Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You do not consider the Battle of Surigao Strait a meaningful battle, nor the participation of the West Virginia, Maryland, Mississippi, Tennessee, California, and Pennsylvania meaningful contributions? The Maryland didn't do much and the Pennsylvania did not get into the action, but the others all were heavily engaged against Admiral Nishimura's Southern Force, defeating it soundly.
IIRC, the Fuso had already been sunk by PT boats and destroyers before the American battleships could get in on the action. Thus, our battlewagons ganged up against the Yamashiro, the sole remaining battleship of the Southern Force, and pounded her under the waves.
But in terms of the significance of the contribution of these American battleships, consider what would have happened if they hadn't been there. The Yamashiro would have presumably plodded along towards the invasion beaches. But given that the lightweight Taffy 3 managed to chase off a force that included FOUR battleships (Yamato, Nagato, Kongo, and Haruna -- ALL of which were superior to the Yamashiro, in terms of armament and/or speed) and a bunch of heavy cruisers, it seems likely that one of the other Taffys (Taffies?) could have taken care of the old, slow, tired Yamashiro.
So yes, our battleships can lay claim to sinking the Yamashiro (and also the Kirishima at Guadalcanal), and can also lay claim to island bombardments and protecting our aircraft carriers. They did indeed serve a useful role in the war. But to say that they made a "meaningful contribution" to victory, when compared with the indispensable roles played by our carriers, and submarines, and even our smaller surface ships (especially at Guadalcanal), is a bit more of a stretch, IMO.
Excuse me going a bit off topic here, but most grocery stores and news stands have a LIFE "Pearl Harbor 75 Years Later" special out on the stands. It's not exactly a historical record, but has some good photos and probably has at least a few nuggets that most of us would say, "I didn't know that". Says "Display until 2/24/17" so get 'em while they are hot.
The other event that informed Japanese strategy versus the United States was the Japanese experience against the Russians in 1904-05. That war was pretty much a walk for the Japanese, so they expected all Western Powers to fight badly.
Not quite. They put a lot of trust in their Navy (which was indeed very good) and decided to put their best resource to good use.
To put it simply, the Imperial Japanese Navy was gold; the Imperial Japanese Army was ****.
The performance of the Russian fleet in 1905 was absolutely dismal (not like it was a major sea power anyway), but on land, their cut-off and poorly supplied forces gave the Japanese quite a bloodbath. Especially notably since the Japanese used their best troops, but for the Russians Port Arthur was a godforsaken hellhole at the end of the world, and staffed accordingly (they did send in some able commanders when the things started to heat up, but not their first rate troops). Also, the Japanese Treasury was depleted by the end of the war. Have the Russians held on for several more months, the Japanese stood a good chance to go bankrupt.
Then, the Imperial Japanese Army had their rears handed to them just a couple years prior to Pearl Harbor in two large-scale engagements with the Red Army in / around Mongolia. A full blown war, actually. (AFAIK, that's where Zhukov first successfully applied his encirclement / pincer tactics later used on Germans; and that's why Stalin thought that conquering Finland would be a piece of cake).
And look at how long it took the IJA to conquer China - that was falling apart all by itself. IJA was simply not on the same level as IJN.
So, risking being cut off from vital resources, they had three choices : (a) do nothing and halt their expansion, perhaps roll back some of the gains; (b) launch another land war on USSR that at the moment was fighting the Germans and losing; (c) attack the Western Allies on the seas. The first choice was simply unthinkable at the time, anyone suggesting it would be assassinated. The second choice was contemplated, but the lessons of 1938/9 were still well remembered, and the Soviets kept just enough forces on the border to keep Japan from getting cheeky again. The third choice was still a bad / risky one, but appeared less so at the moment.
The Japanese like the Nazis in Europe were racists. Yup. Just like we were at the time. They believed if they sucker punched us at Pearl Harbor then White comfort loving Americans would not have the inner fortitude to strike back but would sue for peace. In other words they didn't believe we had the samurai spirit.
What a lot of people don't know about the circumstances surrounding Pearl Harbor was that the Japanese government knew that we (the USA) were planning to bomb them with B-17's. We were just waiting for the planes to be finished being built. So what they did was basically launch a pre-emptive strike.
Japan was ticked off at us for imposing economic and trade sanctions upon them because of their invasion of China. We were basically crippling them and their production capabilities due to our embargoes of oil and steel and other necessary materials. So...they figured they could catch us with out pants down and cripple our Pacific Fleet to the point we would be unable to stop their growth and expansion plans. Their attack was a moderate success, but was lessened in efficacy somewhat doe to poor intel on their part, i.e. being unaware that our aircraft carriers were out to sea and away from Pearl at the time of the attack on Dec. 7.
What a lot of people don't know about the circumstances surrounding Pearl Harbor was that the Japanese government knew that we (the USA) were planning to bomb them with B-17's. We were just waiting for the planes to be finished being built. So what they did was basically launch a pre-emptive strike.
Japan was ticked off at us for imposing economic and trade sanctions upon them because of their invasion of China. We were basically crippling them and their production capabilities due to our embargoes of oil and steel and other necessary materials. So...they figured they could catch us with out pants down and cripple our Pacific Fleet to the point we would be unable to stop their growth and expansion plans. Their attack was a moderate success, but was lessened in efficacy somewhat doe to poor intel on their part, i.e. being unaware that our aircraft carriers were out to sea and away from Pearl at the time of the attack on Dec. 7.
The B-17s as naval bombers against IJN capital ships never worked out. The B-17s attacked from very high, used their Nordens, but the IJN would start circling, ruining targeting. That's why US dive bombers were much more effective, although they & the torpedo attack planes suffered much higher casualties.
On IJ intel on Pearl Harbor, read through the rest of the thread. That's been addressed - IJN knew the carriers would be out, they pressed home the attack anyway. They miscalculated on which ships would be the strike force in the PTO.
What a lot of people don't know about the circumstances surrounding Pearl Harbor was that the Japanese government knew that we (the USA) were planning to bomb them with B-17's. We were just waiting for the planes to be finished being built. So what they did was basically launch a pre-emptive strike.
Source for this? I have never seen anything to indicate that the U.S. had any plans on bombing Japan, with B-17s or with anything else, prior to Pearl Harbor.
Incidentally, we already had B-17s in the Philippines, not to mention at Pearl Harbor, when the war started.
What a lot of people don't know about the circumstances surrounding Pearl Harbor was that the Japanese government knew that we (the USA) were planning to bomb them with B-17's. We were just waiting for the planes to be finished being built. So what they did was basically launch a pre-emptive strike.
Japan was ticked off at us for imposing economic and trade sanctions upon them because of their invasion of China. We were basically crippling them and their production capabilities due to our embargoes of oil and steel and other necessary materials. So...they figured they could catch us with out pants down and cripple our Pacific Fleet to the point we would be unable to stop their growth and expansion plans. Their attack was a moderate success, but was lessened in efficacy somewhat doe to poor intel on their part, i.e. being unaware that our aircraft carriers were out to sea and away from Pearl at the time of the attack on Dec. 7.
Also the fact that they didn't destroy the ship repair facilities or the fuel storage tanks. To me one of the supreme ironies of the attack is that, yes, they inflicted a great deal of damage on our fleet...but they left the ship repair facilities that were right there intact. And most of the ships damaged were in dire need of upgrades anyway...they were modernized as they were repaired. Most of the ships hit at Pearl saw service later. As to the loss of the Arizona and Oklahoma...the war effort was such that replacing only two battleships was easily manageable.
What is really tragic was the loss of life. Most of the men on the Arizona never had the opportunity to save themselves.
As noted above, Japan never had any intention of trying to smash the United States, what they wanted to do -- and were not as successful as they'd hoped to be -- was cripple the Pacific fleet, allowing them to achieve their strategic aims in the Pacific, and convince the US that a mutually satisfactory peace agreement was more beneficial than a protracted war.
The US and Japan were the two great Pacific powers. The US was the threat to Japanese might, and Japan had reason to fear US strategic resources and production (steel, oil, ships). There were opposing views in Japanese command about whether to initiate war with the United States or not.
The attack itself was a bold gamble. The Japanese fleet had to sail undetected for a couple of weeks to Hawaii; the US fleet had to be present; torpedo nets couldn't be up. Events broke well for Japan, but the blow was not as decisive as they needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by madison999
Can you explain to me how the US came into the oriental picture and what was going on prior to Pearl Harbor ?
How/why was the US involved in those areas before the war; what specifically caused the Japanese to view us as such a threat ?
US possession of the Phillipines and Guam date to the turn of the century. The US took these possessions from Spain as part of the treaty to end the Spanish-American War. US influence over Hawaii came at roughly the same time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Old Gringo
Bear in mind that before WW2, Japan had never lost a war. Their government had become fascistic and extremely militaristic. Their alliance with Germany and Italy no doubt made them overconfident.
Their huge miscalculation was that after the Pearl Harbor attack, they assumed the US would seek peace rather than engage them in war. As it unfolded, their great strategist Yamamoto was correct; they got 6 months of victories followed by inevitable defeat.
They wouldn't listen to him.
Just as we didn't listen to Ike regarding the military-industrial complex.
It was a tough call. Japan's alliance with the Axis was partly to surround the USSR. Japan realistically feared that the US would eventually join the fray on behalf of its allies. They decided to strike first. And it didn't, ultimately, work out.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A couple of notes
