|
Post by quincannon on Dec 8, 2016 17:30:06 GMT
There was a lot of discussion on the founders forum recently about Jodak's contributions on the black board to the overall knowledge and appreciation of Pearl Harbor as an historic event. I followed what I could of it up to a point, and he did a first rate job of it.
Yesterday was of course the 75th Anniversary, and no mention of the event was made here, and I had expected there would be. Notwithstanding its absence here plenty of mention was made of it in the media, and our local media here was no exception. We happen to have living here an Arizona survivor, now in his mid 90's and there was the obligatory interview.
I was somewhat disturbed by what he said. To be short his heart was not overflowing with forgiveness toward the Japanese people. That in itself was not surprising, because I had heard this same person say the same things several times before, usually around this time every year. It occurred to me though that this is not the way things should be. Without being overly religious, we are told that if we are to be forgiven, then we must first forgive. I suspect that goes for nations just as much as it does for individuals.
I am also not all that sure that there is anything, short of our own unpreparedness and mistakes in judgment, that are in need of forgiveness.
What I am about to say will anger some, probably infuriate others, and may generally piss off that portion of the world that exists between Maine and Hawaii from east to west, and the Rio Grande to the Canadian border going south to north.
I do not blame the Japanese for attacking Pearl Harbor in the manner in which they did. The surprise attack is a legitimate arrow in the quiver of the warrior. The fact that there was a delay in breaking off relations, due to decoding the final part of the fourteen part message, does not change the surprise nature of the attack, but it is a mitigating factor in not strictly observing international conventions. The fact that we knew the contents of that message a full two hours, give or take, before the Japanese Embassy in DC did is our bad as far as inaction goes, and there are no comparable mitigating factors for that AT ALL.
The Japanese nation had but two choices in the prevailing circumstances of the time, 1) Withdraw from the Tri-Partite Pact, withdraw from China, and make every attempt to rejoin the community of nations, or, 2) given the strategic and economic imbalance between them and the west, do exactly what they did. They chose wrongly in my opinion, but in choosing wrongly, they did what they did with a great degree of operational skill. In short, had I commanded, I would have done the exact same thing, in hopes of achieving a quick victory, gaining my strategic objectives, then trying to come to a point of armistice. If you choose wrongly in the first place, that would be the only way it could be done, in my view.
All this brings us back full circle to the main points, that being, You Do Not Make Peace With Your Friends, and, A Lasting Peace Demands a Great Degree of Forgiveness on Both Sides. Genda, in his address to the Naval Institute tried to convey this message back in March of 1969 when he spoke at Annapolis. He was met with the usual calls from some quarters of hang the bastard. The question is how long can we afford to harbor any lingering resentments, especially at this time every year? The corollary is how long can we afford to blame the other guy for a supposed stab in the back, when our inaction and misjudgments sharpened the knife.
I apologize for the disjointed nature of establishing this post. I was having Pro Board issues with my ability to post it.
|
|
colt45
First Lieutenant
Posts: 439
|
Post by colt45 on Dec 8, 2016 19:11:30 GMT
Jodak's posts on Diane's board about the lead-up to the attack showed the point of view of both sides, in particular the Japanese viewpoint. They clearly wanted to avoid going to war with us if it was at all possible, but given the stance of the US government, and their belief that we had already chosen sides and were not going to give an inch with regards to their proposals, left them with no other course of action. The fact we were caught flat-footed is inexcusable given the information that we had and the war warnings that were sent out in November. There were many errors in the "accident chain" that if one or two had been corrected, might have averted the strike entirely or at least minimized the damage.
I agree with Chuck that the Japanese were not the evil ogres history paints them to be with respect to Pearl Harbor, and from their viewpoint, they took the only course of action left open to them. I don't believe the bushwa that the US government allowed the attack to happen just so they would have an excuse to enter the war on the allies side, but clearly mistakes were made in communications and too many assumptions were made by top level brass that allowed Pearl to be caught so off-guard.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Dec 8, 2016 19:25:30 GMT
The biggest issues I have with the Japanese in WWII are situations such as Nanking and treatment of POW's.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 8, 2016 19:48:10 GMT
Tom: I am not a fan of that aspect either. Joan's uncle was a POW from 43-45, and had no love for the Japanese until the day he died. That though was an issue of culture, and the question is, has was been transformed to what is now. I think it has, and for a great number of reasons. So do we continue to castigate the reformed sinner, or do we welcome him into our brotherhood. If we continue to do the former we have no right to call ourselves a brotherhood.
Operationally the Japanese pulled off one of histories greatest feats of arms. I think there is a lingering pissed off factor about that as well. We grow all too fond of our own atta boys, sometimes undeservedly, and tend to look down our noses at the achievements of others. That dear friends is the first step in tripping all over your swantz.
Peace is both a desired and desirable end state. Peace is achieved through a variety of means, including war. Lasting peace though means that you must impart, not impose, the values of righteousness. That takes one hell of a lot more work, and skill, than fighting. In doing so you must never compromise your values, but you must always compromise on your emotions. It ain't easy, but it's the right thing to do.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Dec 8, 2016 21:45:11 GMT
QC I fully understand the hatred many veterans have with the Japanese and their inability to forgive. I also agree that the manner in which the Pearl Harbor attack was conducted was masterful and the planning of it was excellent. Admiral Nagumo's failure to attack the 1) oil storage facility; 2) repair facilities and 3) the Submarine base was costly to the Japanese especially at Midway and I bet he went to his maker regretting not having sent the third wave.
The refusal of the Japanese to accept blame and apologize to all the nations attacked and subjugated to The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere as well as apologizing for the War has accelerated the lasting animosity of those who were affected.
Many have also complained about the limited War Crime prosecutions of the Japanese military and some civilians. America's concern with Stalin and the spread of communism curtailed the trials and preserved the Emperor. Many believed and still do today that Hirohito was a War Criminal and should have been prosecuted.
For those survivors who still can not forgive, I pray that they will release the hate as it hurts no one but themselves. Perhaps Matthew 6:14-15 will reach their hearts if they are believers. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 8, 2016 22:47:53 GMT
Dave: I think if you will read Chapter Two of Fuchida and Okumiya, supplemented with the appropriate passages from Prange, you may have a different view on who was to blame. Apologies in the affairs of state, are often two way streets, and we were just as much to blame for the need to create the Co-Prosperity Sphere, as were those who created it. There was absolutely no need to go to war with Japan in 1941, or before, or after, had the D and the E of DIME, overshadowed and supplanted the I and M.
The Third Strike: The third strike is a creation of Fuchida. It is best to check if you have the means, before one I have often said here and elsewhereopens their mouths as to necessity and method. When you sustain the loss of 26 strike aircraft in combat, and add to it the slightly over twenty percent loss operationally, not to mention the fatigue of the air crews, then couple it with the fact that you barely have the fuel to return to Japan, I suspect the only regret Nagumo had was in the shoestring aspects of the operation itself, and not with any notion he did not do the bet he could with what he had to work with.
Many believed wrong regarding Hirohito. To be a criminal you must be culpable in a crime. He committed no crime. To carry that further, it must be understood that the Emperor in Japanese society and culture of the day was so isolated from the affairs of government, that he had no influence on those below him in a practical way.
|
|
|
Post by Beth on Dec 8, 2016 22:52:13 GMT
I was saddened that Jodak felt that he was unable to finish his thread. It was interesting and enlightening. It was one of the things that kept me going back to Diane's board to check on for updates. I found myself pondering Pearl Harbor more this year than years previous because of his thread.
I will publicly state that if Jodak would like to put the conclusion of his thread and continue his conversation about WWII on this board, he would be more than welcome. It is a subject that everyone here will find interesting since we all acknowledge our interests go well beyond 1876.
|
|
|
Post by deadwoodgultch on Dec 8, 2016 23:27:32 GMT
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 8, 2016 23:37:47 GMT
Well Beth, Jodak would be a welcome addition here, but in his absence the material is all contained in Prange three volumes, the first and third in order of publication, being the most relevant to your expressed needs. Verdict of History, can be skipped initially but should be read eventually. From the Japanese perspective I would supplement Prange with Midway The Battle That Doomed Japan, by Fuchida and Okumiya, specifically Chapter Two which is the evolution of Japanese Naval Strategy from 1921 to the conclusion of the Pearl Harbor attack. An oldie but a goodie, although Fuchida, the prime author, takes one or two leaps into deep space. Genda is the guy who knows where all the dirty laundry is hidden, and while I understand he wrote a book, I have never seen it.
Prange is the acknowledged go to source on the subject, but he can be as dry as a dishrag on the clothes line for three days in the Texas sun. If you want to know exclusively of the attack itself, having read Jodak, may I suggest "December 7, 1941" with Prange listed as the main author, but actually written by Goldstein and Dillon. Prange passed away before any of the three PH books, and his "Midway" were published. Goldstein and Dillon did the scut work on "At Dawn We Slept" and "Verdict of History". The latter two virtually wrote December 7th and Midway from Prange's volume upon volume of notes. All this was gleaned from Goldstein, as I once attended a national security seminar, where he was a featured speaker, at FEMA (Old Mount Saint Joe's) at Emmitsburg MD. He talked Prange, Pearl and Midway in the on campus bar and I kept buying the beer. Wonderful evening and I stayed sober.
One thing I should insert here, The time period between Pearl and Midway should be considered one campaign. It was by the Japanese. They called it their First Phase. Hard to do that for some of us here in the west, because of the vast distances and areas covered from the Aleutians to the Indian Ocean. It was their campaign, with everything contained therein interrelated in some way. I think it leads to a better understanding of that period if it is approached in that manner.
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 9, 2016 2:55:35 GMT
Dave, addressing you concerns about the potential targets of a third wave attack.
The repair facilities were hit. The damage was mitigated by the dry docks being full at the time. Ships were destroyed or damaged but little was done to cause any harm to the docks themselves. Had they been empty it would have been a different story.
The sub base facility largely depended upon the tender. Sinking the tender would have made the base non operational until another could come out from the west coast. Ten days maybe.
The oil tanks would have been a problem. There were new storage facilities under construction off base. There was already a shortage of fleet oilers, which did inhibit early operations. Such destruction of tanks would have been a short term issue, perhaps six months, but not the unmitigated disaster that some authors have suggested.
Americans have both a funny and unique ability to overcome adversity, and adapt what they do have to fill an unanticipated requirement. I think the record will show that we could do it, and taking that forward would have done what was necessary to go after those who came after us.
As far as the Japanese go. They obeyed a cardinal iron law - Go first after those things that can hurt you. They did. A third strike, against an alerted garrison, no matter how badly that garrison was hurt would have been a complete disaster for Kido Butai. Now consider air groups decimated, what effect it would have had on their plans for the next six months.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Dec 9, 2016 3:00:30 GMT
QC Thank you for the sources and I will look at them as soon as I can. I admit that perhaps the third wave would have been difficult to launch based on the time line of launch and recovery of the 1st and 2nd strikes and the reduction of the force due to plane losses.
Looking at the fuel farm(s) I realize they would require many more bombers to have been successfully destroyed, however they should have attacked the sub base! The U.S.S. Tautog (SS-199), one of 4 subs at the sub yard that morning would go on to become one of the top scoring boats of World War II. She would make 13 patrols while sinking 26 Japanese ships.
As to Emperor Hirohito's guilt or innocence I might mentioned that Australia wanted to try him for War Crimes but MacArthur and Truman desired a smooth transition of Japan from war to peace and Hirohito remained in place as a political necessity. Do you honestly believe that Tojo did not take the fall for the Emperor? Tojo was blamed for much if not all the actions committed by the Emperor. The image of the peaceful and blissfully ignorant young scientist studying fish does not seem accurate. Regards Dave
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Dec 9, 2016 3:04:19 GMT
I hate it when I post at the same time as someone else. Chuck I love having these discussions as I always learn a lot and it does not hurt. That is what is great about this board is having the exchange of posts instead of words and hurt feelings. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 9, 2016 3:35:23 GMT
You have every right to feel the way you do about the Emperor, however feelings are not admissible evidence in a tribunal before the bar of justice. Show me the evidence.
Hirohito's continuance on the throne was essential to a stable postwar Japan, especially in view of the fact that the rest of that part of Asia was going to hell in a handbasket. MacArthur made the correct decision.
If you want to get and keep the people of a newly defeated country on your side you do not go about hanging a person that they considered god the day before yesterday.
Tojo did not take the rap for the Emperor. He took the rap for Tojo. He and his Army buddies were the prime cause of events taking the course they did. Japanese politics just pre-war were like a Chicago gang war in the days of prohibition. The Navy, their great rivals wanted no part of war with the USA or anyone else. Extreme sanction of naval officers at the hands of the Army was not unknown, as well as offing of civilians who were anti-war. Yamamoto himself was a target of Army extremists, who all worked with Tojo pulling the strings. I don't think Tojo would have hesitated to off the Emperor for a second, if he stood in Tojo's way.
|
|
dave
Brigadier General
Posts: 1,679
|
Post by dave on Dec 9, 2016 4:05:45 GMT
The subservient behavior by the Japanese after the surrender was commented on by most if not all of the Allied occupiers. As to how much of that was due to the Emperor retaining power there are many varied opinions. I personally find it very difficult, neigh impossible, to accept that Hirohito was merely a puppet figure who did not have prior knowledge of operations in China prior to Pearl Harbor or in the planning and execution in WW II but I have no information supporting my belief. I have neither the money or interest in securing texts that deal with his actions or non actions. Regards Dave
|
|
|
Post by quincannon on Dec 9, 2016 4:23:54 GMT
Not trying to change your mind. Just trying to point out that there is not one shred of proof.
Wartime US views are hard to change even at this late date. They have become ingrained in who we are. All I can do is point you toward those who have cut through the bushwa, and examined the record. None of them place any blame upon Hirohito beyond him being the titular head of government. Hirohito was no more responsible for the workings of the Japanese government, the war effort, or any crimes committed, than King George was for the UK and Commonwealth. The fury of war may make it sound that way, but that don't make it so, and the record supports that view.
|
|