Cloudy needs help -

[cantdog]

That's a sensible position for both P.Harbor and the 2001 skyjackings, I think, Colleen.

"possible this, possible that"-- pfui. The Pearl Harbor thing is much more circumstantial, they knew the carrier group was out. The 9/11 thing was reports of possibilities only. They shut down the air traffic, they scrambled the fighters. They also let the Bin Ladens go home, and flew the President around in circles. But there are stupider things done at sea.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

That's a sensible position for both P.Harbor and the 2001 skyjackings, I think, Colleen.

"possible this, possible that"-- pfui. The Pearl Harbor thing is much more circumstantial, they knew the carrier group was out. The 9/11 thing was reports of possibilities only. They shut down the air traffic, they scrambled the fighters. They also let the Bin Ladens go home, and flew the President around in circles. But there are stupider things done at sea.

Actually Cant, they didn't know where the carriers were. The JN-25 code had just been changed and the first mobile fleet was practicing radio silence. Signals intelligence was fooled by phoney air to ship calls that the Japanese had going as a subtrafuge. Neither Hypo, Negat or Belconnon had any handle on the new flet and ship identifiers.

Peral harbor consipracy buffs make a leap of faith, that with the strength of the indicators, it's impossible Roosevelt wasn't informed. By and large, the pieces that are so clear in retrospect just weren't so clear without the benefit of hindsight and were buried in a veritible avalanch of information that pointed towards other goals. Particularly, the Landing force that would atack Malaya had been sighted by a dutch submarine.

9/11 requires the same leap. It's not an illogical leap. It's just not a leap you can support with any evidence. Intelligence work, even in this day and age is amosaic. having this bit and that bit is all well and good, but unless you can separate the wheat from the chaff and arrange the bits you have in some order, having them does not imply you have the picture.

I would be terribly remiss if I said there is no evidence someone knew, but it is just as difficult to say for sure someone knew.

Into all deliberations comes the fact that the administration was able to utilize the sense of anger and outrage to further its agenda. That however tends to do more to cloud the issue than to clear it up. It provides retroactive motive for allowing it to happen, motive that it isn't an assurity would have existed, as the reaction to Pearl harbor, as well as 9/11 was not a foregone conclusion.

 

[cantdog]

9/11 was nothing like a foregone conclusion. They made a lot of hay out of it, true. But that is what they went to school for. I don't buy the idea Charley does, that they let it happen. But without it, this administration would have been a one-term aberration. That's important. But it does not imply that they knew, that they wanted it or something like it, or that they let it happen. It is still reprehensible that they used it as they clearly have done.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

9/11 was nothing like a foregone conclusion. They made a lot of hay out of it, true. But that is what they went to school for. I don't buy the idea Charley does, that they let it happen. But without it, this administration would have been a one-term aberration. That's important. But it does not imply that they knew, that they wanted it or something like it, or that they let it happen. It is still reprehensible that they used it as they clearly have done.

It's politics. I have no confidence the Dems wouldn't have used it in similar fashion to advance their agenda, had they been in the white house when it ocured. I also doubt the conclusion this would have been a one term administration without it. It isn't apparent to me that the wedge issues utilized by the GOP to defeat Kerry would have been any less effective without 9/11.

In my opinion, gay marriage was a far more significant reason we have GWB deux than 9/11. Certainly the climate of fear influenced some voters. But I tend to believe the Far Christian right was the deciding factor and they came out in droves to protest gay marriage, not because they feared terrorists.

 

[Guest]

Anyone else get all their stories bombed into oblivion last night? Or was it just me? If it was just me was it because of my comment about Joe? My comment to Charley? Or sticking up for cloudy?

 

[impressive]

Anyone else get all their stories bombed into oblivion last night?

For a change, no.

 

[Guest]

Anyone else get all their stories bombed into oblivion last night? Or was it just me? If it was just me was it because of my comment about Joe? My comment to Charley? Or sticking up for cloudy?

Nobody in the AH would slam someone for expressing an opinion. We're better than that. I think you're being paranoid, Dran.

PM Laurel about your troll.

 

[Lisa Denton]

Anyone else get all their stories bombed into oblivion last night? Or was it just me? If it was just me was it because of my comment about Joe? My comment to Charley? Or sticking up for cloudy?

I looked at Cloudy's thingie late last nite (huh) and left a ramblin anti-trollish comment which made sense at the time, but not this mornin.

Even she didn't bomb me .................................. maybe she seen I gave her a 5 vote also, I dunno.

Hope Laurel removes your troll votes Dranoel.

Have a banana ..... WTF? Where did my bananas go? Have a rose

 

[Remec]

Some asshole troll is 1-bombing her stories and leaving vicious public comments. This was because apparently he took offense with her latest Essay -

The Myth of Religious Freedom

Interesting, isn't it, how an essay on the evils of intolerance brings out the bigots?

At any rate, if you haven't already, please drop by and leave a positive PC comment on this or any of her other essays that have been recently flamed by this "anonymous" poster.

I hate anonymous cowards.

Done and done. I really should drop by the New submissions more often, but I've been up against a bit of a dry spell and am always worried I'll carry off someone else's turn of phrase. <g>

 

[Remec]

I would suggest tarring and feathering. Probably won't stop them, but would be fun

No no no...would only be amusing.

Fun is strapping them down and *removing* the tarred feathers, one by one.
<EG><wink>

 

[Remec]

I've studied World War II. An amazing amount of information was there that the Japanese were going to attack pearl Harbor. In retrospect it's obvious, but without the benefit of hindsight, the information is not the same. I do not think anyone knew 9/11 was coming. There was ample information there, in hindsight, to know. But like pearl harbor, it was spread out, hiden in thousands of bits of other information.

It's been proven that the messages regarding the Japanese fleet's move on Hawaii and the Pacific were translated in plenty of time to have, at the very least, sent our ships out of the harbor. The thought is that we needed something more imperiling and immediate to bring us "into" the war.

 

[cantdog]

There was considerable isolationism in Senate, House, and country. Something did have to change to nullify that reluctance. FDR's government felt joining the Allied Powers was a necessary thing, but it would have been disastrous, they thought, to go to war over the objections of so many. Evidently they were mistaken, though. Going to war over the objections of the majority helped Dubya.

 

[cantdog]

Anyone else get all their stories bombed into oblivion last night? Or was it just me? If it was just me was it because of my comment about Joe? My comment to Charley? Or sticking up for cloudy?

I don't imagine this thread got much play outside the AH. Your "comment" was just to your colleagues, just as your mockery of Joe was. The AH folk aren't likely to one-bomb one another, I don't think. Pretty sad that you do.

I get bombed and unbombed periodically, and I pay zero attention any more. Can't say whether it was that night or not. I suggest, though, that you worry less about it, for your own peace of mind.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

It's been proven that the messages regarding the Japanese fleet's move on Hawaii and the Pacific were translated in plenty of time to have, at the very least, sent our ships out of the harbor. The thought is that we needed something more imperiling and immediate to bring us "into" the war.

I've read several accounts, never, in any account, have I seen any information on the whereabouts of the Fist Mobile fleet. Exactly what source are you using? JN25 had been changed, they were observing radio silence and the Magic intercepts of the purple code was only supplying diplomatic transcripts. Those intercepts could have provided no details of fleet dispositions as Nomura was as surprised as anyone by the attack.

In neither Prange or Costello's work is there any hint this is the case. I would say it hasn't been proven, in fact, I haven't even seen it speculated that anyone knew of the first Mobile Force's disposition.

I would genuinely like to know where you got that. It isn't in any of the US investigations, neither Army, Navy nor Congressional. If such information was avialable, then it must have come out very recently and I would like to read it.

 

[Remec]

I would genuinely like to know where you got that. It isn't in any of the US investigations, neither Army, Navy nor Congressional. If such information was avialable, then it must have come out very recently and I would like to read it.

I'll have to admit that I would need to do some research, as I'm relying on what several friends I used to hang out with had told me during a break in a game of "Victory in the Pacific" over fifteen years ago. You are obviously more versed (both in general details as well as with more recent information) in the subject, so I doubt any research I might come across would be anything you haven't already seen or, at least, heard of.

And, while I said Hawaii, I am aware that there is confusion as to where the fleet was and whether or not they were going for Pearl and similar Pacific installations or whether they were planning on attacking the West Coast of the US; it was just that I was under the impression that enough of the message had been translated, correctly, that we could have done something to lessen the risks more than we did.

 

[Colleen Thomas]

I'll have to admit that I would need to do some research, as I'm relying on what several friends I used to hang out with had told me during a break in a game of "Victory in the Pacific" over fifteen years ago. You are obviously more versed (both in general details as well as with more recent information) in the subject, so I doubt any research I might come across would be anything you haven't already seen or, at least, heard of.

And, while I said Hawaii, I am aware that there is confusion as to where the fleet was and whether or not they were going for Pearl and similar Pacific installations or whether they were planning on attacking the West Coast of the US; it was just that I was under the impression that enough of the message had been translated, correctly, that we could have done something to lessen the risks more than we did.

As I understand it, the fact that they didn't know where the Japanese carriers were, was of grave concern to Kimmel. I seem to remember a candid exchange between Kimmel and his intelligence man, Layton.

Kimel: You mean the japs could be rounding diamondhead at this moment?

Layton: I would hope we would have spotted them by then sir.

To my knowledge:

1. The Japanese embassy in Hawaii was ordered to burn it's code books and destroy its coding machines.

2. We knew in advance Japan was about to break off negotiations (From Magic intercepts) and the Military establishment was concerned as it was a favored Japanese tactic to attack within hours of declaring war.

3. The First Mobile Force had gone missing, which seemed to foreshadow immediate action.

4. Changeing of the codes, which blinded us to their fleet dispositions, was also a standard action of a fleet about to go to war.

5. Controversy still remains as to wheter we intercepted the "East Wind Rain" code from radio tokyo, which was supposedly a warning to her diplomatic staffs that war was imminent.

6. Invasion fleets had been spotted operating near Fomosa, with malaya or thialand as their probable destination.

7. A Japanese message, which requested fleet dispositions in Pearl harbor lay half translated on the desk of a woman translator. It wouldn't be finished until long after it was useless.

Considering the information, you would have to be a fool not to recognize the enemy was planning action. You would have to be a prophet, to know the atrget was Hawaii.

While some things argued for Pearl, most argued against it. One of the strongest, and one most Pearl Harbor conspiracy theorists don't know about, is the fact that torpedo bombing in Pearl Harbor wasn't possible with the torpedos of the day. The harbor is barely 40 feet deep, while Airiel torpedos needed 60 to 70 feet. The Japanses devised a whole new technology to make them work, but if you didn't know that, and no one did, you can almost rule out Pearl as a target out of hand.

Most authorities expected the Japanese blow to fall in the Phillipenes. It was the logical target, astride their line of advance. It was also pretty thinly defended. If you take that predisposition and apply it to the intelligence, you can see where they were more concerne with getting warnings to McArthur than they were about Pearl.

Most theorists also do grave injustice to the Japanese. They make it a case of Us "leting" them kick our tush, rather than a case of giving them credit for a superlative operation. Secrecy was maintined, radio silence, intense training, outstanding flying skill and just plain ole tactical/strategic genius on the part of Yammamoto.

I didn't mean to side tack the thread, apologies to thoose I have subjected to a boring history discourse.

 

[Guest]

Colly -

Your history lessons (and let's face it, many of us need a serious refresher in the course) are never boring. And you are a delight.

As for threadjacking? The purpose for this thread has been obtained: troll removed, bad votes corrected, cloudy is safe. And sexy.

Threadjack away.

 

[cloudy]

Colly -

Your history lessons (and let's face it, many of us need a serious refresher in the course) are never boring. And you are a delight.

As for threadjacking? The purpose for this thread has been obtained: troll removed, bad votes corrected, cloudy is safe. And sexy.

Threadjack away.

What SSS said.

Wanna drink?

 

[Guest]

"Cloudy needs help."

She does!? That's news to me.

 

[rgraham666]

Going to continue the historical threadjack here.

Colleen, the technology to keep air-dropped torpedos from diving deep wasn't new to the Japanese.

The British had developed something similar the year before Pearl Harbour when they attacked the Italian Fleet in Taranto.

I can't recall whether the Japanese copied it or, now that they were aware it could be done, developed it on their own.

And as a note, Japanese torpedoes were much better than our own.

I think racism played a big part in all the nasty surprises of WWII. The Allies thought the Japanese were sub-human, who all needed glasses. The Japanese thought the Allies were decadent, afraid to fight and die. The Germans thought the Russians were primitive brutes.

All were wrong. And all paid for it, big time.

 

[kendo1]

Colly

Amicus, RG and I were discussing this last month.
I think we put the world to rights!

 

[oggbashan]

Going to continue the historical threadjack here.

Colleen, the technology to keep air-dropped torpedos from diving deep wasn't new to the Japanese.

The British had developed something similar the year before Pearl Harbour when they attacked the Italian Fleet in Taranto.

I can't recall whether the Japanese copied it or, now that they were aware it could be done, developed it on their own.

The Japanese studied the attack on Taranto in depth and sent observers there. The Italians recovered some of the torpedos used by the British and shared the information they obtained with the Japanese.

The Japanese practised with modified torpedos in shallow water until they perfected the method used at Pearl Harbor.

The British were aware of the interest that the Japanese had taken in Taranto but thought that their target might be the dockyard at Singapore. The parallel between Taranto and Pearl Harbor was obvious - with hindsight.

Og

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Going to continue the historical threadjack here.

Colleen, the technology to keep air-dropped torpedos from diving deep wasn't new to the Japanese.

The British had developed something similar the year before Pearl Harbour when they attacked the Italian Fleet in Taranto.

I can't recall whether the Japanese copied it or, now that they were aware it could be done, developed it on their own.

And as a note, Japanese torpedoes were much better than our own.

I think racism played a big part in all the nasty surprises of WWII. The Allies thought the Japanese were sub-human, who all needed glasses. The Japanese thought the Allies were decadent, afraid to fight and die. The Germans thought the Russians were primitive brutes.

All were wrong. And all paid for it, big time.

Taranto is a deep water harbor. Also, the British were still using the fairy swordfish torpedo bomber. It's an ancient canvas & wood plane, and can drop in shallower water because it moves slower than an all metal mono plane.

The Japanese longlance (type 97) was the best torpedo of the war. The Japanese came up with the brilliant idea of attaching wooden fins to the torpedos, these broke off on contact with the water, but slowed the sinking so much they allowed torpedo runs in the shallow waters of Pearl.

One claim made by many conspiracy theorists, is that the attack on Taranto showed it could be done and therefore, the negligence of the Fleet commanders at Pearl had to be intentional. Far from being the case, Taranto gave further prof to the Navy that torpedo nets were not needed as attack was not possible, save by submarine.

This is a para from an American report issued to all Commanders after Toranto:

"A minimum depth of water of 75 feet may be assumed necessary to
successfully drop torpedoes from planes. About two hundred yards of
torpedo run is necessary before the exploding device is armed, but this
may be altered."

From the same report:

"4. As a matter of information the torpedoes launched by the British at
Taranto were, in general, in thirteen to fifteen fathoms of water,
although several torpedoes may have been launched in eleven or twelve
fathoms. [17]"

A fathom is about 6 feet. So even at the most shallow estimate, you are still looking at launch in over 66 feet of water.

To my knowledge the British torpedos were not modified in any way.

Of course, many people will say it at least proved ships in a harbor were vulnerable to aireil attack. However, if you discount their torpedos, Japanese dive bombers posed so little threat to heavily armored warships that they, themselves, relegated their dive bombers to attacking carriers or in their abscence the Army Air fields.

It should be noted that the Japanese also had no high level bombs capable of penetrating Battleship armor. In another feat of improvisization, they outfitted 16 inch Naval shells with fins. it was one of these improvised bombs that penetrated the Arizona and detonated in her forward Magazine.