Remember Pearl Harbor

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by dannubis



Nobody is discussing the destruction of the main cities of your enemy in here.

We are discussing the fact whetehr or not it is appropriate to remember the dead at pearl harbor by gloating over the deads in Japan...

Whos gloating?

[Patroklos]

whose job it is to die for their country

[DinoDoc]

Yeah. No one ever won a war by dieing for thier country. They won it by making the poor dumb SoBs on the other side die for thiers.

[Unimatrix11]

Originally posted by TCO
Japan was a bunch of evil militarists. We sparred with them, to keep them from dominating Asia. They fvcked with the bull and got the horns. Now they are pacifists like the Germans.

a) Japan was RULED by a bunch of militarists.

b) You (or much rather the US, the CW and assorted allies) sparred with them, OVER the dominance of East-Asia.

c) The USA (&Co) won.

d) The looser of a violent conflict usually acquires some maturity over the aspect of violence. The winner feels no need to do the same.

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Yeah. No one ever won a war by dieing for thier country. They won it by making the poor dumb SoBs on the other side die for thiers.

Now you sonofaB!tches know how I feel

[Patroklos]

The DoD would be unhappy to hear that about Iraq. What was all that prattle about "Shock and Awe," if both sides knew it was coming?

You realize that "prattle" is exactly why it wasn't a suprise, it having happened months before the event, right?

In an odd sense it was important to lose all the battleships, because a carrier-centric navy would turn out to be more effective.

False. The shift to carriers was already well underway at this point. If you look at the build schedules it is quite clear. There is a reason Japan (who had a gun club just as strong as America's) attacked with carriers at Pearl Harbor.

In any case, battleships/crusiers were very important during the war, just not in the roles they were originally intended. Where do you think most of the AA support for fleet defense came from?

[Unimatrix11]

Originally posted by tinyp3nis


full article: http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1930

By the way Smedley Butler commented as early as 1935 about US was provoking Japan.

Ta-Da ! There you go... Thx, uhem, well you know your name

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Lord Avalon
Also, Japan being on its knees didn't mean much if they were going to fight to the death. It took the horror of the nuclear attacks to get them to capitulate. How many more lives on both sides would have been lost if we actually had to invade Japan?

Actually, Japan was prepared to continue fighting after the atomic attacks. The nail in the coffin was the Soviet declaration of war and overrunning Manchuria in a week and removing all hope from the Japanese of a negotiated surrender.

[Lord Avalon]

Originally posted by Patroklos

False. The shift to carriers was already well underway at this point. If you look at the build schedules it is quite clear. There is a reason Japan (who had a gun club just as strong as America's) attacked with carriers at Pearl Harbor.

Weren't they going to build mostly escort carriers? But with the loss of ships at Pearl, more full-size carriers were prioritized? (Anything online about build schedules?) And I wasn't talking about Japan's navy, just U.S.

In any case, battleships/crusiers were very important during the war, just not in the roles they were originally intended. Where do you think most of the AA support for fleet defense came from?

Wasn't saying they weren't important.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Afghanistan and Iraq weren't exactly surprise attacks.

agreed. Everyone knew we were going to attack. Hell, I knew Bush was going after Iraq back in 2002 way before the war started. You could hear it in his voice.

[Patroklos]

Weren't they going to build mostly escort carriers? But with the loss of ships at Pearl, more full-size carriers were prioritized? (Anything online about build schedules?) And I wasn't talking about Japan's navy, just U.S.

No, escort carriers were for all intents and purposes an invention of the wartime years. In fact, several cruisers had already been/were being converted to carriers at the time of PH.

agreed. Everyone knew we were going to attack. Hell, I knew Bush was going after Iraq back in 2002 way before the war started. You could hear it in his voice.

Assuming you are not very good at reading someone's mind through his voice, there were also the daily news briefing about the buildup of 100K+ troops in Kuwait

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Comrade Snuggles

Originally posted by Lord Avalon
Also, Japan being on its knees didn't mean much if they were going to fight to the death. It took the horror of the nuclear attacks to get them to capitulate. How many more lives on both sides would have been lost if we actually had to invade Japan?

Actually, Japan was prepared to continue fighting after the atomic attacks. The nail in the coffin was the Soviet declaration of war and overrunning Manchuria in a week and removing all hope from the Japanese of a negotiated surrender.

You really should preface stuff like this with "some historians, with whom I happen to agree, claim".

[Unimatrix11]

Well, Kuci, it is true, that even after all that, when the emporor himself finally ordered to end the war, hundreds jumped from the bridges and many pilots took their machines down into the tokyo bay. There was even rebellion and officers commited suicide because they helped putting it out against their own conviction.

Some historians, with whom i happen to agree, claim, that the overall attititude of many japanese was like this: If we remain stubborn, they cant defeat us or at least will have to give us more favorable terms. For unconditional surrender, they´d have to kill us all. But the Yanks cant kill 100.000.000 people. Thus they cannot force us to surrender. We´ll just have to sit this one out...

[Patroklos]

Thats propbaly because there were on 71 million Japanese at the time.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
You really should preface stuff like this with "some historians, with whom I happen to agree, claim".

I thought the Japanese archives pretty well established this was the thinking of the Japanese leadership at the time.