Winston
Lorenzo von Matterhorn
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2009
- Messages
- 9,560
- Reaction score
- 1,748
Well, I'm going to necessarily limit my investigations from this point on to these items:Where are you going with all this?
1. What was the source of those correct Hawaiian newspaper headlines and is there any other confirming evidence behind Joseph Leib's claim, supposedly solving what was still a mystery in 1984 for something so incredible that IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN EXPLAINED long ago.
2. What is the validity of the 1949 Chinese Nationalist claim that they passed a warning to London which they, perhaps incorrectly, assumed was passed to DC?
3. What was that "It's going to happen tonight" comment by the US gunboat officer in China based upon?
4. What was the scuttlebut at Pearl, in Hawaii, and with US personnel in China just prior to the attack?
ALL of that is going to take a LOT of work and NOT on-line. It means reading or at least scanning every book I can get through inter-library loan if necessary on the subject of the Pearl attack since the possible answers won't necessarily be limited to books about foreknowledge, getting copies of period newspaper articles, etc., etc. This is probably going to take a LONG time since it definitely won't be a sole effort of mine.
A summary from what I've learned so far just on-line in a few days:
1. There was a goal to incite the Japanese to surprise attack; Nimitz knew or suspected this and took a pre-war desk job to avoid the inevitable scapegoating, only going to sea after the attack.
2. Richardson, one of the very best US Admirals based upon his prescient warnings who was an expert on Japanese military tactics warned, along with others in the Navy, that stationing the Pacific Fleet at Pearl would make it a sitting duck to the surprise attack he knew would be characteristic of the Japanese and was a bad idea for many other reasons. He was forced to resign.
3. When there was a warning that an attack was imminent, unbelievable levels of inaction and improper action at the very highest levels were evident, FAR beyond simple incompetence; my best guess is that they didn't want to possibly deter an attack by showing signs of being ready for it since there were known or suspected to be Japanese spies near every Pacific installation who would notice any alert; thus, since the goal in the first place was to incite a surprise attack from the Japanese, just let it happen wherever it was going to happen, but send a too-late alert to cover your a**.
About the Hawaiian newspaper headlines:
1. They were made exactly at the time when Japanese intercepts indicated they were definitely planning to go to war in the very near future.
2. Since it's likely only a small fraction of Pearl personnel would have read those headlines, calling in a tip, if it wasn't a warning via international news wire as claimed by FDR White House insider Joseph Leib, a week in advance gave the rumor time to spread via word of mouth; did the Army actually go though that hospital tearing off the front page; if so, who ordered that and why exactly?
3. Even though it wasn't known from the intercepts of late November where exactly the attack would occur, anyone with at least half a brain back then and today who knows the balance of naval power in the pacific would know that the Japanese had just two choices:
a. Halt their aggression and retreat from territorial gains to lift the resource embargo (no freaking way) or
b. Go to war which, if they were to have ANY chance of winning or even reaching a stalemate after taking more territory to acquire embargoed resources would require them to knock out as much of the US fleet as possible in a surprise attack just as they did against the Russian fleet in the Battle of Port Arthur. As I documented above, at least one admiral, a Japanese military strategy expert and maybe another of the US Navy's very best admirals are on record as believing that. I have no doubt that many admirals and officers I haven't read about were just as smart about that. Heck, even the Marxist newsletter I linked to gave every period newspaper quote needed for anyone to agree with that assessment. The Japanese certainly seem to have agreed with that OBVIOUS strategy, no?
Last edited: