What really happened in Pearl Harbor

Discussion in 'History' started by Overdose, May 6, 2004.

  1. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,202
    How come they told you about it and not the rest of us?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. BIGFOOT Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    282
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,202
    We all know there were "hints" of the Japanese attack. The question is, what could the US have done to prevent it? In your own words.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. BIGFOOT Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    282
    U.S could not prevent it precisely because the war was a contrived racket to tie Countries into war, by a hidden power of International Finance.

    Read Major General Smedley Butler, USMC."War Is A Racket"

    Here. http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4377.htm. So, to try and discuss why America could not prevent, we are just turning ourselves into "talking heads"
     
  8. The Marquis Only want the best for Nigel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,562
    The point was, Bork, that your entire stance on this issue was ideological.
    Now let me know what you think of someone having an entirely different ideology means to you.

    Obviously, you are in support of those who decide not to get involved. Regardless of "moral" concerns.
    Would you care to explain why you are in opposition to someone who does get involved, regardless of "moral" concerns?
    I suppose the most simple question would be; would you have cared, or would you not?
    Is it that you care more about someone who does get involved, because their particular ideology differs from yours?

    ...
    I'm quite glad you're not in active service. It is quite obvious you couldn't hit the side of a barn.
     
    Last edited: Nov 22, 2014
  9. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,762
    Where the hell did you get that kind of impression? In my opinion America should have been involved the moment Hitler invaded Poland, if not the day he originally came to power in the first place. I'm Canadian, I'm proud that my country only took a week to officially join the war. Our official reason for having done so was because our Prime Minister at the time, William Lyon Mackenzie King, thought he could talk to his deceased mother through his dog, and the dog recommended that Canada join the war, but it would have been unthinkable for us to say no at the time, in any case.

    It seems you've completely misread my argument, assuming you even read it. I was saying the US was extremely reluctant to commit itself to any form of war (its military budget and preparedness of the time clearly demonstrate this beyond any reasonable doubt), and therefore it would have made no sense from anyone's point of view for the US to deliberately instigate a total war with Japan by inviting an attack on Pearl Harbor.

    Actually, you're dead wrong. I was trained by an elite sniper to hide in the woods and pick off action movie commandos at distances upwards of 1.5km, but I generally try to make my comments appear like I can't shoot worth a hill of beans, just to mislead gullible folks like yourself into thinking I'm harmless.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Germany
     
  10. The Marquis Only want the best for Nigel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,562
    Gee, I'm not entirely sure. It might have been from everything you posted in this thread prior to now. If you go back and read your own posts, you do appear to be an anti-war sort, you realise.
    I suppose you could argue that your statements were made from either exasperation with the American commitment, or from agreement with that position, and you could carry it either way.
    When you start going on about Henry Ford, though, it tips the scale.

    Henry Ford owned a subsidiary company in Germany prior to World War 2. Firstly, that alone puts paid to any argument about Ford "selling arms to the Germans", because, quite obviously, they weren't armed with Sherman tanks and Garand Rifles. We do have to put up with the continual idiocy based entirely upon choice of words, after all. That has been made clear, in just about every thread here.

    Secondly, it remains largely unknown just how much oversight Ford had over the operations of Ford Germany after the outbreak of war.
    If your contention is that he should have simply given it away after the Nazis made their intentions known, then I'm afraid that's just silly. Any clear thinking man would have simply waited and seen what came of it all.
    And yes, I'm quite aware that the term "clear thinking" is rather subjective, and now is regarded as being whatever the majority declare it to be, subject to change at whim, and completely disregarding what those who were there at the time might have thought.

    No, you were actually arguing that the American public didn't want to get involved. And when I argued otherwise, you argued right back.
    I'm not quite sure how I could have misread "I repeat, there was ZERO appetite amongst the American public to stick their noses into WW2, nor were they militarily prepared for it. That didn't change until after Japan decided to try being something they're not." but by all means, go ahead and explain. I'd agree with the middle bit.
    The United States most certainly were not ready for any sort of prolonged conflict. However, you're arguing that it would have made no sense from anyone's point of view for the US to deliberately instigate a war.
    I did say earlier that you should never discount arrogance. You aren't allowing for the probability that the US thought they could get away with what they were doing without instigating an actual war.

    In addition, there is a distinction between assessing attitudes toward a war with Germany and one with Japan. You can't on one hand argue about the one, and assume your arguments remain valid with respect to the other. These are two separate things.

    This is the internet. You do have to realise that you saying what you were/are is largely irrelevant due to the fact that there is almost no way you can verify it.
    I can't shoot worth a hill of beans either.
     
  11. CptBork Robbing the Shalebridge Cradle Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,762
    Blah-de-blah blah. Go read the article first if you want your grandstanding Henry Ford apologetics to be taken seriously.

    What the heck are you trying to get at? It's quite clear the US didn't wish to go to war with Japan, nor Germany, until those countries made the incredibly foolish blunder of forcing it to make that decision.

    Thanks for the internet safety tips, Smokey Bear! I'll have to learn not to take people seriously in the future when they tell me that they're a purple 3-eyed monster. Why then were you making snide comments about how I'd handle spousal abuse in a bar or how my poor marksmanship skills leave me unqualified for the Green Berets?
     
  12. The Marquis Only want the best for Nigel Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,562
    Heh.

    ... ah, to hell with it, I can't be bothered. Go shoot a deer and pretend it's me, or something.
     
  13. The. Ring. Banned Banned

    Messages:
    111
    The radars were not reliable, as they were just too new. The zeros were spotted, and reported, but did anyone see the jets in NY coming, or the one that hit the Pentagon, these things just happened on a different day. No one ever sees what is right in front of them, until it is too late.
     

Share This Page