Pearl Harbour - Whodunnit?

[Ingot54 13]

Did the US provoke Japan into attacking the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbour?

 

What foreknowledge did Allies (Britain and the USA) have of the impending attack?

 

Was this a case of sacrificing the men and ships of the Pacific Fleet, in order to give reason for the USA to come into the war?

 

The following is an excerpt from:

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq66-1.htm

 

Is it a convenient write-up of history, of how it would like to be remembered, rather than how it should be remembered - truthfully?

 

When the attack ended shortly before 10:00 a.m., less than two hours after it began,

the American forces has paid a fearful price. Twenty-one ships of the U.S. Pacific Fleet

were sunk or damaged: the battleships USS Arizona (BB-39), USS California (BB-44),

USS Maryland (BB-46), USS Nevada (BB-36), USS Oklahoma (BB-37), USS Pennsylvania (BB-38),

USS Tennessee (BB-43) and USS West Virginia (BB-48); cruisers USS Helena (CL-50),

USS Honolulu (CL-48) and USS Raleigh (CL-7); the destroyers USS Cassin (DD-372),

USS Downes (DD-375), USS Helm (DD-388) and USS Shaw (DD-373); seaplane

tender USS Curtiss (AV-4); target ship (ex-battleship) USS Utah (AG-16); repair ship

USS Vestal (AR-4); minelayer USS Oglala (CM-4); tug USS Sotoyomo (YT-9); and

Floating Drydock Number 2. Aircraft losses were 188 destroyed and 159 damaged, the

majority hit before the had a chance to take off. American dead numbered 2,403. That

figure included 68 civilians, most of them killed by improperly fused anti-aircraft shells

landing in Honolulu. There were 1,178 military and civilian wounded.

 

Today would be a good opportunity to review what happenens in war - truth being the first casualty - but unfortunately after

the smoke clears, the truth is not always as clear.

[Tams 20]

Sad day.... and a stupid day. As stupid as 911. As embarrassing as 911.

[Predictor 11]

Ingot,

You may want to look at our embargo/trade restrictions on Japan which happened I believe the year/summer prior for clues. Many felt that the embargo would force a retaliation. I'm not an expert on this but I think it was a common belief at the time. Interestingly, the Japanese had a stock market even then...

 

The American oil embargo caused a crisis in Japan. Reliant on the US for 80% of its oil, the Japanese were forced to decide between withdrawaling from China, negotiating an end to the conflict, or going to war to obtain the needed resources elsewhere.

 

http://militaryhistory.about.com/od/worldwarii/a/wwiipaccauses_2.htm

[MightyMouse 12]

You can also claim that we provoked Al Qaida on 911. I think either claim is a stretch. The US is not that cunning. Reactionary and opportunistic, yes. Cunning, no.

[physicist 10]

Did the US provoke Japan into attacking the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbour?

 

Uh... No. Japan was responsible for its own actions. BTW, We AMERICANS spell it

harbor, not harbour.

 

It is of course popular with leftists to always blame Western nations for everything - in their eyes, all the world's ills must be caused by Caucasians - blacks and asians are always de facto the victims... The fact that JAPAN was the aggressor never occurs to them - somehow , it must be the white man's fault.....

[Ingot54 13]

Well guys, I am interested in getting to the truth of this.

 

We hear stories about the CIA involvement in the Arab Spring uprisings and so on - all wonderful stuff ... but lacking in documentation. Until of course, that is, until someone like Wikileaks breaks ranks with Mainstream media, and spills four or five beans!

 

So I think the only thing I can do is look at sources that have written about it, and see if they are believable.

 

I apologise that I I spell with "s" instead of "z" - or keep the old forms of spelling.

 

I use "bour" for "neighbour" and "harbour" and "iour" for words like "behaviour".

 

I don't think it detracts from the essence of what I write. It belies the fact of my Australian English education, which still resists the Americanisation of everything that threatens to dumb us down.

 

I mean we are still wondering what kind of expressions "I ain't no muv-vucker, man" are, where I live, and thankfully so. It is not educated English - it is creole I think.

 

But that's another topic for another day.

 

I found an interesting item by Robert Higgs here, during my search for truth - but like all things, it is just a part of a larger picture:

 

How U.S. Economic Warfare Provoked Japan's Attack on Pearl Harbor - Robert Higgs - Mises Daily

 

Note the spelling of "Harbor" for the purists.

 

I am expecting that as soon as some notice where this item was published, they will immediately throw the baby out with the bathwater, without following the 17 mins presentation.

 

 

He quotes his sources, which have been documented since the 1940's and are on the public record.

 

FDR got his way - they goaded the Japanese into an untenable position whereby they "fired the first shot" ... and more than 2400 Americans lost their lives on that fateful day, December 7th 1941.

Attack on Pearl Harbor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Sacrificed for political aims ... or the greater good?

[Monkey 10]

This thread really pisses me off. Some nut from Australia thinks because the US cuts off oil from the Japs because they are murdering hundreds of thousands (maybe millions)? of Chinese that it is our fault the Japs attacked us like a bunch of buzzards from Hell? This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Maybe the stupid Japs shouldn't of been murdering the Chinese in the first place? Now who would be smart enough to think of that? An American of course! LOL

[Ingot54 13]

This thread really pisses me off. Some nut from Australia thinks because the US cuts off oil from the Japs because they are murdering hundreds of thousands (maybe millions)? of Chinese that it is our fault the Japs attacked us like a bunch of buzzards from Hell? This is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. Maybe the stupid Japs shouldn't of been murdering the Chinese in the first place? Now who would be smart enough to think of that? An American of course! LOL

Finally ... an emotional response from a yank ... Touché !

 

I guessed it would strike a nerve from the purist warmongers, who always like to say they are "peace-keeping" :rofl::rofl:

 

I s'pose you are referring to me as "some nut from Australia" ... coming from a yank (small "y" ) I will accept the compliment!

 

Thank you, marine. You missed Australia in your conquest of the world ... and we have oil, gas, copper, gold, iron, bauxite, zinc, coal, uranium, and a few Brit-born politicians.

 

There is a big red stone out in the middle, but the sisters and the brothers might want it back. No, it is not made of gold, and there is no oil underneath it. Don't even think about it!

 

What we try to keep out, is ... no prizes for guessing, because we have had a degree of success here ... the yanks! Sadly, they have Pine Gap, and recently took over Darwin, so I guess the end is nigh.

.................................................................................... :helloooo: ....... :helloooo: .......:helloooo:

Be nice to us nuts, yank, when you come for us. :helloooo: :rofl: :helloooo: :rofl: :helloooo: :rofl: :helloooo:

[Predictor 11]

One thing worth remembering was that Japan was a great power at the time while the US was not -- not at all like we are the super power today. There's a great story on youtube about how the commander who carried out the mission did not want to go to war with the U.S and said if he did that in 3-4 years they would fail. This man had spent some years in the U.S beforehand.

[Ingot54 13]

The best way to teach people not to be hypocrites is to drop a couple of atom bombs on them.

How close to the truth are you hoping this thread will get us Ingot? I would think the US Gov

at the time knew exactly what happened and why and so would the Japanese.I'm no

expert either but i bet we'd get 2 very different explanations.

The source I found and posted above in post #6 is not the only one.

 

And the USA is not the only western nation to use this tactic.

 

Further, the USA is not alone in abusing its relationships with its allies.

 

If you look at the Australian and New Zealand (ANZACS) attack/assault on Turkey at the beach at

Gallipoli, you will see how utterly futile that exercise was, and the treatment of those troops as

fodder for the cannons! As an Australian I know this story only too well. My maternal grandfather

was there as a machine gunner, before being lucky enough to be amongst the survivors,

and sent to France.

Gallipoli Campaign - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

The persistent lack of progress was finally making an impression in the United Kingdom,

with contrasting news of the true nature of the campaign being smuggled out by journalists

like Keith Murdoch and Ellis Ashmead-Bartlett, so discrediting Hamilton's performance.

Disaffected senior officers such as General Stopford also contributed to the general air of gloom.

The prospect of evacuation was raised on 11 October 1915 but Hamilton resisted the suggestion,

fearing the damage to British prestige. He was dismissed as commander shortly afterwards

and replaced by Lieutenant-General Sir Charles Monro.

 

It should be clear to all that the evidence from that Wikipedia quote is pointing to the use by the British,

of men under their command, to prop up their "prestige."

 

This is a more honest appraisal:

Dr Peter Stanley speaks about Gallipoli myths

 

Breen also says it is time to spare a thought for the working class, which was used as cannon

fodder by British upper-class officers at Gallipoli, and Australians should focus on that tragic injustice.

 

The point of posting the above, is to show that despite all the rhetoric and hand-wringing

at the respective times of our National Memorial Days, people need to remember that their

governments - the "servants of the people" quite often had an agenda to satisfy their own prestige

as commanders, as well as satisfy the debt they owed to the financiers who helped get them elected.

 

What role did the Rubber and Tin Companies play in the decision to "fight the spread of communism"

in Vietnam?

 

What role did the multi-national Halliburton play in the decision(s) to invade Iraq in 1992 and 2003?

Halliburton (with the Vice-president of the USA Dick Cheney as a former CEO) This is the same

Dick Cheney who "served" as Defense Secretary whilst actively involved in the running of Halliburton!

 

Imagine that - you make the policy, you make the bombs, you outfit the soldiers, and you get the

contracts to rebuild, as well as the contracts to provide "security" during the aftermath!

I am not making this stuff up. just Google "Halliburton and Iraq" and "Dick Cheney and Halliburton"

and you will see the corruption and filth associated with this company and the politicians

who condoned it in full knowledge of the game.

 

Yet GW Bush - the President of the USA did nothing to protect the interests of his own people

against this predatory man and his company.

 

So don't try to make some lolly story about Pearl Harbor (there - spelled "right" for the pedantic).

PH was no more and no less another "Anzac Cove" to give the people an excuse to emotionally

back Roosevelt in drawing the nation into a war it had no business fighting, just as has always

been the case. I think people now need to question the motives and facts a little more closely.

 

The "weapons of mass destruction" myth proves that!

 

I should add, that without the involvement of the US, the WW II was going rather precariously

for the Allies. But that does not give anyone any reason to believe fairy stories.

 

If Roosevelt had been an honest person, he would have faced the people and said:

"Our Allies are in trouble. It's time we rolled up our sleeves and lent a hand."

 

What reasonable person would have denied that as an honourable thing to do?

 

Politicians have no respect for, and no faith in their constituents. They believe the people are

there to be used, and while the people allow it, it will continue. I don't buy the rhetorical:

"They are only there until the next election" ... to be replaced with ... ???

[Ingot54 13]

You can also claim that we provoked Al Qaida on 911. I think either claim is a stretch. The US is not that cunning. Reactionary and opportunistic, yes. Cunning, no.

MM - while I have a lot of respect for most of your views, I am struggling with this one right now.

 

I imagine you would know better than an Australian what happened during the JFK years ... or more precisely what might have happened, had Kennedy had the morals of Bush and Obama today ... with their "executive decree" over-riding your constitution these days. America should be very glad they had JFK for as long as they did. Unlike the warmongers of today, he was very mindful of just what war does to people. I believe he captained a ship of some kind in the Pacific during WW II?

Operation Northwoods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Operation Northwoods was a series of false-flag proposals that originated within the

United States government in 1962, but were rejected by the Kennedy administration.[2]

The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or other operatives, to

commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and elsewhere. These acts of terrorism were to

be blamed on Cuba in order to create public support for a war against that nation,

which had recently become communist under Fidel Castro.[3] One part of Operation

Northwoods was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in

other Florida cities and even in Washington".

 

Operation Northwoods proposals included hijackings and bombings followed by the

introduction of phony evidence that would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:

 

The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United

States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and

irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban

threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.

 

Several other proposals were included within Operation Northwoods, including real or

simulated actions against various U.S. military and civilian targets. The plan was

drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, signed by Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer and sent to

the Secretary of Defense. Although part of the U.S. government's Cuban Project

anti-communist initiative, Operation Northwoods was never officially accepted; it was

authorized by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but then rejected by President John F. Kennedy.

 

It shows clearly how out of control those in power were then, and do you think they are more accountable today ... or less so?

 

In the light of Northwoods, would you say that the 911 blame game on Al Qaeda was true ... likely to be true, possibly true, not true, or something outside these possibilities?

[MightyMouse 12]

MM - while I have a lot of respect for most of your views, I am struggling with this one right now.

 

I imagine you would know better than an Australian what happened during the JFK years ... or more precisely what might have happened, had Kennedy had the morals of Bush and Obama today ... with their "executive decree" over-riding your constitution these days. America should be very glad they had JFK for as long as they did. Unlike the warmongers of today, he was very mindful of just what war does to people. I believe he captained a ship of some kind in the Pacific during WW II?

Operation Northwoods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Operation Northwoods was a series of false-flag proposals that originated within the

United States government in 1962, but were rejected by the Kennedy administration.[2]

The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or other operatives, to

commit acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and elsewhere. These acts of terrorism were to

be blamed on Cuba in order to create public support for a war against that nation,

which had recently become communist under Fidel Castro.[3] One part of Operation

Northwoods was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in

other Florida cities and even in Washington".

 

Operation Northwoods proposals included hijackings and bombings followed by the

introduction of phony evidence that would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:

 

The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United

States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and

irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban

threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.

 

Several other proposals were included within Operation Northwoods, including real or

simulated actions against various U.S. military and civilian targets. The plan was

drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, signed by Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer and sent to

the Secretary of Defense. Although part of the U.S. government's Cuban Project

anti-communist initiative, Operation Northwoods was never officially accepted; it was

authorized by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but then rejected by President John F. Kennedy.

 

It shows clearly how out of control those in power were then, and do you think they are more accountable today ... or less so?

 

In the light of Northwoods, would you say that the 911 blame game on Al Qaeda was true ... likely to be true, possibly true, not true, or something outside these possibilities?

 

Ingot,

 

If you agreed with everything I posted, we would be bored.

 

There is no way they would ever have pulled that off. As far as 911 is concerned, you really need to look at how poorly we do things to grasp how impossible it would be for our government to orchestrate such a plot. Incidentally, I know of a family from my town who was on the first plane. They were very real people and not part of a conspiracy.

 

Did they try to use 911 as a reason to invade Iraq? yes. Was it inevitable to the rest of the world that we were going to invade no matter what? Look at the way we handled iraq once the sand cleared. We broke one of the major rules of war.

 

I said we weren't cunning because I thought that we were embarrassingly transparent in our objectives, in spite of our attempt to be deceptive.

[SIUYA 11]

When it comes to war mongers and such from any side - most of these people are 'orchestrating the PR' more than the operations.

They are more likely extremists themselves who manage to view an opportunity to push their own ideas, and at the same time they think whats wrong with making some money at the same time......

There usually is not a single truth or catalyst that caused something but as they say the biggest casualty to war is truth.

 

Ingot as an aside to this - --- this might be interesting to you Japanese history textbook controversies - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

My wife lived in Japan and was constantly amazed when many of her Japanese friends did not think many of the atrocities occurred, and where amazed when they found out.....its the deliberate re-writing of history on any side winner or looser.

[johnw 10]

Never trust Low Life in high places