Kimmel and Short were guilty at Pearl Harbor

[harmonica]

they had ''peacetime'' mindset--after a war warning --after Taranto
.....--I remember reading in the mid 80's about how the Israelis defended against airplanes used as weapons ......but then after 9-11, many professionals never even thought of it ---well, I knew about them in the mid 80's as an mere E2 in the military....the professionals should've been thinking about that--just as Short and Kimmel should have known about Taranto = and know Pearl was vulnerable

Typically military thinking follows previous wars and as rightwinger said no one on our side expected a carrier attack, carrier use and tactics were still in their infancy and our Navy was still stuck on battleship war tactics. The Japanese attack on Pearl opened everyone's eyes.

see post # 47
.....yes--'''typical''/mediocre/''ignorant''/slow/wrong/ etc military thinking ---to mediocre military men

impressive evidence [ hahahaha ] you have there = crap

Considering that I'm dealing with what is most likely a high school student who may have taken a little high school history then read a revisionist book and thinks he's now an expert...........

even MORE impressive evidence you post..please stop....there's so much I can't keep up

 

[harmonica]

1. terrorists attacks do not win wars
2. they did not do that
3. the bigger threat was the carrier attack
4. there were multiple ways to guard against both
etc etc

The Pearl Harbor attack didn’t win the war
They did defend against sabotage and acts of terror
The carrier attack was the bigger threat but less likely
Some defenses are contradictory. You can’t do both

It was up to the NAVY to define the threat and recommend defenses

Pearl Harbor was only one of the targets. The Philippines and Singapore were bigger losses

are you saying they should've not have even cared if the IJN attacked PH??!!!
OBVIOUSLY the carrier attack was MORE likely !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hahahahahahahahahha
there were NO sabotage attacks

.....kind of like the dumbass Russians that were soundly defeated/outmaneuvered/out-''generaled''/etc by the Germans
...and the French in 1941 --one of the largest armies [ with England!better tanks/etc ] defeated quickly and soundly by the Germans --TWO countries defeated by ONE --defeated by better generals/tactics/etc
..only when the US got in and hitler interfered with strategy/etc--did the Germans have no chance .....only when the industrial might of the US [3 times more than Germany ] did Germany have no chance ......Germany's industrial might almost the same as Russia ..but Russia had a bigger population
etc
.....Kesselring also did a fantastic job in Italy as the Allies had logistics/naval and air superiority
Grim Economic Realities

Yeah, so? And this has what to do with the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor? I mean other than the fact the Germans (for the most part) modernized their tactics in the 1930s and again as they learned throughout the war. The overall German planning was nothing more than an adapted version of the Sheffield Plan from WWI, what they did that was completely modern for it's time was combine their different forces to act in unison. Guderian's "race to the sea" during the initial phase of Case Yellow actually scared the hell out of the brass and he was ordered numerous times to stop and wait for the infantry to catch up, orders he basically disobeyed. This happened again during Operation Barbarossa where he and others were reigned in by the more conservative thinking brass.
Kesselring, "Smiling Albert", was a very good commander but what saved his bacon in Italy was terrain and a comedy of errors made by allied commanders. Under different terrain, different circumstances things might have been different, we don't know.
But of course you're seeing it all in retrospect then projecting without any real knowledge of the subject.

well---since I'm dealing with a grade school-level student---- I'll explain
....Kesselring and the Germans ''out generaled'' the French/Allies = just like the Japanese did to Kimmel and Short
--you see, how simple that is??

 

[Ringel05]

The Pearl Harbor attack didn’t win the war
They did defend against sabotage and acts of terror
The carrier attack was the bigger threat but less likely
Some defenses are contradictory. You can’t do both

It was up to the NAVY to define the threat and recommend defenses

Pearl Harbor was only one of the targets. The Philippines and Singapore were bigger losses

are you saying they should've not have even cared if the IJN attacked PH??!!!
OBVIOUSLY the carrier attack was MORE likely !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
hahahahahahahahahha
there were NO sabotage attacks

.....kind of like the dumbass Russians that were soundly defeated/outmaneuvered/out-''generaled''/etc by the Germans
...and the French in 1941 --one of the largest armies [ with England!better tanks/etc ] defeated quickly and soundly by the Germans --TWO countries defeated by ONE --defeated by better generals/tactics/etc
..only when the US got in and hitler interfered with strategy/etc--did the Germans have no chance .....only when the industrial might of the US [3 times more than Germany ] did Germany have no chance ......Germany's industrial might almost the same as Russia ..but Russia had a bigger population
etc
.....Kesselring also did a fantastic job in Italy as the Allies had logistics/naval and air superiority
Grim Economic Realities

Yeah, so? And this has what to do with the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor? I mean other than the fact the Germans (for the most part) modernized their tactics in the 1930s and again as they learned throughout the war. The overall German planning was nothing more than an adapted version of the Sheffield Plan from WWI, what they did that was completely modern for it's time was combine their different forces to act in unison. Guderian's "race to the sea" during the initial phase of Case Yellow actually scared the hell out of the brass and he was ordered numerous times to stop and wait for the infantry to catch up, orders he basically disobeyed. This happened again during Operation Barbarossa where he and others were reigned in by the more conservative thinking brass.
Kesselring, "Smiling Albert", was a very good commander but what saved his bacon in Italy was terrain and a comedy of errors made by allied commanders. Under different terrain, different circumstances things might have been different, we don't know.
But of course you're seeing it all in retrospect then projecting without any real knowledge of the subject.

well---since I'm dealing with a grade school-level student---- I'll explain
....Kesselring and the Germans ''out generaled'' the French/Allies = just like the Japanese did to Kimmel and Short
--you see, how simple that is??

Simple things for simple minds........ Enjoy your fantasies.

 

[Ringel05]

Typically military thinking follows previous wars and as rightwinger said no one on our side expected a carrier attack, carrier use and tactics were still in their infancy and our Navy was still stuck on battleship war tactics. The Japanese attack on Pearl opened everyone's eyes.

see post # 47
.....yes--'''typical''/mediocre/''ignorant''/slow/wrong/ etc military thinking ---to mediocre military men

impressive evidence [ hahahaha ] you have there = crap

Considering that I'm dealing with what is most likely a high school student who may have taken a little high school history then read a revisionist book and thinks he's now an expert...........

even MORE impressive evidence you post..please stop....there's so much I can't keep up

No you can't, that's your problem Sparky...........

 

[harmonica]

see post # 47
.....yes--'''typical''/mediocre/''ignorant''/slow/wrong/ etc military thinking ---to mediocre military men

impressive evidence [ hahahaha ] you have there = crap

Considering that I'm dealing with what is most likely a high school student who may have taken a little high school history then read a revisionist book and thinks he's now an expert...........

even MORE impressive evidence you post..please stop....there's so much I can't keep up

No you can't, that's your problem Sparky...........

Roosevelt prior to Dec 7

for the Japs are notorious for attacking without warning,”

both President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull think a Japanese surprise attack is a distinct possibility.

I can tell you do not know about military/subjects/etc
SOP is to send out patrols-recon to guard your base/camp/area
Short and Kimmel did not do this

This dispatch is to be considered a war warning

WAR WARNING--you can't get much clearer than that = you HAVE to go to wartime procedures == dawn and dusk patrols/etc
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/a-war-warning-is-sent-to-commanders-in-the-pacific
How (Almost) Everyone Failed to Prepare for Pearl Harbor | History | Smithsonian
....I post history/facts/evidence - while you post crap = you have failed like Kimmel and Short did

 

[Ringel05]

impressive evidence [ hahahaha ] you have there = crap

Considering that I'm dealing with what is most likely a high school student who may have taken a little high school history then read a revisionist book and thinks he's now an expert...........

even MORE impressive evidence you post..please stop....there's so much I can't keep up

No you can't, that's your problem Sparky...........

Roosevelt prior to Dec 7

for the Japs are notorious for attacking without warning,”

both President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull think a Japanese surprise attack is a distinct possibility.

I can tell you do not know about military/subjects/etc
SOP is to send out patrols-recon to guard your base/camp/area
Short and Kimmel did not do this

This dispatch is to be considered a war warning

WAR WARNING--you can't get much clearer than that = you HAVE to go to wartime procedures == dawn and dusk patrols/etc
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/a-war-warning-is-sent-to-commanders-in-the-pacific
How (Almost) Everyone Failed to Prepare for Pearl Harbor | History | Smithsonian
....I post history/facts/evidence - while you post crap = you have failed like Kimmel and Short did

As usual you selectively cut and paste which is why I should know better than to argue with an idiot, those watching can't tell the difference. Enjoy your delusions. Bye.

 

[harmonica]

impressive evidence [ hahahaha ] you have there = crap

Considering that I'm dealing with what is most likely a high school student who may have taken a little high school history then read a revisionist book and thinks he's now an expert...........

even MORE impressive evidence you post..please stop....there's so much I can't keep up

No you can't, that's your problem Sparky...........

Roosevelt prior to Dec 7

for the Japs are notorious for attacking without warning,”

both President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull think a Japanese surprise attack is a distinct possibility.

I can tell you do not know about military/subjects/etc
SOP is to send out patrols-recon to guard your base/camp/area
Short and Kimmel did not do this

This dispatch is to be considered a war warning

WAR WARNING--you can't get much clearer than that = you HAVE to go to wartime procedures == dawn and dusk patrols/etc
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/a-war-warning-is-sent-to-commanders-in-the-pacific
How (Almost) Everyone Failed to Prepare for Pearl Harbor | History | Smithsonian
....I post history/facts/evidence - while you post crap = you have failed like Kimmel and Short did

As usual you selectively cut and paste which is why I should know better than to argue with an idiot, those watching can't tell the difference. Enjoy your delusions. Bye.

again--your own insults reduce your arguments to nothing
why insult?? that's what members do when they know they have lost

 

[Ringel05]

Considering that I'm dealing with what is most likely a high school student who may have taken a little high school history then read a revisionist book and thinks he's now an expert...........

even MORE impressive evidence you post..please stop....there's so much I can't keep up

No you can't, that's your problem Sparky...........

Roosevelt prior to Dec 7

for the Japs are notorious for attacking without warning,”

both President Roosevelt and Secretary of State Cordell Hull think a Japanese surprise attack is a distinct possibility.

I can tell you do not know about military/subjects/etc
SOP is to send out patrols-recon to guard your base/camp/area
Short and Kimmel did not do this

This dispatch is to be considered a war warning

WAR WARNING--you can't get much clearer than that = you HAVE to go to wartime procedures == dawn and dusk patrols/etc
https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/a-war-warning-is-sent-to-commanders-in-the-pacific
How (Almost) Everyone Failed to Prepare for Pearl Harbor | History | Smithsonian
....I post history/facts/evidence - while you post crap = you have failed like Kimmel and Short did

As usual you selectively cut and paste which is why I should know better than to argue with an idiot, those watching can't tell the difference. Enjoy your delusions. Bye.

again--your own insults reduce your arguments to nothing
why insult?? that's what members do when they know they have lost

Delusion thy name be.......

 

[whitehall]

Kimmel and Short had six months of "war warnings". How long could they remain at General Quarters"? It's ironic that FDR's last V.P. is quoted as saying "the buck stops here" but the FDR administration dodged the buck anyway they could and it settled on two hapless subordinates. COS George Marshall had ultimate responsibility for the defenses at Pearl and he even had the final decoded message in his hand that he read and re-read for hours while Zeroes were headed towards Pearl. It's not hard to find evidence that FDR invited an attack by "little yellow people who couldn't build a plane that would fly or a ship that would float", in order to get into the real war in Europe. It seems that the actual criminals were Marshall and MacArthur but they were protected by the media while Short and Kimmel were hung out to dry.

 

[harmonica]

Kimmel and Short had six months of "war warnings". How long could they remain at General Quarters"? It's ironic that FDR's last V.P. is quoted as saying "the buck stops here" but the FDR administration dodged the buck anyway they could and it settled on two hapless subordinates. COS George Marshall had ultimate responsibility for the defenses at Pearl and he even had the final decoded message in his hand that he read and re-read for hours while Zeroes were headed towards Pearl. It's not hard to find evidence that FDR invited an attack by "little yellow people who couldn't build a plane that would fly or a ship that would float", in order to get into the real war in Europe. It seems that the actual criminals were Marshall and MacArthur but they were protected by the media while Short and Kimmel were hung out to dry.

1. they stayed on wartime conditions for over 3 years
2. in the mid-80s, I did guard duty Marine Barracks Pearl Harbor...it consisted of 5 companies....for 2 weeks my company did 4 on- 4 off -4 on 4 off-4 on --8 off--then the cycle again !
another week one time we got maybe 4 hours sleep per night while we did guard duties and parade practice/parade formation ......
3. this is the military's duty/job
please link the other war warnings --what did they consist of?

 

[whitehall]

There are certain mid century icons who are above reproach regardless of evidence to the contrary. General George Marshall is one of those characters. He was promoted to Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces over dozens of more qualified and senior candidates even though he never had a combat command. Amazingly there was no coordinated national intelligence network existing before Pearl Harbor. Marshall's job was to coordinate the mission and strategy of the various branches of the Armed Forces but he apparently wasn't up to the job. He was one of the few who had access to the decoded Japanese transcripts, code name "Magic" and that's how he apparently spent most of his time as the de-facto intelligence chief. There is no evidence that the Chief of Staff met regularly with leaders of the various military branches in the critical months before the Attack and Marshall never emerged from his office to actually visit areas most likely to be the target of the first strike. What advice could Marshall actually offer to Kimmel and Short since he never saw a shot fired in anger himself?

 

[harmonica]

Kimmel and Short had six months of "war warnings". How long could they remain at General Quarters"? It's ironic that FDR's last V.P. is quoted as saying "the buck stops here" but the FDR administration dodged the buck anyway they could and it settled on two hapless subordinates. COS George Marshall had ultimate responsibility for the defenses at Pearl and he even had the final decoded message in his hand that he read and re-read for hours while Zeroes were headed towards Pearl. It's not hard to find evidence that FDR invited an attack by "little yellow people who couldn't build a plane that would fly or a ship that would float", in order to get into the real war in Europe. It seems that the actual criminals were Marshall and MacArthur but they were protected by the media while Short and Kimmel were hung out to dry.

....I forgot to say--when I said 4 off--8 off --that meant we were just off guard--we were still on duty ....and in those times you have to check back in, eat, etc

 

[Picaro]

There are certain mid century icons who are above reproach regardless of evidence to the contrary. General George Marshall is one of those characters. He was promoted to Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces over dozens of more qualified and senior candidates even though he never had a combat command. Amazingly there was no coordinated national intelligence network existing before Pearl Harbor. Marshall's job was to coordinate the mission and strategy of the various branches of the Armed Forces but he apparently wasn't up to the job. He was one of the few who had access to the decoded Japanese transcripts, code name "Magic" and that's how he apparently spent most of his time as the de-facto intelligence chief. There is no evidence that the Chief of Staff met regularly with leaders of the various military branches in the critical months before the Attack and Marshall never emerged from his office to actually visit areas most likely to be the target of the first strike. What advice could Marshall actually offer to Kimmel and Short since he never saw a shot fired in anger himself?

Marshall was a product of the American military's 'good old boy' system same as MacArthur was, and ditto Patton, same as Hitler's High command, same as Britain's, same as Stalin's. It was also Patton's 'good old boy' influence that got Eisenhower leap-frogged to his top job, over MacArthru's whining, so it worked both ways; some of the 'good old boys' were in favor of recognizing talent, some where out for themselves. 'Meritocracies' don't seem to do any better at producing competent leaders, though, due to the 'Peter Principle' and other reasons; at least with the 'good old boys' the competent can get bumped to the top jobs far sooner than they ever would via a 'meritocracy' slog. And who defines what 'merit' is is also a unknown in itself. A quartermaster sergeant who has never been 'shot at' has a better grasp of how to move an Army or Navy than a combat sergeant who has been' shot at' a hundred times. Logistics is king in modern warfare, and it most certainly was in WW I and WW II, not how many people one stabbed with a bayonet in the trenches.

Was Marshal truly awful? The evidence is both Japan and Germany were rubble in less than four years, despite being thousands of miles away, and we kept ourselves and all of our allies in the war on four fronts. So who were the most incompetent and had the worst intelligence? Not the U.S., which is immediately obvious.

 

[Picaro]

well---since I'm dealing with a grade school-level student---- I'll explain
....Kesselring and the Germans ''out generaled'' the French/Allies = just like the Japanese did to Kimmel and Short
--you see, how simple that is??

Agree about Kesselring's defense and orderly withdrawal, and the Japanese surprise attack was well handled, but neither of those facts won the war for their sides, just a few battles. If the American Generals had followed Alexander's orders instead of playing cowboys and getting in races with Monty to be the first in Rome, the Italian invasion would have been a bit different.

 

[whitehall]

There are certain mid century icons who are above reproach regardless of evidence to the contrary. General George Marshall is one of those characters. He was promoted to Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces over dozens of more qualified and senior candidates even though he never had a combat command. Amazingly there was no coordinated national intelligence network existing before Pearl Harbor. Marshall's job was to coordinate the mission and strategy of the various branches of the Armed Forces but he apparently wasn't up to the job. He was one of the few who had access to the decoded Japanese transcripts, code name "Magic" and that's how he apparently spent most of his time as the de-facto intelligence chief. There is no evidence that the Chief of Staff met regularly with leaders of the various military branches in the critical months before the Attack and Marshall never emerged from his office to actually visit areas most likely to be the target of the first strike. What advice could Marshall actually offer to Kimmel and Short since he never saw a shot fired in anger himself?

Marshall was a product of the American military's 'good old boy' system same as MacArthur was, and ditto Patton, same as Hitler's High command, same as Britain's, same as Stalin's. It was also Patton's 'good old boy' influence that got Eisenhower leap-frogged to his top job, over MacArthru's whining, so it worked both ways; some of the 'good old boys' were in favor of recognizing talent, some where out for themselves. 'Meritocracies' don't seem to do any better at producing competent leaders, though, due to the 'Peter Principle' and other reasons; at least with the 'good old boys' the competent can get bumped to the top jobs far sooner than they ever would via a 'meritocracy' slog. And who defines what 'merit' is is also a unknown in itself. A quartermaster sergeant who has never been 'shot at' has a better grasp of how to move an Army or Navy than a combat sergeant who has been' shot at' a hundred times. Logistics is king in modern warfare, and it most certainly was in WW I and WW II, not how many people one stabbed with a bayonet in the trenches.

Was Marshal truly awful? The evidence is both Japan and Germany were rubble in less than four years, despite being thousands of miles away, and we kept ourselves and all of our allies in the war on four fronts. So who were the most incompetent and had the worst intelligence? Not the U.S., which is immediately obvious.

Nobody was "truly awful" but Marshall fits the category of "truly political". It's possible that Marshall met with FDR on the eve of the Pearl Harbor attack. Marshall was credited with a near photographic memory but during the ensuing congressional hearings he couldn't remember where he was on 12/6/1941 while his staff was frantically looking for him. Marshall had the decoded message in his hand but he diddled for hours while (conveniently) the Armed Forces message center went down. Marshall was tuned into the arcane world of cryptic messages but strangely enough he never thought to create a coded message to transmit to Pearl Harbor by picking up the freaking phone. Instead he sent a Western Union telegram that arrived at the same time as the Jap Zeroes. Marshall is the missing link in the Pearl Harbor conspiracy but he has always been protected by historians and the media.

 

[harmonica]

.....again, over 200 aircraft destroyed or damaged---when they should've been on recon missions