Why the Submarine is the unsung hero at Midway -- true story.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by TorpX

I was watching a PBS channel the other week, and I caught part of a program which featured a lecture by Craig Symonds. It was about the battle of Midway and covered many of the details talked about in this thread. One thing in particular that I didn't know before, was that Yamamoto was personally involved in Japan's decision to declare war on the U.S. He said Japan's original plan was to conquer the DEI and leave the US alone, but Yamamoto insisted that if they wanted to attack the DEI, they had to also attack the Philippines and US. Otherwise, the Americans would be interfering in everything and this would not work. He threatened to resign if his plan was not adopted, and won the argument. This, of course, meant there had to be an attack on Pearl Harbor.

Am I the only one who never heard this before?

It is a fascinating speculation, how events might have unfolded if the U.S. and it's Philippines dependency had been excluded from Japanese war plans in December 1941. Had Tokyo confined itself to occupying British Malaya and Burma, along with the Dutch East Indies.(where all the oil and rubber was) Roosevelt would certainly have wanted to enter the war and confront Japanese aggression. The question is whether Congress and public sentiment would have allowed the president to declare war in the absence of a direct assault on American national interests. Certainly, without a surprise attack on a sleeping fleet there would not have been the sense of national outrage that unified the country overnight. Going to war to defend European colonies and possessions in the far east wouldn't have had the rallying effect of "Remember Pearl Harbor."

However, since the Japanese couldn't see any way of keeping the US from getting involved if they descended on British and Dutch colonies they went ahead and including knocking out the U.S. Pacific Fleet on their war plans. A poor move if Yamamoto endorsed doing it. But then I always thought he was overrated anyway.

[nikimcbee]

The USN always had problems with PR that were deeply institutionalized from the top down

Funny you should mention that. I read in a book about the USS Pampanito about an account of the " Take her down" action with the Growler and H Gilmore's death. In that book, a crewmember mentioned that how it is potrayed in the official story, Gilmore cries taker her down and he dies, but in the book it says he was killed out-right and none of that happened like the Navy potrayed it. I had never heard this before except in this book (from a crew member who served on the Growler(?) )


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_W._Gilmore

Simultaneously, the Japanese crew unleashed a burst of machine gun fire at Growler’s bridge, killing the junior officer of the deck and a lookout,[4] while wounding Gilmore himself and two other men. “Clear the bridge!” Gilmore ordered as he struggled to hang on to a frame. As the rest of the bridge party dropped down the hatch into the conning tower, the executive officer, Lieutenant Commander Arnold Schade — shaken by the impact and dazed by his own fall into the control room — waited expectantly for his captain to appear. Instead from above came the shouted command: “Take her down!” Realizing that he could not get himself below in time if the ship were to escape, Gilmore chose to make the supreme sacrifice for his shipmates. Schade hesitated briefly — then followed his captain’s last order and submerged the crippled ship.

[nikimcbee]

However, since the Japanese couldn't see any way of keeping the US from getting involved if they descended on British and Dutch colonies they went ahead and including knocking out the U.S. Pacific Fleet on their war plans. A poor move if Yamamoto endorsed doing it. But then I always thought he was overrated anyway.

It would have been interesting if Yamamoto had lost out to the "old guard" of the IJN and they used Battleships to attack PH. If i recall, the Yamato was brand new. She would have eaten our fleet for lunch (and want seconds).


On a side note, I wish somebody would make a movie about the midget subs there. That has always been my favorite aspect of PH.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

If i recall, the Yamato was brand new. She would have eaten our fleet for lunch (and want seconds).

The only battleships in the Pearl Harbor strike force were Hiei and Kirishima. Yamato wasn't even in service, being commissioned into service on the 16 of December.

It wouldn't have mattered, because almost all the US battleships were powered down and couldn't have used their main batteries.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

The only battleships in the Pearl Harbor strike force were Hiei and Kirishima. Yamato wasn't even in service, being commissioned into service on the 16 of December.

Even worse she wasn't deemed operational until May 27th, 1942 due to delays and setbacks in training her crew, particularly on the new 18.1 inch guns.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Torplexed

Even worse she wasn't deemed operational until May 27th, 1942 due to delays and setbacks in training her crew, particularly on the new 18.1 inch guns.

I think this is a good time to mention that the super-ship has always been a myth. Yamato would almost certainly have had no trouble at all with any of the battleships present at Pearl, but seven of them, even though most dated to World War One, would probably have not boded well even for a ship that new and powerful.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

I think this is a good time to mention that the super-ship has always been a myth.

Yamato was always an eye-catcher but her reputation never lived up to the myth. In many respects her size worked against her. In late 1942, the IJN toyed with idea of sending her down to the Solomons to bombard Henderson Field on Guadalcanal but couldn't make it work due to fuel and ammo constraints. You could have Yamato parked in a developed base like Truk, but if you send her out on one Tokyo Express run to Henderson field staging out of Simpson Harbor in Rabaul, she with her consorts would burn as much bunker grade fuel as the Combined Fleet would be allocated in a month and it took multiple runs to get anything done. Given the logistical strains on Japan's merchant fleet on just keeping the four old Kongo class battleships at Rabaul fully replenished in what had been a colonial backwater port before the war was proving a headache. Plus, there were probably not proper facilities for reloading Yamato's massive 18.1 inch guns, each round weighing 3,200 pounds. The Japanese were not adept at setting at up new logistical staging areas to support the consolidation of new territories. In terms of base construction and improvement it took them years to do what Allied forces could do in a month. The result was that in the primitive South Pacific a "super-ship" like Yamato was often constrained in where she could go and what she could do.

[Horus3K]

Originally Posted by Torplexed

It is a fascinating speculation, how events might have unfolded if the U.S. and it's Philippines dependency had been excluded from Japanese war plans in December 1941. Had Tokyo confined itself to occupying British Malaya and Burma, along with the Dutch East Indies.(where all the oil and rubber was) Roosevelt would certainly have wanted to enter the war and confront Japanese aggression. The question is whether Congress and public sentiment would have allowed the president to declare war in the absence of a direct assault on American national interests. Certainly, without a surprise attack on a sleeping fleet there would not have been the sense of national outrage that unified the country overnight. Going to war to defend European colonies and possessions in the far east wouldn't have had the rallying effect of "Remember Pearl Harbor."

However, since the Japanese couldn't see any way of keeping the US from getting involved if they descended on British and Dutch colonies they went ahead and including knocking out the U.S. Pacific Fleet on their war plans. A poor move if Yamamoto endorsed doing it. But then I always thought he was overrated anyway.

Well, and why do you think Japan attacked USA in the first place?...Because USA basically left no other choice for Japan, esp when you consider japan was to 80% relying on US oil, cutting that of they HAD to invade the oil rich nations/colonies!

In my view Roosevelt was anticipating the japanese attack somehow, even wanting it! Japan planned to declare war to US and attack PH some hours later...but they messed that up nicely, so Roosevelt had the best propaganda argument ever with the socalled "Day of Infamy" to get US citizens enraged enough to enter war(most US people didnt want any war involvement whatsoever), without being the aggressor but the attacked one!

As said im very sure they anticipated an attack somewhere somehow...maybe not as severe as the actual attack

You think Yamamoto was overrated? I think you wrong there, his MAIN goal with attacking PH was to eliminate the US carriers, which where "luckily" not there...on receiving the message that no carriers where found/hit he said that from now on it will be impossible to beat the USA, esp after its industrial moloch starts to gear up....and maybe you dont know but he studied in the UK and im sure he was often in the USA, so i guess he could judge the overall situation well enough to do what he did!

Both sides knew a conflict was inevitable, but Roosevelt played his deck much better than the japs did, and as others here said already, the winner writes the history, for Roosevelt surely wanted to enter the war to help Britain on one hand and to keep the upperhand in the pacific!

Well the following maybe a bit of a conspiracy theory, but the similarities between Pearl Harbour and 9/11 are striking...they knew something was to happen so they could manipulate public opinion to reach their goals!

But where Roosevelt played his deck like a real pro, Bush administration just acted very plumb and stupid!

I guess some of you want to sacrifice me for what i wrote here, its just my personal opinion...being a "modern" german i get sceptical when thing fit too nicely to be just coincidance...

Damn i didnt want to produce epic wall of text, but i kinda had to

Edit: Totally forgot what i wanted to write in the first place :P...the ONLY major players in the pacific was Japan, the USA and UK empire(busy/bound by germany)

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Horus3K

Well, and why do you think Japan attacked USA in the first place?...Because USA basically left no other choice for Japan, esp when you consider japan was to 80% relying on US oil, cutting that of they HAD to invade the oil rich nations/colonies!

We left Japan with a choice, even more than one. There is no way Japan was going to get US oil by attacking the US directly. The Pearl Harbor attack was to prevent the US from interfering with Japan's plans in the South Pacific. Japan could have got the signal that they should get out of China. They could have cooperated with their neighbors and done pretty much what they ended up doing after the war. They could have just gone after the oil in their region, and we might not have interfered at all.

As said im very sure they anticipated an attack somewhere somehow...maybe not as severe as the actual attack

Of course they expected it. There are plenty of documents from the time discussing US expectations. The problem is that they expected the attack on the Philippines and varioius areas around the South Pacific, not at Pearl Harbor.

Well the following maybe a bit of a conspiracy theory, but the similarities between Pearl Harbour and 9/11 are striking...they knew something was to happen so they could manipulate public opinion to reach their goals!

And like all conspiracy theories neither one has ever been backed up by any real evidence.

I guess some of you want to sacrifice me for what i wrote here, its just my personal opinion...being a "modern" german i get sceptical when thing fit too nicely to be just coincidance...

Are you paranoid? Expecting trouble? No one here wants to sacrifice anyone. For the most part we like a good debate. In answer to your skepticism, things only fit "too nicely" in your own mind. Coincidence is like luck - things happen the way they happen, and people see something more than there is because they want to. I'm not saying you're wrong, but as always some real evidence would be nice.

[Dread Knot]

In all my years of listening to people who spout the Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory, I've never heard one who could explain how Roosevelt got Hitler to go in on the conspiracy. By his declaring war on the US he relieved Roosevlet of a lot of political headaches. Roosevelt certainly wanted the US in the war---the war in Europe. Under the terms of the Tripartite Pact, Hitler was under no obligation to declare war on the US if Japan did so. Frankly, Hitler wasn't exactly know for honoring pacts even if it had. And Japan certainly hadn't endeared itself to Hitler when they didn't declare war on Russia.

[WernherVonTrapp]

Actually, Hitler declared "War" on the U.S. as a direct result of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, in support of his new Asian ally.
Not that I believe in any conspiracy theory, but you should read a book titled "Infamy" by John Toland. It presents (with evidence) some very compelling arguments supporting Roosevelt's knowledge of an impending attack on Pearl Harbor. Billy Mitchell was not the only one who predicted just such an attack, Admiral Richmond Kelly Turner did too.

[Bilge_Rat]

I have studied this area extensively, since the WW2 Pacific Theatre has always been my favorite, and I never saw any compelling evidence that Roosevelt or anyone else in the U.S. high command "knew" Pearl harbour was coming.

Many people suspected in the fall of 1941 that Japan would not back down and would make a grab for the Dutch Indies but everyone thought the attack, if there was one, would be against the Philippines. No one thought the japanese had the capability to strike PH.

As to the interesting what ifs, there are a few:

1. what would the U.S. have done if Japanese forces had bypassed U.S. and British territory entirely and just invaded the Dutch East Indies? Could Roosevelt have convinced Congress to declare war to protect a european colony? after all, the US did not react when the Japanese took over french Indochina in sept. 1940.

2. what would the U.S. have done if on dec. 8, 1941, Hitler who had been kept in the dark about PH had disavowed his ally and declared war on Japan? Hitler was quite capable of turning on an ally if it suited him.

Roosevelt did not need PH to take the U.S. into WW2. Don't forget that in the fall of 1941, the U.S. was already fighting an undeclared war against Germany. U.S. Navy ships were escorting convoys in the North Atlantic and had depth charged U-Boats. The U.S. destroyer Reuben James was sunk by a U-Boat in october 1941. Many historians believe that Roosevelt was getting U.S. public opinion ready to declare war on Germany in the spring of 1942. PH just accelerated the process.

[MKalafatas]

Originally Posted by Horus3K

You think Yamamoto was overrated?....and maybe you dont know but he studied in the UK and im sure he was often in the USA...

I had not heard that Yamamoto studied in the UK. I know that he attended the London Naval Conference. He studied at Harvard and was a naval attache in Washington. He certainly knew the US. [Perhaps 'UK' was a typo, and you meant to say 'US'.]

As an aside, I was surprised to learn recently while reading his autobiography that retired US Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens was one of the code-breakers responsible for the information resulting in the ambush and death of Yamamoto.

[Dread Knot]

Originally Posted by WernherVonTrapp

Actually, Hitler declared "War" on the U.S. as a direct result of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, in support of his new Asian ally.
Not that I believe in any conspiracy theory, but you should read a book titled "Infamy" by John Toland. It presents (with evidence) some very compelling arguments supporting Roosevelt's knowledge of an impending attack on Pearl Harbor.

I did read it. Thirty years ago when it came out. That's part of the problem. 70 years on and no uncovered forgotten orders or deathbed confessions. No one cashing in on the story of the century in their old age. No smoking gun to produce a breakthough that gets the PH conspiracy out of the shadowy crackpot realm of JFK assassination plots or faked moon landings.

As for Toland, he has always been a somewhat controversial figure in historical circles. A writer of biographies and histories, Toland has no formal training in history--no advanced degrees, and not even an undergraduate course to his name.

Toland makes no pretense of being a professional historian. He relied heavily on personal interviews for his information, gladly granting anonymity to his sources--a practice that drove documentation-driven historians wild. His books were structured with drama in mind, and read more like exciting novels than dry history. Readers embrace him but historians tend not to.

[Horus3K]

I wrote my i some kind of prework-hurry, so i may have overshooted a bit

I think PH wasnt a real conspiracy, just very cleverly used by Roosevelt to reach his goals...i just wanted to say that in both cases, PH and 9/11, US government knew that something was about to happen, and after it did happen you can use those incidents to reach the political goals you couldnt reach by "normal" means, which in my eyes isnt a "real" conspiracy theory, just very hard to judge nowadays by either lack of evidence or/and clouded by propaganda from all sides...

Per definition, conspiracy theories even ignores hard evidence...for example that the moon landing was a fake

Quote fron Sailor Steve:
"We left Japan with a choice, even more than one."

Your are basically right here, but those choices were unacceptable for the Japanese for many reasons, may it come from traditions or their weird code of honour, but mostly because the Japanese were transformed from a "normal" nation to a rigid Imperialistic and very militaristic nation with ever growing military, and for that you need so many ressources that from a certain point you cant aquire those by peaceful means!

In germanys case, getting rid of national unemployment and ever growing military, germany was basically bankrupt and to go on with that, their first action in any invaded country was to plunder its gold reserves...

Also in their religious belief Japan was created by the gods, and if one nation should rule the world it should be them...and im sure if the Emperor didnt stopped the war they would have fight to the last men, even if all their cities got nuked.

I also love a good debate and im not paranoid hehehe...i just wasnt sure how people would react on my post