69 Years ago Japan attacked America at Pearl Harbor
- Thread starter Cajuncowboy
- Start date
- Messages
- 78,756
- Reaction score
- 43,267
zrinkill;3735925 said:
No need to...some things just irk me and you happened to be in the way of it. It was not your fault over joking about my or your service...just something about inferring that one generation of military men were tougher or better bothers me..again I know it is not your intent, but in my mind it kind of belittles others who have served.
Just because the statistics of some suffering from Viet Nam or the current wars are higher than those suffering post traumatic issues from WWII does not make one group tougher or wimpier and it darn sure does not mean that all WWII vets just laugh it off...what is done or said in public is very different than what is in private and there were many WWII veterans that suffered when they left the war.
You just happened to be in the way when I fired my jerk gun at being irked over something.
Doomsday101
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 107,762
- Reaction score
- 39,034
ConcordCowboy;3736033 said:Payback...for Pearl...
[/IMG]
[youtube]fWoNDxjOksM&feature[/youtube]
CanadianCowboysFan
Lightning Rod
- Messages
- 25,681
- Reaction score
- 8,470
The attack on Pearl Harbor is a conspiracy theorists delight. We all know Roosevelt was itching to get into the war but couldn't get over the American predisposition not to get into it.
Did he know of the pending attack and not prevent it? Why were the planes out on the runways tip to tip (yes I know the reasoning the USAF gave), why were so many warnings ignored.
I don't believe he was that machiavellian to provoke Japan and then deliberately put his soldiers at risk but the conspiracy theories are juicy.
One often wonders what might have happened had their been a third strike and the fuel and other such installations been taken out. Nagumo was too cautious, he overestimated American retaliatory ability on that date, a third strike might have cripped the US fleet for a longer period of time (US would have won the war anyway).
It was a sneaky dastardly attack to say the least but anyone who has followed Japanese history can see they have done it in the past. They attacked Port Arthur without declariing war in 1904 and pretty much won the Russo-Japanese war right then and there, the victory at Tsushimina the next year merely confirmed it.
As for the comments about those alive then being the greatest generation, I don't agree, I think ours is pretty darn good too.
I do wonder though how many of the navy nurses looked like Kate Beckinsale.
Did he know of the pending attack and not prevent it? Why were the planes out on the runways tip to tip (yes I know the reasoning the USAF gave), why were so many warnings ignored.
I don't believe he was that machiavellian to provoke Japan and then deliberately put his soldiers at risk but the conspiracy theories are juicy.
One often wonders what might have happened had their been a third strike and the fuel and other such installations been taken out. Nagumo was too cautious, he overestimated American retaliatory ability on that date, a third strike might have cripped the US fleet for a longer period of time (US would have won the war anyway).
It was a sneaky dastardly attack to say the least but anyone who has followed Japanese history can see they have done it in the past. They attacked Port Arthur without declariing war in 1904 and pretty much won the Russo-Japanese war right then and there, the victory at Tsushimina the next year merely confirmed it.
As for the comments about those alive then being the greatest generation, I don't agree, I think ours is pretty darn good too.
I do wonder though how many of the navy nurses looked like Kate Beckinsale.
Phoenix
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 6,814
- Reaction score
- 1,419
Coincidentally, this is day 69 of my having stopped smoking, cold turkey, after being up to 2.5 - 3 packs a day and smoking for 30 years...
So, in honor of the recurring number of the day, 69, may I present:
[youtube]r6DPmHVitk8[/youtube]
So, in honor of the recurring number of the day, 69, may I present:
[youtube]r6DPmHVitk8[/youtube]
- Messages
- 48,001
- Reaction score
- 27,922
CanadianCowboysFan;3736165 said:
There's always the "fog of war" and in this case the "fog of prewar". Even though the "signs" were there for upcoming attack by Japan, it was missed. Much like the German offensive that resulted in "The Battle of Bulge" who's anniversary is also coming up shortly.
US intelligence failed to put the pieces together. It happens. Fortunately the carrier fleet was not a Pearl and the attack fell upon a bunch of aging battleships.
hairic
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 2,724
- Reaction score
- 650
BrAinPaiNt;3735947 said:
There is truth to this. In WW2 the fire rate was around 15-20% among infantry. It was only after WW2 that everyone really started to figure out how to get soldiers to start firing. By Vietnam, we got it up to 70%, and currently have it into the 90%+ somewhere.
PTSD rates have risen right along with those percentages.
Doomsday101
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 107,762
- Reaction score
- 39,034
MichaelWinicki;3736220 said:
True and communications was not near as advanced as we see today. Not to mention radar system were still in the beginning stages heck the navy relied on air reconnaissance to find an entire fleet
burmafrd
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 43,820
- Reaction score
- 3,379
No one really thought that A) the Japanese would take that big a risk- thousands of miles from their nearest base, taking a risk all the way that someone would spot them.
B) that they could get that close without someone spotting them.
The conspiracy nitwits have been proven wrong by history- any conspiracy would have evaporated long ago. The US was fat dumb and happy and we paid the price.
And yes that generation was tougher. Tough times produce tough people. And the materialism and me generation crap was far off in the future.
B) that they could get that close without someone spotting them.
The conspiracy nitwits have been proven wrong by history- any conspiracy would have evaporated long ago. The US was fat dumb and happy and we paid the price.
And yes that generation was tougher. Tough times produce tough people. And the materialism and me generation crap was far off in the future.
SaltwaterServr
Blank Paper Offends Me
- Messages
- 8,124
- Reaction score
- 1
hairic;3736233 said:
PTSD has also risen with the frequency of live action by the soldiers. In WWI you had tremendously high rates of PTSD, which coined the phrase "shell shock" from the artillery bombardments.
In WW2 the frequency of engagements dropped dramatically in the European theatre and in the Pacific as well, when compared to how often front line troops in WW1 were under going attacks.
In Vietnam the new mobile infantry was in contact with enemy forces by a factor of 3 IIRC over what the front line infantry in WW2 had to deal with. PTSD went up accordingly.
In OIF1, one of the units I read about was in contact for 5 weeks straight, every single day. There was no rotation. Same guys, every day.
PTSD takes many forms, and some of the remarks by the Marines showed it. Being attacked by 9' tall Iraqi's everynight in their dreams and their weapons wouldn't fire. Thinking of how easy it would be to kill the person in front of them in line at the bank, because the person was arguing about an overdraft fee. Swerving in traffic under overpasses in heavy traffic and almost causing wrecks to avoid kids who might be dropping grenades onto their vehicles, in California.
Some of it isn't debilitating, some of it is just enough to get to you.
FWIW, Midway wasn't the payback for Pearl Harbor. Not even close. That honor goes to the Battle of Truk Lagoon. 60 ships and almost 300 Japanese aircraft destroyed in the three day battle. We caught 'em flat-footed and made em pay.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truk_Lagoon