"Pearl Harbor" Topic

Today in 1941 the IJFs attacked US forces at Pearl Harbor, HI. "Lest we forget" …

Those that don't remember history …

Of course those that make these types of decisions normally have no family or friends that will go in harms way. If a conflict breaks out. Which always does sooner or later …

It is often said that "Wars are fought for old men, by young boys." And it's never the career politicians son that is the first one to jump out of plane over a hostile combat drop zone.
It's easy to say "Lest we forget", but in reality, we do. Our memories (as a nation) are often woefully short, almost to the point of us having the attention span of a ferret on a double espresso.
Many younger people nowadays don't remember, or "don't get" the importance of events such as Pearl Harbor, The Challenger Disaster, The Berlin Wall coming down, (I have one friends daughter who is in her early 20's and says that she can't even imagine the idea of a wall completely dividing a city.), or even 9/11…
American politics by and large are cyclic. We don't learn from our history. An example of this currently is the USMC eliminating armor assets from their organization. IMHO, I believe that this is going to be a dreadful, terrible, mistake that will end up being corrected once again, after blood has been spilled.
But perhaps, I've said too much…

Amen to that …

E.g. USMC losses Tanks – link

A date which will live in infamy, or until they become allies and major trading partners, whichever comes first.

WWII doesn't hold any significance to most people in the world today. Pear Harbor was 79 years ago. It is like asking a Pear Harbor survivor what he thought about the Confederates firing on Fort Sumter.

We are outliers.

It is like asking a Pear Harbor survivor what he thought about the Confederates firing on Fort Sumter.

Well, I'm still mad about that! And I was only a baby when Pearl Harbor was attacked. Regarding both attacks, I would say: Forgive, but don't forget.

As usual, a few powers-that-be at the top make the (stupid) decisions, and its the ordinary people at the bottom who pay the price -- on both sides.

My father-in-law was at Kaneohe Bay Naval Base. He was fishing when the first wave came over. When he got back he was walking across the airstrip when the second wave came in and a Jap Zero made two staffing passes at him as he was running to the hanger. He got strafed again while on Guadalcanal but a P-39 chased it away. They all missed.

Murphy, you may be right, only time will tell. If you read what the Commandant is planning for the future their anticipated operations will not need tanks. What can occur in the future is if the politicians again have the Marines fight in a long protracted struggle where they will need tanks.

The Commandant understands that the Marines cannot compete with the Army for assets to fight a conventional war. They need to find a relevant mission that the Army cannot fulfill and trade conventional war assets for the new ones to fill the new maritime interdiction/defense mission. I'll bet Chesty Puller would not approve.

There has been criticism about the Marines "hunting submarines". However, you need to recon and patrol around your AO. If you are on an island that means searching for subs. Hopefully, in the future, the Marines will not be used as a supplement to Army missions.

If you are a Marine and wondering what type of "fighting" the Marines will do in the future, don't worry, they always seem to find trouble to get into. It's a Marine thing.

Wolfha

My father was supposed to be on one of those B-17's that flew into the attack. He told me he was really mad because they didn't cut his orders in time. He just wanted to see the islands and then come home. Later he was shot down over Schwienfurt and spent the rest of the war in a Luft Stalag.

MY Barber, when I was young was a Survivor from the USS Nevada. He told me all he heard was a few thumps and then came on deck to a scene of Hell on Earth.

He spent the rest of the war cutting Hair from one end of the world to the other.

Memories of war, like all memories, are fickle things. We forget, or choose to, or remember selectively enough that we drift ever-farther from any reasonable rendition of what actually happened and why.

In retrospect, the Japanese attack in December 1941 was the war's second- or third-most drastic miscalculation, with Hitler's declaration of war on the US probably the worst, followed closely by his decision to attack Russia without first having closed out the British Empire. (Even his war on Russia might have succeeded if not for Anglo-American – and mainly American – aid.)

That said, US domestic policy – and, specifically, deep divisions over the costs or benefits of foreign entanglements – made it easier for prospective enemies at the time to misjudge both American capacity and, more importantly, American will. These combined to lead such enemies to misjudge – rather fatally – American effort as applied over time.

But their misjudgement was well-founded nevertheless: the US stayed out of the First World War until spring 1917, was not decisive after that, and had now been two full years and more on the sidelines of the Second. It did not seem like the committed juggernaut it would, by 1944, become.

The many thousands who perished from December 7 onward therefore owed their deaths, in no small part, to the domestic divisions, corporate greed, and political incapacity – all compounded by doubt over America's armed potential as opposed to its extant armed might – that contributed to such massive enemy errors. Lest we forget, indeed.

Entrenched social division, rampaging corporate greed, political incapacity, and dubious (and possibly declining) military strength are as dangerous now as in 1941. Maybe more.

I hope no enemies are watching.

The CCP are watching.

May God bless all who served on December 7,1941.
Truly, the Greatest Generation.

Another perspective is that the Pacific war or the expansion of the Japanese WWII was sandwiched between the unprovoked commencement of hostilities with the attack on Perl Harbour and the bombings of Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many might prefer to forget.

Another perspective is that the Pacific war or the expansion of the Japanese WWII was sandwiched between the unprovoked commencement of hostilities with the attack on Perl Harbour and the bombings of Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many might prefer to forget.

I think there were plenty of leaders both civilian and military who lost sons and their own lives in the conflict. The German High Command was certainly held to account. As far as the Pacific theatre was concerned, the Australian memory is a story of attempted war crimes trials and executions being stopped by US policy. That's what is 'known' but I couldn't say if it's more than our perception. Public memory is untrustworthy as best.

Can't help but wonder if Japan hadn't attacked the USA and only attacked The Dutch East Indies & The British, would Roosevelt have joined the war even with no direct attack on the United States? Would have been a difficult sell to the American public at that point. Japan's major miscalculation sealed their doom.

I think there were plenty of leaders both civilian and military who lost sons and their own lives in the conflict

True and many did not. But remember WWII was thought of by some as, "The Good War" … Just say'n …

I read an article some years ago that stated that the same percentage of sons of congressmen served in the invasion of Iraq as the sons of the general public.

Well that is good to know. I got out in '90 and never met any politicians' kin anywhere. Maybe they were not in Infantry or Tanks ?

The important question to ask (IMO) is exactly where those politically connected offspring were actually stationed.

B

I'm always fascinated by the way "popular history" gets created and massaged over time.

WW1 – Woodrow Wilson won the 1916 presidential election on an anti-war campaign platform. The US was already making heaps of cash supplying the entente and had no important geo-political interests in what was at root a European conflict. Nevertheless, the US somehow ended up entering the war within months of the election.

WW2 – Perhaps the US was not OFFICIALLY at war with Germany and Japan prior to December 1941, but the Roosevelt administration had the US actively involved in direct support of Great Britain for at least a year beforehand.

IMO, decisions relating to matters of war and peace are never in the hands of the citizens; they rest in the offices and board rooms of vested political and commercial interests.

B

The important question to ask (IMO) is exactly where those politically connected offspring were actually stationed.

Very good point … as I said, in 10+ years on active duty, never met any in the Infantry, Tanks, or Artillery, or in any other branches either.

IMO, decisions relating to matters of war and peace are never in the hands of the citizens; they rest in the offices and board rooms of vested political and commercial interests.

Agree completely …

A) did you meet and know the story of every infantryman & Tanker?
B) Did you know the name of every politician so that you might know on of their offspring when you meet him/her?

I find it interesting how far people will go to defend their preadjusts.

A) did you meet and know the story of every infantryman & Tanker?
B) Did you know the name of every politician so that you might know on of their offspring when you meet him/her?

Of course not … But I'm pretty sure we'd know that sort of thing among guys it the unit.

E.g. we had an NCO with an IQ if 160(!), he was very smart but not such a good soldier.

Also my first Bde Cdr in the 101, was LTC Pete Dawkins. He played for the West Point as an split end. Was in an advisor to an ARVN Parachute unit in Vietnam. And his picture was on the cover of Time magazine back then wearing an ARVN Para Beret.

Those are just few examples …

So based on my experience in the Infantry and being attached to Armored units. You generally kind of get to know something about the guys you work with. If he was a congressman's son I'm pretty sure we'd have known it.

I find it interesting how far people will go to defend their preadjusts.

I'm not defending anything just relaying my experiences while on active duty … Some others may have experienced it differently ?

Was your experience different in the Military ?

Did you serve with any politicians' sons or daughter ?

Regardless, what does this have to do with remembering Pearl Harbor ? I'd say it's waaay OT ?

And the Question is … when and where will the NEXT Pearl Harbor be? There are many countries building up their military assets while ours decline. Our Surface Ship designs are decades old and our advantage in Carriers is negated if we are forced to fight in range of eneny land based air power. In a conventional fight we'd be hard pressed in several areas. And before you use the two most common (false) counter arguments. First consider that even though the strongest navies tend to mostly be our Allies, friends and enemies change over time. Second before you quote that our fleet is so huge by tonnage, try comparing numbers and TYPES of ships. Some of the New DDG and FFG of our potential adversaries that are coming off the slipways are truly impressive. Food for Thought. Cheers!

Hopefully there will never be another Pearl Harbor. IMO the closest we go to is was 9/11. And we have taken the fight to the enemy and that won't happen again.

However, we still need to be prepared for any incidents. Even WWIII. We have had many lessons learned from before, after and currently … We just have to learn the right thing from our history and history in general.

However, it is reported within the next year or 2 the US will downsize it's military and Vet services by about 10%. In a time where our biggest threat is building up it's military at an alarming rate. And many of our Allies have and are generally downsizing their militaries drastically … So once again … those at the top may failed to have learned little from the past.

The average politician can't see or plan beyond his next election.

"The average politician can't see or plan beyond his next election."

….. or erection, as the case may be for certain of our "public servants".

B

All that being said more Vets are in Congress, etc., these days. So that looks like a good thing. However, it seems they are party members first and Vets second. For better or worse?