New docs on Pearl Harbor attack emerge

[winny]

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger II

wow, sounds like a scary situation your granpa was in!
care to tell us more?

He was an Anti Aircraft Gunner/Driver. He went over on D-Day +6. He was in Holland or France (sadly I can't remember which). He was stood next to his Bedford lorry (which towed a Bofors AA Gun) when he noticed a "Spitfire" circling, he waved at it and at that point realised it was a lone 109.

He said he froze for a split second as he realised it was lining up on him. He dived underneath the truck on the first pass before jumping up onto his gun and returning fire. The 109 didn't come back round for another go. (I guess my Grandad was a target of opportunity for somebody on thier way home!)

His total tally for the war, 2 'kills' and one 'damaged' (all for some reason 109's) The 2 kills were both in Holland some time after Market Garden.

[BadAim]

I find it amusing that no one in Europe (at least as far as this thread is concerned) seems to think that perhaps some people in the States might have had a positive motive for wanting to get involved in WWII. I dunno, like perhaps saving your asses?

No, that's not possible. My bad.

[TomcatViP]

+1

Yes we know that in Eu. Be sure of tht.

[Skoshi Tiger]

It would be interesting to know would be how many false alarms and miss information had been recieved in the months leading up to the attack and what measures were taken to verify the validity of the information.

Within a couple of days the Japanese had invaded Thailand, British Mayasia AND attacked Pearl Harbour.

In the time eading up to the 7/8th there would have been activity all over the asia pacific region. I wonder which reports would have been taken most seriously?

Cheers

[Blakduk]

Dont forget the difference that more than 60years makes to our preceptions. In the first half of the 20th century the British Empire was still massive and held huge territories in the Asia-Pacific region. From the Japanese perspective the USA was just another competing empire in the region which they thought the USA had little interest in spending blood or treasure to pursue dominance over. They believed USA interests were more focused to the west and made more detailed plans for the conquests in Hong Kong, Singapore, Burma etc, as well as the Phillipines. They also focused considerable energy to cutting Britain off from India
The Japanese strategy was to kick the europeans out of the 'Sphere of Influence' they wished to make, carving out a pan-Asian empire they would dominate and deal with the rest of the world on their terms. They believed a decisive blow against the USA pacific fleet would blunt their offensive arm and give the Japanese time to establish a solid bloc they could exploit for its natural resources and keep Europeans out. Hence their convenient pact with the Nazi's who were solely focused on Europe/USSR- there was almost complete lack of cooperation between these Axis powers.
The Japanese initially soundly beat the British, French and USA ground forces and seemed on the cusp of meeting their objectives.
In hindsight their strategy was hopelessly flawed as they underestimated the USA's industrial capacity and willingness to accept heavy loss of life. From the Japanese perspective there was little in the Pacific region that the USA required and they seemed to believe that if it became expensive for the USA to remain there they would soon come to terms.
In this regard the dictatorships of the early 20th century consistently proved unable to comprehend that democracies are quite capable of enduring huge sacrifices when they recognise the need to, especially when they are fighting for abstract concepts such as freedom and liberty.
Hitler was also baffled by Britains continued instransigence after they were kicked out of Europe- to his mind it made no sense for Britain to keep fighting because there was nothing in it for them.

[ElAurens]

Well said Blakduk.

[KG26_Alpha]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

Well said Blakduk.

+1

Originally Posted by BadAim

I find it amusing that no one in Europe (at least as far as this thread is concerned) seems to think that perhaps some people in the States might have had a positive motive for wanting to get involved in WWII. I dunno, like perhaps saving your asses?

No, that's not possible. My bad.

And the P51 won the war don't forget

[Sven]

Good post Blakduk

Originally Posted by BadAim

I find it amusing that no one in Europe (at least as far as this thread is concerned) seems to think that perhaps some people in the States might have had a positive motive for wanting to get involved in WWII. I dunno, like perhaps saving your asses?

No, that's not possible. My bad.

Interesting concept especially the 'saving' part.

[jg27_mc]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

...And the P51 won the war don't forget

War was won by numbers... And I am thankful and happy about it.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by BadAim

I find it amusing that no one in Europe (at least as far as this thread is concerned) seems to think that perhaps some people in the States might have had a positive motive for wanting to get involved in WWII. I dunno, like perhaps saving your asses?

No, that's not possible. My bad.

Must be the same positive motives that made them invade Iraq and Afghanistan and also bomb Libya.
Makes me wonder what's wrong with Syria, those ppl could use some help too, don't you think?