much, which is a pretty silly statement to begin with for any war. As this is the first tangent on the road to a parallel topic, is war right, I'm just going to end this here.
Yes, that is the one. Can never remember its name off hand for some odd reason.
All populations are swayed by propaganda, it's a human trait. It's basically an extension of the "lab coat effect", which is demonstrated in <a href='http://www.roddriver.com/foreign_990618.html' target='_blank'>one of my favorite psychology experiments</a> of all time. Basically, as long as there is an authority figure urging you onward, there is a very good chance that you will do whatever he or she says. There are exceptions, obviously, but by and large the human race is rather easily led. If the driving force also makes references to nationalistic ideals, it's even easier to get a mob mentality going. Just look at the opinion polls after 9/11 (unfortunately I have no links offhand, but I'll check)- suddenly Bush was doing better at <i>everything</i>. Not just how he reacted to terrorism, but also the economy, education, you name it. It's rather sad that humans are so easily swayed, but that's just The Way Things Are™.
While there may be certain concepts where the US seems similar to Nazi Germany, overall I would say the similarity is somewhat stretched at best. The political and social backgrounds of the two countries are drastically different, a few of the methods of governmental control over the population might be the same but by and large the Nazis were capable of far more manipulation than even this somewhat autocratic administration. The takeover of the Nazi regime was also decidedly undemocratic with little respect for the system in place, while by contrast the Bush election was controversial but accomplished within the established system (and said system was not destroyed after the fact).
And well you know about Germany and who they were a bit racist to.
Jew's didnt cowardly attack a Nazi fleet base and kill many a soldier.
Jew's didnt cowardly attack a Nazi fleet base and kill many a soldier. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually I am 100% confident that the Americans knew about the attack on Pearl Harbour. Just a certain person needed to have breakfast....
Actually, there's a fair bit of reasoning to believe it's true.
Or to turn it on its head:
How likely is it that a massive Japanese attack force can leave port, potter over the pacific and attack America without anyone having a clue in an age of wireless communication, air power and submarines?
Exactly.
The japanese spent months in preperation to avoid just that.
The japanese spent months in preperation to avoid just that. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And how did they do that exactly?
Psychically detected all HUMINT? Built rubber replicas of the ships in port? Made the actual fleet invisible? Wrapped cotton wool around the propellors?
Do you have even the slightest concept of how impossible it is to conceal a large number of ocean going vessels with thousands of crew, weighing tens of thousands of metric tons?
Irrelevant point anyway.
Just to be clear, I disagree with the topic entirely. The US, despite a political stance somewhere to the right of Mr Schickelgruber, does not resemble Nazi germany at all.
If you actually look at the political make-up of the country, the motivations behind foreign policy and the rhetoric used, you'll find that the USA is currently almost identical to Britain or France around the turn of the first millenium. The parallels between Bush and Urban are many.
Psychically detected all HUMINT? Built rubber replicas of the ships in port? Made the actual fleet invisible? Wrapped cotton woll around the propellors?
Do you have even the slightest concept of how impossible it is to conceal a large number of ocean going vessels with thousands of crew, weighing tens of thousands of metric tons?
Irrelevant point anyway.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
LOL, before you call it "impossible", hit up google.com for some quality information on how exactly they hid their plan.
<i>Play nice or don't play at all</i>
Psychically detected all HUMINT? Built rubber replicas of the ships in port? Made the actual fleet invisible? Wrapped cotton woll around the propellors?
Do you have even the slightest concept of how impossible it is to conceal a large number of ocean going vessels with thousands of crew, weighing tens of thousands of metric tons?
Irrelevant point anyway.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
LOL, before you call it "impossible", hit up google.com for some quality information on how exactly they hid their plan, you dork. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Absentic you are going to have to start conducting yourself better on these boards or get out, this is a place for respectful discussion not a place where you can mouth off all the time. Please be respectful.
Onto the topic at hand, we DID know about the attack but the information got lost "in transit" I forget the exact information, saw it on the History Channel a few months ago I believe. I'll look it up and see if I can find it.
<i>Anybody else notice the irony of this post? Play nice or don't play at all...</i>
As for HUMINT; given the social nature of the japanese culture (very loyal, nationalistic at the time), it is not entirely unfeasable that we could not aquire reliable HUMINT sources, and if they did, theres no garuntee the HUMINT sources understood where their fleet was going. The fleet practiced in secrecy, definately a step taken to minimize the possibility of a spy revealing their plan. The ships did not go directly to hawaii, they went roundabout north, away from shipping lanes. They did not all simply gather in one port and leave, more likely they left seperate ports and rendevoued after they left.
Now, assuming we had good HUMINT, assuming their secret practices failed to hide the plan of the attack, assuming that the HUMINT was aware of the danger of a few ships leaving port seemingly routinely, assuming the HUMINT was in contact with other HUMINT units and realized that ships are leaving all the ports at once and heading in a generally similar direction, assuming those HUMINT knew that those ships would almost certainly rendevous with each other en route to their destination, and assuming that the HUMINT knew this was an attack rather than the standard maneuvers and patrols.......... perhaps they could have effectively gathered together a warning message and sent it somehow.
Thats alot of assumptions. Thats alot of things that need to happen before adequite warning can be compiled and sent.
And en route, the message could always be lost or late. This is not the age of email and instant messaging. Turns out that was one of the problems, japan themselves would warn us and declare war immediately before the attack, but it was too late.
Now, even if japan did not warn us at all and just attacked, we thought there might be some hostility so we prepared. Thats what at least one of the carriers were doing: transporting aircraft to one of the islands to reinforce it from possible attack. But we didn't know the attack would come from the air, as in this stage, carrier airpower was in its infancy still, and only the british who had done something so bold. Battleships were still queen of the seas. We didn't even know if it was POSSIBLE to successfully strike at such a major system by air yet. And we all know of the clumping together of aircraft to let us guard them more effectively and how that backfired when we realized they attacked by air, but I digress. The point is, pearl should have technically been able to defend itself even given no political warning. Its a major military installation equipped with multiple airfields, fighter squadrons, and radar for advance warning. We all know the fluke that rendered the radar useless; we mistook the attackers as B-17's and it went downhill from there. Many things had to go wrong in quick succession for us to get beat so badly and many things did go wrong in simulatiniously, both on the strategic level, political level, and tactical level. And quite frankly, you are not going to be able to convince me that all of that was set up as a big conspriricy, there are just too many unknowns that the politicians would have had to know. They would have HAD to know the b-17's were coming in, staged it, and they would have HAD to know that the radio operator in central command would be a **** and blow off the warning. Anywho, only a couple battleships were permanently destroyed and japan didn't even attempt to hit the vital oil reserves. The net result is that it **** us off; it did cripple us for a few months but we got back into the game and by the end of the war we had over 100 carriers of various types.
Wanna know the real kicker? In the 30's we simulated an attack by air on pearl harbor in an excercise. Caught the navy guys by surprise then too.
For the love of god, if not I'll get nem to close it
Yes, because it was a really clever idea. Using carriers to move planes into striking distance of an enemy fleet was just sheer brilliance.
However, while this kind of assault might not have immediately occured to the Americans, putting the base on Alert and perhaps moving some of the ships out may have prevented disaster. I was also reffering to the many indications of an attack on pearl harbour that were ignored. An intercepted radio transmission (that never went anywhere), an Admiral who had breakfast instead of checking out a radar signal and a Japanese sub being sunk the day before ALL smell of something. Saying the Americans did NOT know is a LOT harder to support, because there is a lot to the contrary.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->more likely they left seperate ports and rendevoued after they left. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You are correct, and they also staged a fake attack somewhere too. Can't remember exactly where.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Thats alot of assumptions. Thats alot of things that need to happen before adequite warning can be compiled and sent.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't see why you find that so odd. The battle of midway for example was won because a pilot got lost. While lost and wondering where they hell they were they spotted the Japanese carries. The rest is history.
A sighting here, a radio signal here and many other factors can contribute to a surprise attack. The Americans DEFINITELY had warning of Pearl Harbour, they just chose to ignore it. It would of been the perfect thing to get a 1940's American public annoyed enough to want to go to war.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->japan themselves would warn us and declare war immediately before the attack, but it was too late.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
And the diplomats were snubbed too <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And quite frankly, you are not going to be able to convince me that all of that was set up as a big conspriricy, <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I never did O_o. I asserted the Americans knew about the attack, this is probably 100% historical fact. You filled in the conspiracy blanks yourself. I just blambe it on stupidity and possibly over confidence.