MHO Home   Forum Home   Help   Register   Login
 
 
Welcome to MilitaryHistoryOnline.com.
You are not signed in.
The current time is: 8/19/2018 1:17:16 AM
 (1939-1945) WWII Battles
AuthorMessage
Page 2 of 2 (Page: 1  2) 
OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 11/9/2017 1:04:40 PM
Oh, they were certain the Allies would respond, they just hoped they would have time to get what they needed and build up an insurmountable defense. I don't think the Army realized deep down that the Pacific was mostly "empty air".

Michigan Dave
Muskegon, Michigan, MI, USA
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major


Posts: 3795

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 11/15/2017 3:11:50 PM
op,

That's one thing about the Pacific the Ocean is so vast,

it's almost impossible to hold territory against good navies!?

What say you?
MD
---------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 11/15/2017 4:35:15 PM

Quote:
op,

That's one thing about the Pacific the Ocean is so vast,

it's almost impossible to hold territory against good navies!?

What say you?
MD

--Michigan Dave

IT's almost impossible to hold territory WITH good navies. If there had been a serious threat to our supply lines and rear areas immediately adjacent to the "front" we'd have had to have a much larger military structure. Fortunately, the Japanese were never willing to consider "logistics, logistics, logistics" as a valid strategy guide.

brian grafton
Victoria, BC, Canada
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Moderator


Posts: 1975

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 11/15/2017 9:02:21 PM
Opana, I tend to agree with you.

I assumed at the time you posted that you were responding to my comment: "The point is, they made their move and were incredibly successful."

But I also said: "I think it important to keep the Pacific war within a temporal framework." In late 1941, Britain, France, Holland and the US boasted control of much of the various Asias, either by conquest, treaty, control, trade or some other means. Six months later, white nations had lost their power bases. Britain had lost Hong Kong, the Malay States, and Singapore, and were being challenged in Burma. India, the jewel in the crown, was less than supportive of the Brits, and had citizens fighting against GB in sites as far apart as Burma and Germany. France and Holland, already non-existent states (except for governments-in-exile) lost Indochina and Indonesia. The US lost small atolls and the Philippines, though not Midway. Australia was under threat, and New Zealand, an even smaller nation but with a commitment to Britain, was in no better position.

I put that down as pretty good soldiering, to be honest. And that's why I said they were incredibly successful.

Did it last? No. But as you suggest (even if you meant it only ironically) the Bushido cult of the warrior became so fearsome that the use of nukes was seen as the "best" solution.

Cheers
Brian G
---------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.

"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 11/16/2017 6:35:50 AM
I didn't suggest that the atomic bombs were the best solution. They were part of a total package. The fact that Gen. Marshall was to be given ten more bombs for use in the invasion of Japan tell us that the US was not certain that two would end the war. The Allies were faced with the possibility that the war would end when the last military man in Japan was dead.

Killroy63
Pinson, AL, USA
top 50
E-4 Specialist
Posts: 89

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/6/2018 7:06:14 PM
From all that I've read, the Japanese plan re: Australia was to isolate it, not conquer it.

Had the won Coral Sea and been able to take Port Moresby, this would have given them a site for multiple air bases from which they could have used land-based aircraft to bomb the handful of installations along the northwest coast of Australia. Remember that the vast majority of Allied supplied in Australia had to be moved via ship because the Aussies had very little capacity to move supplies by rail. The Japanese, particularly during that period, were the past masters at sinking ships via dive bombing and, especially, torpedoes (if for no other reason than their torpedoes actually worked!).

Once the handful of installations along the northwest coast were suppressed or destroyed, an invasion fleet could land troops along the coast under a land-based air umbrella, meaning that carriers could either be excluded entirely or employed against whatever handful of naval forces we could muster against them. The object of the invasion force wouldn't be to take over all of Australia but rather to provide additional airstrips from which they could interdict reinforcements and supplies to the Aussies.

In addition to all of that, subsequent to a victory at Midway, the Japanese had plans to invade and capture Samoa and Fuji, which would further isolate Australia from resupply from the United States, meaning that supplies would have to go across the Atlantic and the Indian Oceans in order to reach Australia. I'm not convinced at all that would have been enough to keep Australia in the war.

dt509er
Santa Rosa, CA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 598

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/7/2018 2:30:04 PM
The thought of Japan actually occupying Fiji & Samoa surely would have thrown a huge kink in the line of communication between the US & Aus/NZ. As you have said Killroy, its unlikely that would have knocked Australia out of the war, an occupation and subjugation in the brutal way in which Japan was notoriously known to do during this time in Northern Australia, well that might have had a profound impact on the Australian government. My thought is, would Japan have enough troop strength to occupy these areas of Samoa, Fiji, N. Australia, etc? Japan's Imperial Army Generals were very reluctant to cut troops from China for duties elsewhere and Japan's Navy would have been spread very thin occupying these islands and sea areas.

Even with an assumption that Japan won the Coral Sea battle, the Midway battle would still have taken place and what was Japan to do then with these occupied islands after the drubbing that they took at Midway? And we have yet to even broach the matter of Guadalcanal and its impact in this scenario.

---------------
"American parachutists-devils in baggy pants..."

I take offense to your perception of being offended!

“If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.” Lord Ernest Rutherford

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7660

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/7/2018 3:45:24 PM
One Australian writer named Sue Rosen has uncovered the Australian war plans to cede vast amounts of territory considered indefensible, to adopt a scorched earth policy and guerrilla warfare by citizens groups.

Nothing was to be left for the use of the Japanese. People would be moved to areas that could be defended.

Rosen's book is entitled, " Scorched Earth, Australia’s Secret Plan for Total War".

I have not read it but perhaps our Australian posters have.


And I am reasonably sure that the Commonwealth of Nations could not have offered any assistance to Australia.


Cheers,

George

dt509er
Santa Rosa, CA, USA
top 15
E-8 Master Sergeant


Posts: 598

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/7/2018 4:02:20 PM

Quote:


And I am reasonably sure that the Commonwealth of Nations could not have offered any assistance to Australia.


Cheers,

George
--George


Churchill was quite perturbed when Australian PM Curtin recalled the 6th & 7th AIF divisions; he even attempted to divert these troops to Burma but Curtin held his ground. Had these troops not made their way back Port Moresby would have easily fallen to Japanese occupation.
---------------
"American parachutists-devils in baggy pants..."

I take offense to your perception of being offended!

“If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.” Lord Ernest Rutherford

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7660

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/7/2018 4:57:23 PM
Apparently Churchill implored FDR to use his relationship with PM Curtin to agree to moving Australian troops to Burma.

So Winston was pulling out all the stops. What was Winston's rationale, I wonder?

On Dec. 26 of 1941, PM Curtin indicated that Australia needed the assistance of the US.


Quote:
'Without any inhibitions of any kind I make it quite clear that Australia looks to America, free of any pangs as to our traditional links or kinship with the United Kingdom.


Churchill claimed that Curtin's statement would be reviled throughout the Commonwealth.

Even FDR, supporting his friend Winston said that the statement, "smacks of disloyalty".

The fact that the US did respond is indicative of the need for a strategic base and allies in the fight against Japan.

I think that Curtin's appeal to the US was the right one given that the British and Commonwealth had been well beaten by the Japanese in initial battles, and it was clear that they were not able to respond to assist Australia, in late 1941.


Cheers,

George


Killroy63
Pinson, AL, USA
top 50
E-4 Specialist
Posts: 89

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/7/2018 6:38:46 PM

Quote:
The thought of Japan actually occupying Fiji & Samoa surely would have thrown a huge kink in the line of communication between the US & Aus/NZ. As you have said Killroy, its unlikely that would have knocked Australia out of the war, an occupation and subjugation in the brutal way in which Japan was notoriously known to do during this time in Northern Australia, well that might have had a profound impact on the Australian government. My thought is, would Japan have enough troop strength to occupy these areas of Samoa, Fiji, N. Australia, etc? Japan's Imperial Army Generals were very reluctant to cut troops from China for duties elsewhere and Japan's Navy would have been spread very thin occupying these islands and sea areas.


That's the problem with counterfactuals.

The best of them change the least, but even a (relatively) small change at one point becomes a rather larger snowball once it begins to roll downhill, gaining momentum.

I tend to agree that the occupation and subjugation of Australia by Japan was probably impossible, but its neutralization as a staging base was quite possible. As Japan pushed its frontiers further out, land-based aircraft could have been rebased from, say, the Philippines and Formosa to provide that which would be necessary to base in northwestern Australia, with the result being that supply convoys would have entered hostile airspace several hundred miles out at sea, or convoys would have been forced to divert even further to the south, adding more time to the voyage.


Quote:
Even with an assumption that Japan won the Coral Sea battle, the Midway battle would still have taken place and what was Japan to do then with these occupied islands after the drubbing that they took at Midway? And we have yet to even broach the matter of Guadalcanal and its impact in this scenario.--dt509er


All that would have depended on just how large the Japanese victory was.

Japan could very well have sunk both the Lexington and the Yorktown, thus removing an additional carrier from the American Midway force. Worse, Japan could have done so before the US managed to damage Shokaku and decimate Zuikaku's fliers, so Nagumo's First Air Fleet could have been six carriers rather than four and America's carriers two rather than three. Of course, given the Japanese's fascination with overly-complicated battle plans, it is possible that the two additional carriers could have been diverted to another target, though the fact that those six had formed the Pearl Harbor Strike Force argues against that.

I have heard a story, possibly apocryphal, that Midway was wargamed repeatedly by our Naval War College, and the results were never duplicated. In most instances, the US lost the battle, with the result being that Midway was occupied and Hawaii subjected to more-or-less regular air raids from Midway. Being that Pearl Harbor was no longer a "safe" anchorage, we might have had no choice but to move the fleet to the West Coast to preserve it until reinforcements in the form of the Essex class carriers came on stream in early 1943.

A loss at Coral Sea followed by a loss at Midway almost certainly means no Guadalcanal, as we would have had insufficient carrier assets to protect the transports while the Japanese, having not lost four carriers but perhaps only one or two, had a sufficiency to carry out raids on the West Coast, the Panama Canal Zone, Australia, or perhaps the Indian Ocean all the way to Ceylon (again).

I still do not see the US losing the war, at least not militarily, although public opinion might have become either incredibly pessimistic (much like what Lincoln went thru in the months leading to the 1864 election), or they might have demanded that we abandon our Germany First strategy and concentrate on Japan, with all the consequences that might entail.

Talk about a snowball, right?




brian grafton
Victoria, BC, Canada
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Moderator


Posts: 1975

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/7/2018 9:12:57 PM
George, without trying to appear too biased, WSC is still writing the history at this point.

Churchill's request for Australian troops for Burma rather than Australian home defence is to a great extent unconscionable. While it is possible to present Aussie troops in Burma as a first line of defence against Japan, it seems to this humble reader that it is easier to see this as a defence of Empiah, even at a possible cost to a requirement to defend Australia.

I'm not sure of my references for saying this, but I seem to remember that PM Curtin stood up for Oz and Oz troops in ways that Canada's PM Mackenzie-King never did. Good on him. WSC was playing his game as always: get wog troops (and you can bet he saw all commonwealth and colonial troops as "wogs") to protect the Empiah, at Suez and Burma and Hong Kong and Singapore. Keep British troops closer to home, for the "vital" fight.

Curtin demanded that at least some Diggers come home. I don't blame him: what on earth had WSC done to make Curtin trust him? Norway? North Africa? Greece? Crete? Tobruk? Hell of a track record! And as a bottom line, exactly how could Oz retrieve its fighting forces to protect its homeland, given GB control over troop movement and personnel convoys and the like?

FDR was desperate for land bases as the US leapt into the war after PH. WSC might be seen to have control of many of the possible bases in the East (Oz, NZ, India, Ceylon) that might be valid should the US lose all their own toe-holds in the theatre. And God knows they came close. So FDR's comment about disloyalty might have a few silent riders attached, however heart-felt it may have appeared to be. Truthfully, is there any indication that FDR supported the concept of any Empire except the American one?

Cheers
Brian G

---------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.

"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.

Killroy63
Pinson, AL, USA
top 50
E-4 Specialist
Posts: 89

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/11/2018 6:56:27 PM
Brian:

Forgive me, please, for inserting myself into your discussion, but I thought you raised an excellent point:

"Truthfully, is there any indication that FDR supported the concept of any Empire except the American one?"

I am not particularly a fan of FDR. I don't go so far as to embrace some of the conspiracy theories that have been spun about him, such as he had foreknowledge- specific foreknowledge- of Pearl Harbor and yet did nothing to mitigate, let alone prevent, the attack. I won't go that far.

Most of what could have been done to slow the Japanese advance from December 7th, 1941 until June, 1942 would have to have been done prior to December 7th. FDR had very rarely been overly worried with public opinion when it came to ramming his agenda through Congress (it helped, no doubt, to have the sorts of majorities he commanded), and he had cowered the Supreme Court into not opposing his expansion of government power. If he had wanted to expend political capital to move public opinion towards war faster than he did, he could well have done so. A leader leads; he is not slave to public opinion (though he should always listen).

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/11/2018 7:19:17 PM
LOL. If FDR knew about the raid he had two choices.

1. Just let it happen so that he could get into a war in the Pacific that he really did want in the hope that Hitler would keep a promise. This would leave him with a major defeat, a damaged fleet, and the danger that someone would find out about the ruse. It would require someone who was a huge friend of the Navy to willingly allow it to be destroyed just so he could gain a political advantage.

2. OR he could have the Army and Navy at Hawaii ready for a major battle. Ships buttoned up tight, all guns manned and ready, and the Army fully alert with the fighters in the air and the AAA in position and ready to open fire. (2/3s of Japanese airplane loses came in the second wave, when we were fully alert but not yet fully deployed. He could have had a line of destroyers anchored just east of Battleship Row, making it impossible to put eight torpedoes into a single battleship.

Such a stupid idea.

brian grafton
Victoria, BC, Canada
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Moderator


Posts: 1975

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/11/2018 9:32:51 PM
Killroy, welcome to MHO. Feel free to join in any discussion. That's what it's all about!

I have a soft spot for FDR, I'll admit. He played a very delicate game between 3 Sept 1939 and 7 Dec 1941 that was incredibly supportive to those fighting Nazism, often creating smoke-screens in US neutrality that allowed him to ignore legal, social or ethical issues under serious debate in the US at the time.

Was he a good, honest, decent president? Don't know, and quite honestly don't care. FDR's footprint is on the world. His impact on the US may have affected his political manouvering, but

My point, however, was simply that FDR never saw or supported a US role in the saving of the British Empire. His interest was in expanding US influence and control. He wasn't intent on sending troops to save Hong Kong, or Singapore or Australia.

You note:
Quote:
Most of what could have been done to slow the Japanese advance from December 7th, 1941 until June, 1942 would have to have been done prior to December 7th.
If so, it has to be said that the "most" the US could have done was inadequate.

There is every reason to believe the US understood the potential Japanese challenge — largely commercial and cultural at first — to growing US hegemony in the Pacific. With the war beginning Sept 3, 1939, it had to be clear to the entire world that any distant holdings for any European nation — those of Britain, France and Holland in particular — would be increasingly easy marks for economic, cultural or political usurpation. My argument is simply that FDR wouldn't give a damn that Oz fell to the Japanese, or eny of the stories worth notingl. If Curtin is noting where he is looking to for help, that's not treason. That's good sense.

Personally, WSC was more concerned with maintaining the structure of Empire than with defeat of Britain's enemies. FDR played a role in WSC's wartime manipulations, of course. But FDR's own jottings re the war years are as valid, if not as perfectly presented and dejected as ;;l folks do

Cheers
Brian G
---------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly.

"The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/12/2018 12:17:30 PM
People seem to think that the oil embargo came out of thin air.

1. Japan had promised not to invade the northern part of Indochina when they took the South. They did so to make it easier to attack China's wheat growing regions. FDR enacted sanctions because of this violation of their promises.

2. More than the above, oil was in demand. The military heads wanted the national strategic reserve built up. The British wanted every drop they could get. The American consumers were asking why they had to endure shortages while the Japanese were getting oil to kill Chinese. Guess who was first on the list to get dropped well before the embargo actually got implemented?

3. Japan was actively anti-gaijin in China. They were requiring foreign businesses to install a Japanese on their boards and pay Japan for the right to operate in China. The missionaries were harassed, missions burned, printing presses "borrowed" for scrap metal, etc. The US public was made aware of this via Chiang's wife, an American-born Chinese and Hu-Shih, ambassador to the US and Chiang's brother-in-law.

George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7660

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/12/2018 1:46:41 PM
OP, does that mean that the US was just protecting its interests in Asia?

If so what was the US interest in China, other than protecting missionaries from many different countries?

I can see the British interests, imperial interests in Asia that they had extended and supported for centuries. I may not agree with it through a modern lens but again, why was the US there?

Cheers,

George

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/12/2018 2:24:05 PM
The Nine Power Treaty (九カ国条約 Kyūkakoku Jōyaku) (United States, Republic of China, Imperial Japan, France, Great Britain, Italy, Belgium, Netherlands, and Portugal) made the Open-Door Policy on China international law. All signatories except one adhered to it.

As for why the US was there, we'd been there since the early 1800s.


George
Centre Hastings, ON, Canada
top 5
E-9 Cmd Sgt Major
Posts: 7660

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/12/2018 5:04:40 PM

Quote:
As for why the US was there, we'd been there since the early 1800s.


Thanks OP. I am aware that many nations had spheres of influence in China.

China may have been a failed state but the two Opium Wars hastened that demise. The British may have trumped up reasons to go to war.

How did China feel about having the country officially carved up by the imperial powers in 1922, guaranteeing port access for everyone?

What I am getting at is that the Japanese plan to create a Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere, may have had some appeal in the Asian countries.

Getting the white Europeans and North Americans out of the region was an understandable goal.

Were Asian countries, other than China, which was attacked by Japan, supportive of the goals of the Co-prosperity sphere? I don't know the answer, truthfully.

The 9 imperial powers may have been upset at Japanese incursions into China, territory that they coveted but were the Japanese behaving any differently than they were? It's a serious question. The Japanese treated the Chinese terribly but was their goal any different than that of the 9 powers.

I am well aware of the atrocities committed by the Japanese at Nanking in 1937. Indefensible behaviour, but I do not know that that is why the US placed sanctions.

Cheers,

George


Killroy63
Pinson, AL, USA
top 50
E-4 Specialist
Posts: 89

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/12/2018 6:11:27 PM

Quote:
LOL. If FDR knew about the raid he had two choices.

1. Just let it happen so that he could get into a war in the Pacific that he really did want in the hope that Hitler would keep a promise. This would leave him with a major defeat, a damaged fleet, and the danger that someone would find out about the ruse. It would require someone who was a huge friend of the Navy to willingly allow it to be destroyed just so he could gain a political advantage.

2. OR he could have the Army and Navy at Hawaii ready for a major battle. Ships buttoned up tight, all guns manned and ready, and the Army fully alert with the fighters in the air and the AAA in position and ready to open fire. (2/3s of Japanese airplane loses came in the second wave, when we were fully alert but not yet fully deployed. He could have had a line of destroyers anchored just east of Battleship Row, making it impossible to put eight torpedoes into a single battleship.

Such a stupid idea.
--OpanaPointer


There is a great deal of circumstantial evidence that FDR was taking a series of deliberately provocative actions towards Japan which could result in Japan making a decision to go to war with the Allied Powers at some point. Merely the decision to move the Pacific Fleet from the West Coast of the US mainland to Pearl Harbor could be- and was- seen in Tokyo as needlessly provocative (and Kimmel's immediate predecessor as CinC of the Pacific Fleet, Admiral Richardson, thought the move was a bad one and FDR fired him for his opinion).

My guess is that FDR and his advisers underestimated Japan's resolution and thought that we could string them along until our rearmament was completed in early 1943. I do not consider that corrupt so much as perhaps naive.

On point #2, regardless of what FDR did or did not tell the commanders in Hawaii, there is simply no excuse for the complacence of the local personnel during the hours immediately prior to the attack. We had a destroyer attack a mini sub in the Defensive Sea Area just outside Pearl Harbor. We had the radar intercepts that were ignored. Had actions been taken immediately after the USS Ward attacked the sub, we would have had almost three hours to mount a more active defense. If we had acted upon the radar intercept, we would have had an hour of additional time. No, major fleet units could not have raised steam and gotten underway, but anti-aircraft guns could have been manned and stocked with ammo, water tight doors closed, smaller units could have gotten underway and the Army could have gotten many more planes off the ground to begin to pair down the numbers of attackers before they even reached Pearl. You are absolutely correct to point out that most of the losses the Japanese sustained came in the second wave, while most of the losses the US sustained came during the first wave. How much less damage might have been done had our defensive effort during the late second wave had been in place during the first?

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/12/2018 6:34:25 PM
"There is a great deal of circumstantial evidence that FDR was taking a series of deliberately provocative actions towards Japan which could result in Japan making a decision to go to war with the Allied Powers at some point."

Crap.

http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/congress/ PDF copies of the Pearl Harbor Attack Hearings before Congress

The "Magic" Background to Pearl Harbor http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/myths/

West Wind Clear, http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/myths/west_wind_clear.pdf


Killroy63
Pinson, AL, USA
top 50
E-4 Specialist
Posts: 89

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/12/2018 10:08:53 PM

Quote:
"There is a great deal of circumstantial evidence that FDR was taking a series of deliberately provocative actions towards Japan which could result in Japan making a decision to go to war with the Allied Powers at some point."

Crap.

http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/congress/ PDF copies of the Pearl Harbor Attack Hearings before Congress

The "Magic" Background to Pearl Harbor http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/myths/

West Wind Clear, http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/myths/west_wind_clear.pdf


--OpanaPointer


Did I mention any of those three as among the evidence? No, I did not.

Care to address what I did mention?

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/12/2018 10:35:35 PM
Of course you didn't mention the Hearings. Awkward facts really mess with conspiracy theories. But you've had plenty of time to read those 35,000 pages, what do you think?

Killroy63
Pinson, AL, USA
top 50
E-4 Specialist
Posts: 89

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/13/2018 11:19:24 AM

Quote:
Of course you didn't mention the Hearings. Awkward facts really mess with conspiracy theories. But you've had plenty of time to read those 35,000 pages, what do you think?
--OpanaPointer


Maybe I didn't mention those hearings - incomplete as they were , at least the first few rounds, due to the need to keep our code-breaking success a national security secret- because I do not believe in those conspiracy theories?

In fact, I prefaced my statement by stating quite explicitly that I did not believe FDR had direct foreknowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack.

Again, are you interested- or capable- of discussing the points I did raise rather than the ones you think I raised?

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/13/2018 11:22:06 AM
Not actually, after fifty years in this topic there's nothing new to be added. Fifty-two, actually.

OpanaPointer
St. Louis, MO, USA
top 10
E-9 Sergeant Major
Posts: 818

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/13/2018 11:30:13 AM
"There is a great deal of circumstantial evidence that FDR was taking a series of deliberately provocative actions towards Japan which could result in Japan making a decision to go to war with the Allied Powers at some point. "
This is why I don't need to talk to you.

Killroy63
Pinson, AL, USA
top 50
E-4 Specialist
Posts: 89

Re: The Japanese plans to cut off Australia from America in WWII!?
Posted on: 1/13/2018 5:48:11 PM
I generally find the level of discourse on sites such as these to be honest, informative and polite.

You fail on all three points.

I will offer you one last chance to respond intelligently and constructively:

Was not FDR's decision to move the US Pacific Fleet's home port from the West Coast of the US mainland to Pearl Harbor in Hawaii seen as a provocative move by the Japanese?

Page 2 of 2 (Page: 1  2) 
 Forum Ads from Google