Tracy White wrote:
Walt wrote:
Yamamoto was quoted as saying about awaking sleeping giants .having great resolve etc etc...
.. snip ..
I'm only wondering 'What were they thinkin" lol
Please... for the love of God and History, Ready the damned books I suggested, or read them again and commit more to memory before you start wondering such things.
Yamamoto never said that, and all that you are doing here is showing that you have enough knowledge to be dangerous - you have assumptions based on that which would not be there if you re-read or expanded your reading. Zimm's book is a great analysis, but Prange's is a good narrative of the lead-up to the attack (it's not without it's faults though). There were decisions and constraints that reflected on what the Kido Butai could do.
So much of the "what if" I see is so god-awfully bad that it has left an intense distaste in my mouth for any sort of what-if. Most people do not do enough to study the history in depth, to understand the players, the circumstances. I'm not faulting the desire to play, but generally I find that armchair admiraling does history a disservice and is disrespectful to the people who sacrificed so much for their friends, families, and countries. Saying "the Japanese made this mistake" and "any military organization knows..." overly simplifies things.
You get the last word, I'm unsubscribing from this thread as I'm too passionate about this subject.
Tracy whether or not that Yamamoto said this has never been verified. either way..If so by who..I am ready to be corrected by facts..I did not "quote " him verbatim.... I referred to the folklore..or fact.
I don't know what you don't understand about "What Ifs" The topic of this tread was Pearl Harbor Revisited. I did read the books ..and several others in my life long study of Military history..Many have conflicting theory and almost all were written in 3rd person years after so many facts were lost in the fog of time. I have also been there ( home ported) I know the size of the base and how easy it would have been to cripple the logistical support there.
I also understand that there are several official historical opinions on the attack and it's planning etc. I am also a serious student of military history and especially tactic. My questions about the Japanese plans are very real. If they had followed "common Military procedure" in a preemptive strike especially after learning that their "main objectives" ( CVs ) were not present at Pearl..No options were thought of or given to the attackers apparently? One big difference in Military disciplines between Japan and the West the IJN were trained to follow plans to an objective outlined to them by command and the Allies often adjusted on the fly as to what was presented them when the objective was not presented in real time. Many examples can be found of this difference throughout the War.. ( Midway for one) A serious difference in operational tactic. Be it Cultural or historical with the Japanese.
Most successful military planners would have had a secondary target. There was no option for the attackers..they took the attack to the BB fleet and airfields ignoring the fuel farm, warehousing, other base support facilities like cranes and docking/piers etc.. as well as the dry docks and SS Base to a great extent. . All because they were of a different discipline be it cultural or military incompetents or both.
History has shown us that this oversight ( or mistake whatever) was very contributory to what was to become their ruin in short order. These are also facts that to a military planner are all very obvious.
So back to my original question What if The Logistical targets at Pearl were given higher priority? A very simple question knowing all we do 70 years on.
To say or even suggest that The IJN did not blunder by concentrating most of their resource by hitting the BBs....Obsolete BBs... especially after they discovered that their "main targets" the CVs were not in port and leaving the USN's "major Naval Base" in the Pacific mostly untouched and very viable to continue it's support thousands of miles from Stateside..With the CV and Cruiser & SS fleet mostly intact as well as their supports.. If so Then I say someone is reading too many books..Or not the right books eh? Just look to the results less than 6 months down the road..all because the USN was able too get into the game quickly with a great logestical support system still in place.( Pearl Harbor).. It was an opportunity lost to history by Japan...
We all know what happened and how it happened Tracy.. I am not trying to "change" history. I am just bringing up a very real tactical mistake made by the IJN and almost every WW2 historian I know or have read would agree. There is no over simplifying things when the critic has already seen the play Tracy..It's no big deal it's only bathtub pirate stuff..really.
Just a what if???? Golly gee sergeant!!! lol