• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Merged Roosevelt's Rotten Record:Communism, Treachery, Betrayal

Yes, from the military point of view - as I recall the diplomats and crypto guys screwed up the transmission of the declaration of war, so the attack came in undeclared as had been done in the 1904 war with Russia.

Tactically I would have ambushed the US fleet after it left the harbour in response to an air raid warning

But the Japan lost the war the minute it attacked, production was just not even remotely capable of keeping up with the US and the Submarine boys at the academy were from the lowest graduates - and no one listen to them about the dangerous of unrestricted submarine warfare!
 
Last edited:
Yes, from the military point of view - as I recall the diplomats and crypto guys screwed up the transmission of the declaration of war, so the attack came in undeclared as had been done in the 1904 war with Russia.
The "14-part Message" wasn't actually a declaration of war. And I would put the blame for the delay on the Gaimudaijin for:
Sending the parts out of order.
Sending some of them much later than other.
And for insisting that only "cleared" personnel be used to type up the message.
Tactically I would have ambushed the US fleet after it left the harbour in response to an air raid warning
That would presume there was no aircraft scouting the area, yes?
But the Japan lost the war the minute it attacked, production was just not even remotely capable of keeping up with the US and the Submarine boys at the academy were from the lowest graduates - and no one listen to them about the dangerous of unrestricted submarine warfare!

I strongly agree.
 
Strategically I would have, well first not invaded China but with that done. I think the only course left might have been a limited attack against the British and Dutch with the hope that internal politics of the US would delay any US intervention.

To your question. I would have lead with a surface fleet followed by the carrier task force. Once the surface force was located I believe the Americans would have gone to sea, then somewhere North of Kauai I would have engaged them with airpower then a surface action, hopefully the US would have been badly attrited by the air actions and the lucky shots of the submarine line.....then hit PH
 
If you were a Japanese person do you think you could still defend using the bomb?

Depends. Given the logic of the situation I would imagine most likely that my father, were he Japanese, would have starved to death or been used as cannon fodder. So the bomb, while horrible, would have indirectly let me be born had my father not lived in Nagasaki or Hiroshima.

But I've always been contrary like that. I'm half Scottish and half-Southern US - and I can't stand post-Culloden boo-hoo pity parties, and I want to kick every 'lost causer' in the head.
 
The government truther ignorance with regard to Pearl Harbor is truly fascinating to behold. It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
 
What good would it do you? It's like trying to explain calculus to a brick wall in here.

You could start by

Showing us how your statement about the battleship was correct - in comparison to the opposing battleline of the Japanese?

but then you're just a troll and don't know what you are talking about.....
 
You could start by

Showing us how your statement about the battleship was correct - in comparison to the opposing battleline of the Japanese?

but then you're just a troll and don't know what you are talking about.....

It was quite obviously correct, as the ships sunk or damaged at Pearl Harbor, no matter how you gauge their operational capabilities, did not constitute the entirety of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. The heart of the fleet was the handful of fleet carriers, which were all conveniently out to sea on December 7, 1941.
 
It was quite obviously correct, as the ships sunk or damaged at Pearl Harbor, no matter how you gauge their operational capabilities, did not constitute the entirety of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. The heart of the fleet was the handful of fleet carriers, which were all conveniently out to sea on December 7, 1941.

Wrong yet again

You are using modern hindsight, at that time BB were still considered the backbone of a battlefleet. The Japanese gained, by attacking Pearl harbour, strategic BB supremacy - for after PH there were no operational US BB in the Pacific until when SHC? I mean you do know when the US regain BB parity don't you?

Oh, I guess not.......

Remember it was US strategy to form its battlefleet and force its way to the Phillippines. You might want to review plan orange
 
It was quite obviously correct, as the ships sunk or damaged at Pearl Harbor, no matter how you gauge their operational capabilities, did not constitute the entirety of the U.S. Pacific Fleet. The heart of the fleet was the handful of fleet carriers, which were all conveniently out to sea on December 7, 1941.

Except that American naval doctrine focused on the battleship as the primary naval weapon with carriers as support ships.

So the idea that you let your A players take the hit while the B lusters are saved for later needs some work.

That and if not for weather the carriers were due back at Pearl that day or the day before (can't remember which right now).
 
Except that American naval doctrine focused on the battleship as the primary naval weapon with carriers as support ships.

So the idea that you let your A players take the hit while the B lusters are saved for later needs some work.

That and if not for weather the carriers were due back at Pearl that day or the day before (can't remember which right now).

Yes it was luck that US didn't lose its two carriers too. The Japanese thought they had gotten a carrier by mistaking the target ship Utah

For the lurkers this is what the BB situation in the Pacific was after Pearl harbour

There were no operational battleships in the Pacific after Pearl Harbor. New Mexico departed Maine and Mississippi and Idaho departed Iceland two days later by way of Norfolk for San Francisco, arriving 22/31Jan42, six weeks later. The three formed Task Force 1 based out of San Francisco to patrol and escort convoys to Hawaii. Tennessee and Maryland were repaired and sailed from Puget Sound Navy Yard 26Feb42. Colorado finished overhaul a month later, at about the same time as Pennsylvania finished repair. The new construction North Carolina arrived in June restoring the battle fleet and to its prewar number. The new construction Washington and South Dakota arrived in August and Indiana arrived later in the year.

The newest battleship, Washington (BB-56) and newest carrier, Wasp CV-7, were involved in the prewar Atlantic fiction of neutrality patrol. Both departed to reinforce the British Home Fleet as soon as they could, in March 1942, while new carrier Hornet CV-8 departed for the Pacific about the same time to make Doolittle's Raid on Tokyo. Washington performed convoy escort to northern Russia and North Atlantic; Wasp made two ferry runs through Gibraltar to Malta. When Lexington CV-2 was lost at Coral Sea, Wasp was hurried home to replace her. Wasp and new battleship North Carolina BB-55 departed Norfolk while the Battle of Midway was going on, where Yorktown CV-5 was lost in June. New South Dakota BB-57 was ready to depart for the Pacific in mid-August, followed a week later by Washington who had been recalled when the leadership became convinced that the Pacific War deserved more of the new equipment. But, the Navy was down to one active battleship in an active combat zone for a few weeks, twice, late in 1942. N. Carolina had been torpedoed 6Sep and was in repair at Pearl. S. Dakota was damaged in the defeat at Santa Cruz, 26 Oct, and under repair at New Caldonia. Only Washington BB-56 was active in the South Pacific. The older Colorado BB-45 was rushed to Fiji by 8Nov. Washington and partially repaired S. Dakata fought in the second night of the Naval Battle of Guadalcanal,13-14 Nov, where S.D. was again badly damaged and returned to NY. Washington was again the lone fast BB until 28Nov when Indiana BB-58 arrived fresh from shakedown. Old battleships Arkansas BB-33, New York BB-34, and Texas BB-35 remained in the Atlantic, joined by Nevada BB-36 in mid-1943, where their slower speed of 21 knots was not a handicap for troop convoy escort service. The six early war battleships (BB-55 - BB-60) had speeds of 27.5 knots and even these "fast battleships" could not keep up with carriers at combat speeds (CV 33 knot ; CVL 31 kn.). Only the last four, late war Iowa class battleships could reach 33 knots.
 
Last edited:
Wrong yet again

You are using modern hindsight, at that time BB were still considered the backbone of a battlefleet. The Japanese gained, by attacking Pearl harbour, strategic BB supremacy - for after PH there were no operational US BB in the Pacific until when SHC? I mean you do know when the US regain BB parity don't you?

Oh, I guess not.......

Remember it was US strategy to form its battlefleet and force its way to the Phillippines. You might want to review plan orange

False.

Battleships were only considered the backbone of the fleet by some, and they were quickly proven wrong. Forward-thinking naval experts knew that carriers had replaced the battleship as the fleet operations gold standard, especially after the Battle of Taranto and the sinking of the Bismarck.

Those battleships sunk at Pearl were largely obsolete and too slow for carrier operations, which is why they were sacrificed. They had to be replaced anyway, and new battleships were either being planned or built to do just that. Roosevelt had to have an excuse to get into that war, and he needed a few thousands corpses to do it.

Sorry, you're just wrong, as usual.
 
Last edited:
False.

Battleships were only considered the backbone of the fleet by some, and they were quickly proven wrong. Forward-thinking naval experts knew that carriers had replaced the battleship as the fleet operations gold standard, especially after the Battle of Taranto and the sinking of the Bismarck.

Those battleships sunk at Pearl were largely obsolete and too slow for carrier operations, which is why they were sacrificed. They had to replaced anyway, and new battleships were either being planned or built to do just that. Roosevelt had to have an excuse to get into that war, and he needed a few thousands corpses to do it.

Sorry, you're just wrong, as usual.

So in your unevidence opinion, again! Again you are mistaking hindsight for reality, you must really try harder. I mean as a troll you completely moronic lack of historical knowledge makes you completely ineffectual.

Go back and read some Naval history, please it's painful to read your unknowing dribble
 
So in your unevidence opinion, again! Again you are mistaking hindsight for reality, you must really try harder. I mean as a troll you completely moronic lack of historical knowledge makes you completely ineffectual.

Go back and read some Naval history, please it's painful to read your unknowing dribble

If you think I am wrong, prove it. Babbling about naval history isn't going to help you here.
 
If you think I am wrong, prove it. Babbling about naval history isn't going to help you here.

I already asked you to compare the Japanese to American battleline - you ran away

Listen troll - I know you tactics, you try to get everyone to do the research so you can reject it

Ain't workin on me troll

So troll either answer the questions or just shut up, okay?

lol
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom