ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2018 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Sunday, June 16, 2019

A day of infamous deceit

As if there were still any remaining doubts, the evidence that FDR not only knew about the Pearl Harbor attack ahead of time, but actually connived at making it happen in order to get the USA in the war against Germany is conclusive:
A Second World War Navy radioman turned journalist, Robert Stinnett was in the National Archives in Belmont, California, researching a campaign-year picture book on George Bush’s South Pacific wartime navy career in aerial reconnaissance — George Bush: His World War II Years (Washington, D.C., Brassey’s, 1992) — and encountered unindexed duplicate copies of Pearl Harbor radio intercept records of Japanese Navy code transmissions — documentary evidence of what actually happened at Pearl Harbor and how it came about. After eight years of further research and a prolonged case at law under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain partial release of these materials, Stinson published Day of Deceit (2000). A Japanese translation appeared within a year, understandably.

Stinnett demonstrates, on the basis of extensive incontrovertible factual evidence and self-evidently accurate analysis that President Roosevelt oversaw the contrivance and deployment of a closely-guarded secret plan to goad the Japanese into attacking Pearl Harbor and monitor them while they did it. Stinnett hypothesizes that Roosevelt did this in order to precipitate an unwilling American public into supporting intervention in the Second World War, but whatever the motives or purposes, the facts are now abundantly clear. Stinnett establishes and proves his case with voluminous documentary evidence, including forty-seven pages of Appendices presenting photographic reproductions of key official records, as well as numerous others reproduced in the body of the text, and 65 pages of closely detailed reference notes. This evidence proves Stinnett’s factual assertions, arguments and conclusions. His research files and notes are deposited at the Hoover Institute library at Stanford. Day of Deceit is exemplary documentary historiography. It presents the material testimony on which its analysis and conclusions are based. Its validity will be clear to any fair-minded reader. Stinnett’s book settles and resolves rational, candid, honest, fact-based discussion and debate about the background of the attack on Pearl Harbor.

As Stinnett shows, the plan that eventuated in the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor was set in motion in early October 1940 based on an “eight-action memo, dated October 7, 1940 … by Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum, head of the Far East desk of the Office of Navy Intelligence.”
At this point it should be abundantly clear to every historically aware individual that absolutely no single incident should ever be regarded as a legitimate justification for war by the American public, considering the way in which the US government regularly engages in fraud and deception in order to manipulate public opinion whenever it wants to go to war with a foreign state.

And note that the author served in the U.S. Navy from 1942 to 1946. He clearly isn't an anti-military fantasist with an axe to grind.

Labels: ,

99 Comments:

Blogger binks webelf June 16, 2019 1:31 PM  

The actions of all the major players in DC at the time make this plot extremely likely. FDR & his co-plotters knew pretty much down to the moment when it would take place. Ditto Churchill.

That they then cold-bloodedly sacrificed Admiral Husband Kimmel and Maj. Gen. Walter Short as "solely blamable" for the attacks that killed 2400 servicemen & others? A very very nasty piece of American history. "A day that will live in infamy" indeed.

As recently as 2013, Kimmel's grandson was fighting to clear the admiral's name. Good on him.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/08/06/grandson-works-to-clear-officers-name-pearl-harbor-attack/2623579/
Grandson works to clear officer of Pearl Harbor blame

Blogger Arthur Isaac June 16, 2019 1:37 PM  

Spanish American and WWI starts making you think this pretext is the rule and not the exception.

I spent a decade fabricating this cassus belli and I'll be canned if I let it go to waste. (When you realize the elites play at history like it's a Paradox game).

Blogger Dave Dave June 16, 2019 1:37 PM  

Just as Churchill combined to start WW2 by making a phony agreement with Poland, it's not only plausible, but the most likely scenario that FDR induced Pearl Harbor in order to justify joining the war.

Blogger binks webelf June 16, 2019 1:39 PM  

https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/4740-pearl-harbor-hawaii-was-surprised-fdr-was-not
Pearl Harbor: Hawaii Was Surprised; FDR Was Not

Blogger Dave Dave June 16, 2019 1:42 PM  

False flags have played a role in nearly every war for the past 150 years. WW2 is no different. Prescribing to the orthodox historical view of WW2 is idiotic when there's every reason to believe otherwise. Even the people that saw the Iraq war was entered into through a false flag miss the boat on WW2 and insist it was all Germany/Japan that started the war, and nobody else. If you ought to know better, you disgrace yourself by buying the lie.

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 16, 2019 1:47 PM  

Stinnet actually thinks that FDR did what needed to be done so that these uSA would enter the war.
Yes, I read the book shortly after publication.
There are, still, documents pertaining Pearl Harbor and ship movements prior to Pearl Harbor that classified and protected from FOIA requests.
Another eye opening book is A Man Called Intrepid.

Blogger binks webelf June 16, 2019 1:51 PM  

@2 "Spanish American and WWI starts making you think this pretext is the rule and not the exception."

The USS Maine
Pearl Harbor
The Gulf Of Tonkin
Project TP-Ajax (Iran)
Operation Northwoods (Cuba)
USS Liberty Attack (war with Egypt)
Iraq WMDs
911
Syrian "Gas Attacks"
Oil Tanker Attacks 2019

... are just the ones we've all heard about.

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/424298-false-flag-syria-attack/
False flags are real – US has a long history of lying to start wars

https://www.mintpressnews.com/historys-dire-warning-beware-false-flag-trigger-for-long-sought-war-with-iran/258478/
History’s Dire Warning: Beware False-Flag Trigger for Long-Sought War with Iran

Blogger Seeingsights June 16, 2019 1:55 PM  

On a related note, the British intelligence services intervened in American politics before US entry in World War II.
For example, the British intelligence services supported Wendell Wilkie successful goal of getting the Republican presidential nomination.
Wilkie had published a book entitled One World, where he advocated a federal one world government.
The book was a best seller, though I can't help but think that it's sales was helped by globalist institutions.
Wilkie has to be considered as one of the main globalist intellectuals, propped up as controlled opposition.
A fair question to ask is why would British intelligence do that, FDR was pro British. My answer: keeping all bases covered--in the admittedly low chance that FDR would lose, the Brits would still have a President who was acceptable.

Blogger NO GOOGLES June 16, 2019 2:03 PM  

Is this even unique in history? I assume that at least in the last few hundred years (and likely it happened before that but maybe less often) this was the norm for powerful states.

Blogger Joe Katzman June 16, 2019 2:03 PM  

The USN Cryptologic Veterans’ Association is a lot less impressed with this book. https://usncva.org/day-of-deceit.html

Blogger Mark Stoval June 16, 2019 2:08 PM  

I grew up in the 60s in a huge subdivision populated by active and retired navy personnel. All the men I knew thought themselves amateur historians and every single one knew that FDR got into WW2 on purpose.

As far as I can determine. We have been falsely led into war in every conflict since at least the war of northern aggression.

Blogger Johnny June 16, 2019 2:08 PM  

@8

The idea of a global empire run by the English language speakers, the US and the former British empire, has been floating around since the late nineteenth century. It seems like vague notions of that are still in place.

Blogger binks webelf June 16, 2019 2:13 PM  

@8 "On a related note, the British intelligence services intervened in American politics before US entry in World War II."

You mean like the Steele File, 5Eyes, and the attempted UK-US intel community coup d'etat on Trump & the American people? She Was Supposed To Win.

Blogger Eincrou June 16, 2019 2:14 PM  

Yep, I read Day of Deceit a few years after it came out in the early 2000s, acquired from the local library. This was a year or two after I'd started listening to Alex Jones's show in 2002, so I was very interested in this kind of information. I read many books like this during that time period, and Day of Deceit was probably the one that made the biggest impression.

I have learned to be very skeptical of events that create pretexts for war, because even if they aren't false flags or completely staged, the government might have allowed an attack to happen (Pearl Harbor), or goaded it on. (1993 WTC bombing)

Blogger Matt June 16, 2019 2:14 PM  

Somebody send Me-So Michelle a copy, STAT!

Blogger Johnny June 16, 2019 2:18 PM  

Speaking of the War of Northern Aggression, most likely the attack on Ft, Sumter was chance event in the circumstance, but it did have some of the features of a setup. But regardless, it is plain enough that Lincoln took advantage of it because he wanted the war and expected a quick victory. He started a drafting troops without bothering to get the legally required declaration of war from Congress. Probably the first time it had ever happened. And once the troops are in motion Congress can't really do much about it. The situation pressures them into going along.

Blogger MichaelJMaier June 16, 2019 2:19 PM  

Thousands of sailors, murdered by FDR. Funny... The movie PEARL HARBOR actually makes mention of how the military was preparing for a war the CIC promised wouldn't happen. The hot nurses sitting around wondering about why they worked in a huge, empty hospital that was so well stocked.

Blogger Arthur Isaac June 16, 2019 2:24 PM  

@binks, it's not just how the wars started its also about WHO wanted those wars to start.

Blogger Chris Mallory June 16, 2019 2:25 PM  

Dave Dave wrote:Just as Churchill combined to start WW2 by making a phony agreement with Poland, it's not only plausible, but the most likely scenario that FDR induced Pearl Harbor in order to justify joining the war.

It was Chamberlain who made the promise to the Poles, not Churchill.

Blogger Fuzzums Wuzzums June 16, 2019 2:27 PM  

“The enemy is anybody who's going to get you killed, no matter which side he is on.”

Blogger dienw June 16, 2019 2:41 PM  

We have been falsely led into war in every conflict since at least the war of northern aggression.

I've done enough reading over the past ten years that indicate Britain egged on both sides in a psyop.

Blogger Robert What? June 16, 2019 2:44 PM  

Blood is on the hands of Roosevelt and Churchill. I hope they are both frying in hell.

Blogger Doktor Jeep June 16, 2019 2:44 PM  

"After eight years of further research and a prolonged case at law under the Freedom of Information Act to obtain partial release of these materials, Stinson published Day of Deceit (2000). A Japanese translation appeared within a year, understandably."

Commendable. But I can still picture Boomerus Americanus at his keyboard saying "not enough proof". then take a vape hit from his douche flute.

"on the basis of extensive incontrovertible factual evidence and self-evidently accurate analysis"
That would actually matter if the typical person was more than just a self-propelled stomach running on vitriol, jealousy, and virtue signalling.


"...every historically aware individual..."
It's a good thing volcano Gods only want virgins.

At the least though, hopefully copies of these works be it on paper or optical drive get dug up by archaeologists in the next iteration of civilization, and that the civilization is not in it's late stages like ours or else the found information will just get skewed anyway.

All attempts at controlling the internet and reducing it to ghettos and echo chambers is geared to making the world as gullible now as it was then. Notably we already have factions that clamor to be gullible to the point that they will beat you into a coma if you try to inform them.

Today it Father's day, and I'm not one. But I remember my dad, and he would read this and say "It's always been this way. They are all crooks. Nothing ever changes." He was pre-boomer silent generation, actually lost siblings in WWII. He was a perfect example of an SG man. And possibly, then as now, as then is now, everybody thinks this way. It's easier to think that way. To think otherwise means one has to do something about it. That'll cost lollipops and fancy pants.

I ask every day what I can do about it. - I'm not a father so I have time - all I get is "render unto Caesar".

Blogger binks webelf June 16, 2019 2:47 PM  

@18. 1930s-50s: Whom? or (((Whom))), or the Kay Gay Bay & operatives in DC?

For instance, highly placed Soviet sympathizer Lauchlin Currie (1902-1993) likely deflected, disrupted & skewed the American response to the War in China, toward a Communist victory for Mao tse Tung. Horrible.

He was born in Canada (Nova Scotia), became an economic advisor to FDR, ending his days in Colombia, once the Venona decrypts came out, and the U.S. refused to renew his passport (after he traveled there on behalf of the World bank). He died there.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lauchlin_Currie

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venona_project

Blogger JAG June 16, 2019 2:50 PM  

Lincoln, Wilson, & FDR. The three most destructive and evil Presidents.

Blogger binks webelf June 16, 2019 2:54 PM  

@23 "I ask every day what I can do about it. - I'm not a father so I have time - all I get is 'render unto Caesar'."

Free advice is worth every penny, so....

Ask Vox. He has suggestions for helpful acts. Read up, research. I'm sick at home, but I blog, comment, read, learn, edumacate, look after my wife & twin sons, and try and redeem the time. I'm trying to learn Latin these days. Financially support good causes, as you are able, and offer encouragement.

Get God-pilled, if you're not. Then, pray for others, especially those in the front lines, taking the heavier fire and spiritual warfare. This is not just a war against flesh & blood, but also against living evil operating in & through systems & people & hidden groups.

This guy is good, and has the right idea: https://www.romancatholicman.com

Blogger Roninf9 June 16, 2019 3:09 PM  

Seeingsights wrote:the British intelligence services supported Wendell Wilkie

(((They))) did not just support Wilkie. (((They))) blatantly rigged the Republican convention to give Wilkie, a lifelong Democrat that never an elected office, the nomination. (((They))) had to block Taft or any other America First from running in 1940 because just about anyone could have easily beaten the not very popular FDR.

Also FDR didn't just set up the perfect conditions to lure the Japanese into attacking Pearl Harbor. In January 1941 he told the Portuguese Ambassador that the USA would attack Japan in an all out assault when the opportunity presented itself. Thanks to decrypted Japanese communications FDR knew full well that the Japanese were monitoring Portuguese communications (Portugal had major colonies and interests in SE Asia) and he knew that such a message sent back to Prime Minister Salazar would be seen by the Japanese and that they would take measures to preemptively defend themselves.

Blogger Jack Ward June 16, 2019 3:31 PM  

Not read Day of Deceit, or all the comments, but something occurs to me.
Perhaps FDR, or rather his military people, realized that the day of the battle ship was done. Interesting that all of our carriers were at sea for the attack. I guess FDR was not getting all his assets killed off. Or, perhaps, he and his henchmen, assuming he is guilty, did not think the Japanese were going to be that efficient.
One thinks on to Coral Sea and Midway and wonder...

Blogger Freeholder June 16, 2019 3:47 PM  

Don't forget the official Cause Belli for the Mexican American war was stationing troops south of the Nueces in disputed territory. Lincoln questioned it while he was in the house. These manipulations have been going on for awhile. Add me to the pool of people questioning Fort Sumter also.

Blogger Bernard Korzeniewicz June 16, 2019 3:47 PM  

On the other hand Russians smiles "at last some truth". Here, in Poland, people interested in the subject have no problem in seeing the false flag pattern.

Blogger Johnny June 16, 2019 3:50 PM  

>>Perhaps FDR, or rather his military people, realized that the day of the battle ship was done....

At the time of Pearl Harbor the Japanese had already driven the British out of the Asia by sinking two battleships, and both were sunk with airplanes. Battleships were still useful, but not critical anymore. And the battleships we had in Pearl Harbor were all aging models.

Blogger Bernard Korzeniewicz June 16, 2019 3:51 PM  

Eee it was the bit bigger setup.
The attack on Ft. Sumter had been orderwd by members of the South Gov. Privately they were the employees of the Bank of England.

Blogger Bernard Korzeniewicz June 16, 2019 3:53 PM  

Sutton "Wall Street and Hitler" (?)… ((bankers)) were setting the stage for IIWW from 1918!

Blogger binks webelf June 16, 2019 3:59 PM  

@28 "Perhaps FDR, or rather his military people, realized that the day of the battle ship was done"

Yes, the old somewhat retrofit slow battlewagons were sacrificed.. not the new fast carriers.

It would be very interesting to note all American ship movements in the previous 6 months. To? From? Reason? Does it make military sense? What patterns if any? Why were so many of the older BBs in Hawai'i, lined up like ducks in a row? How many BBs on the East/ West Coasts? At sea?

What was the SOP on Hawai'i? Was anything different or unusual? Was the morning flight of B-17s to Pearl on the attack day normal?

I need to read those two books folks have mentioned above. Any other suggestions gladly received.

Like the USS Liberty, I hope the American public wakes up to the old lies, as well as the hot fresh steaming new ones in the headlines.

Blogger Bernard Korzeniewicz June 16, 2019 4:00 PM  

The USN knew since the 1935 that the next big thing is a CV.
They why the carriers were told to sail out of PH before December 1941 and attack first if they encounenc any Japanese forces.

Blogger Bernard Korzeniewicz June 16, 2019 4:00 PM  

You mismatched dates.

Blogger Bernard Korzeniewicz June 16, 2019 4:02 PM  

The very PH navy base has been build to provide the convenience target for the Japs. Reas Stinnet, that man 👨 found tones of stuff.

Blogger Rex Little June 16, 2019 4:14 PM  

My only question is, how could FDR know that an attack by Japan would get the US into the war against Germany? If Germany hadn't declared war on the US after we declared on Japan, I don't think Congress would have been willing to declare on Germany. And in those days a declaration of war meant something (unlike today).

I'd love to see Harry Turtledove or somebody write an alternate history where Germany doesn't declare, the US concentrates on Japan alone, and FDR desperately flails around trying to find a way to get into it with Germany.

Blogger tublecane June 16, 2019 4:19 PM  

One can see the tide ebb, if you will, on the knowledge allowed public airing regarding Pearl Harbor "conspiracy theories." For instance , way back when there was a book called Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace which talked about the feds restricting access to information from any inquisitive party save handpicked Court Historians. Which of course meant we all knew next to nothing.

Now, I think the tide has pulled back to the point where polite society is allowed to openly say FDR conspired for the Japanese to move on Western imperial holdings in the Far East and to hit our naval forces somewhere in the Pacific. But not Pearl Harbor itself. No, no. That was a surprise. Like expecting someone to stab you in the arm and they stab you in the neck.

Also, it is widely known now that we broke the Japanese diplomatic code, and therefore had advanced warning. I don't know how long exactly. Washington deciphered the veiled declaration of war that was sent by the Japanese to their ambassador, which many hours later resulted in a telegram hand-delivered by a bicycle messenger to Kimmel or Short or whomever.

It was George Marshall's ultimate responsibility for failing to get this intelligence to the right spot in time, yet somehow his reputation hasn't been tarnished one bit. Either he was in on the conspiracy or he was grossly incompetent. Anyway, we're allowed to talk about this goof-up.

That's where we are in the Pearl Harbor of non-fringe kook crazy conspiracy territory. The administration conspired to pull us into war by provoking the Japanese and our forces at Pearl Harbor were not adequately warned. Day of Deceit goes farther than that, in having specific maneuvers supposedly made to ensure maximum apparent damage while leaving us capable of waging war on the aftermath. How long before polite society says "Oh, we always knew that."

Blogger Cataline Sergius June 16, 2019 4:22 PM  

Stinnett demonstrates, on the basis of extensive incontrovertible factual evidence...

Sounds legit. Facts that are incontrovertible, literally can't be argued with.

I'm totally convinced.

...self-evidently accurate analysis..

I seem to be suddenly less convinced for some reason.

Nate, are you reading this?

Blogger tublecane June 16, 2019 4:23 PM  

@38- Pretty sure we would've just done it. Congressional declarations meant more in 1940 when you're relatively at peace, but imagine the mood shift after you're at war and mobilized and sending men overseas. It's different.

Anyway, they'd probably find a legalistic excuse along with a propaganda excuse. We're fighting in the Pacific to protect the British Empire. Germany is also attacking the British Empire. That sort of thing.

Six degrees of separation warfare.

Blogger VD June 16, 2019 4:42 PM  

My only question is, how could FDR know that an attack by Japan would get the US into the war against Germany?

The Tripartite Pact.

Blogger Mark Stoval June 16, 2019 4:44 PM  

@25

"Lincoln, Wilson, & FDR. The three most destructive and evil Presidents."

Amen brother, amen.

Blogger Scott June 16, 2019 4:49 PM  

@10

That's a weak counter-argument, but thank you for posting it nonetheless.

Blogger Don't Call Me Len June 16, 2019 4:50 PM  

"Stinnett hypothesizes that Roosevelt did this in order to precipitate an unwilling American public into supporting intervention in the Second World War"

That's very strange. I've been repeatedly told that almost all Americans at the time were On The Right Side of History, eager to get to punching Nazzees, just like their noble SJW descendants, and isolationism was a a fringe position held only by cowardly border-lovin' fascist xenophobes.

Blogger Mark McSherry June 16, 2019 5:03 PM  

From William Patterson's biography of Robert A Heinlein. The excerpt below occurred while RAH was serving aboard the aircraft carrier, Lexington. In February 1932---

"...The U.S. Navy’s war games continued, the Pacific Fleet splitting into Blue and Black teams to run a simulated Japanese attack on Oahu. The Blacks defended and the Blues invaded. Lexington was in the Blue force; her sister aircraft carrier, Saratoga, carried the Admiral’s flag for aircraft, commanded by Admiral Yarnell.

"Japan now had the third-strongest Navy in the world, after the U.S. and Britain. The U.S. Navy had begun reevaluating the shipping and bases in the Pacific. The Naval War College had evolved a war scenario called “Plan Orange” 18 (which must have been the scenario Heinlein was briefed on while still at Annapolis). The Plan Orange scenario was based on the idea of a surprise attack—a favorite Japanese tactic that could produce devastating losses on the enemy. Plan Orange anticipated a surprise attack against Pearl Harbor, launched from aircraft carriers. Lexington and Saratoga ranged ahead of its battleship support and prepared to launch an air attack against Pearl.

"Everyone had assumed the carriers would be detected and “sunk” by Black submarines or land-based planes long before they could get within range to launch their planes, but Saratoga evaded the Black patrol planes and came in northeast of Oahu in rain and squally winds. Once they launched their planes, the weather would carry them directly to Oahu; the pilots could roar through the rain clouds and burst into clear, sunny weather over Pearl Harbor … on Sunday morning, February 7, 1932.

"... Brandley and Heinlein’s T4M went up in a combined launch of 152 planes from the Saratoga and the Lexington. An hour later, the planes came out of the storm front over the Koolau Range and into clear air over Pearl Harbor, where they “strafed” lines of planes parked on runways. The dive-bombers dumped twenty tons of theoretical explosives on airfields, ships in the anchorage, the Army headquarters at Fort Shafter, Schofield Barracks, and Hickam Field. It was a complete surprise: not a single fighter plane was launched from Pearl that morning. The aircraft squadron got back to their carriers almost without incident. It was twenty-four hours before the Black group even located them. They got Yarnell’s flag a few days later when Saratoga was “bombed” from the air and ruled damaged by the Referee, Admiral Schofield.

"At the postmortem critique conducted on the Grand Joint Exercise No. 4, on February 18, 1932, Admiral Yarnell argued that the successful attack on Pearl Harbor meant the Navy should reevaluate American naval tactics—but he was voted down by the majority of battleship admirals. The final report’s conclusion was exactly the reverse of the actual experience : [I]t is doubtful if air attacks can be launched against Oahu in the face of strong defensive aviation without subjecting the attacking carriers to the danger of material damage and consequent great losses in the attack air force.

"If the lesson was lost on the U.S. Navy, Japanese observers filed a thorough report of the attack. This report would form the basis for the 1936 recommendation for surprise attack against Pearl Harbor made in the Japan Navy War College’s “Study of Strategy and Tactics in Operations Against the United States."

Patterson Jr., William H.. Robert A. Heinlein: In Dialogue with His Century: Volume 1: Learning Curve 1907-1948. Tom Doherty Associates. Kindle Edition.

Blogger Noah B. June 16, 2019 5:07 PM  

"He clearly isn't an anti-military fantasist with an axe to grind."

Neither was Smedley Butler. The number of retired military heroes who end up opposing the war machine they once served is a real eye opener. But obviously it's in globohomo's interest to conflate supporting the war machine and "standing with the troops."

Blogger R Webfoot June 16, 2019 5:19 PM  

Is this more common in democracies? I don't know much about how it works in practice for other systems, but there seems to be a rather perverse incentive to pull things like this since democracy more than other systems requires constantly trying to convince as many people as possible, even the stupid and uninformed, that you are doing the right thing.

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 16, 2019 5:41 PM  

Seeing..
A Man Called Intrepid includes the Brits in these uSA before uSA's entry into WW2

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 16, 2019 5:45 PM  

It was. Anderson wrote Lincoln, upon receiving notice of resupply by the Star Of The West, with armed escort, that the war had started.

Blogger Mr. B June 16, 2019 5:57 PM  

Every war from the War between the States (there was never a civil war by definition) to the Afghan/Iraqi war was based on lies.

War between the States: The States are not the root of power, the national government is.

Spanish-American War: THEY SUNK THE MAINE!

WWI: They sank an innocent passenger ship with the poor innocent passengers from the US. The Lusitania was loaded with ammunition and arms for the British. Financed by NY "bankers". As were many of the "passenger ships".

I won't even go into the Lies of WWII.

The Monroe Doctrine had two parts, not the one that we learned in school. No. 1 that we learned was that we forbade European interference in Western Hemisphere affairs. No. 2 which was not taught. We will stay out of European affairs. If only we had kept both prongs of the Doctrine.




Blogger JaimeInTexas June 16, 2019 6:03 PM  

I learned about he 5 Eyes from Stinnett's book.

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 16, 2019 6:10 PM  

Good reminder.

Blogger Clay June 16, 2019 6:47 PM  

Lord have mercy. The stupidity only gets worse. I can only blame Public Schooling, and the Internet.

Blogger Mr. B June 16, 2019 6:55 PM  

@55 WTF are you replying to?

Blogger Brett baker June 16, 2019 7:12 PM  

We were still operating with the basic assumptions of the first War Plan ORANGE. The Japanese would attack our Pacific possessions, then we'd sail out and defeat them. Putting the fleet at Pearl Harbor would either deter Japan, or make it easier to launch a counter-attack. What's often ignored by by conspiracy theorists is that the US WAS on alert for a possible Japanese attack six months before Pearl Harbor, and warnings had been renewed a few weeks before. The assumption was, because of the build up of forces at Hawaii, any attacks there would be sabotage or by submarines. As long as those were avoided, the reprisal against Japan would be carried out no problem. Unfortunately for several thousand US service members, this was wrong.
It's a lot like 9/11. "Arabs hijack some airplanes, what's the worst they could do?"

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 16, 2019 7:13 PM  

The original plan to supply Ft. Sumter was done under the Buchanan administration but Lincoln executed it.

I have posted about this before. See comment 217 and 218.

https://voxday.blogspot.com/2018/10/ending-birthright-citizenship.html?commentPage=2#c6419104679899159385

Blogger Mr. B June 16, 2019 7:26 PM  

Let's get real. Up to the War between the States, it was an unanswered question whether a State couldleave the Union. According to the Declaration of Independence,they absolutely could.
According to the tyrant Lincoln they could not.

Blogger tublecane June 16, 2019 8:27 PM  

@5- Iraq War OK started by false flag? Do you mean 9/11, or just lying about WMDs? Let's not go crazy throwing around the term false flag. Pearl Harbor far as I know was not a false flag attack. Those were real Japanese. The Lusitania was actually sunk by Germans, and so on.

What our Fair Leaders rely on more often than false flags is maneuvering the enemy into firing the first shot. Ft. Sumter is a brilliant example, in that Lincoln got South Carolina to fire on ships bringing food to hungry men. Tonkin Gulf was less sophisticated, just a ship entering North Vietnamese water, daring to be chased and shot at. Except there was a second incident where our ships were engaging in combat against Ghost Ships.

The Maine is a stickier issue. That could have been outright false flag. Also could've been an accident; I dunno. I doubt it was Spanish sabotage.

Blogger Edgar Abbey June 16, 2019 8:29 PM  

This story is very timely given the events we see in the news about supposed Iranian attacks on oil tankers. Trump's foreign policy team clearly wants to manufacture a reason for Americans to be outraged at Iran to justify a war, but the difference this time around is that many more people are skeptical of these kinds of events than in the past.

Blogger Unknown June 16, 2019 8:42 PM  

What created the motivation for Japan's Pearl Harbor attack was an oil embargo the United States had initiated an oil embargo five months prior in June 1941. Which essentially was an act of war. In April 2019, the US initiated an embargo on Iran and stop all nations from buying their oil. I hope this does not play out the same way.

Blogger Watchu talkin bout Willis June 16, 2019 8:55 PM  

JAG wrote:Lincoln, Wilson, & FDR. The three most destructive and evil Presidents.

Make it four: Lyndon Johnson

Blogger Azimus June 16, 2019 10:06 PM  

People are saying false flag for Pearl Harbor because thats the closest term they can think of to describe it, but it is so much worse than a false flag. It is treason, but the vilest form of treason because FDR wasn't betraying American troops because he believed in the Japanese cause, he was purposely throwing away thousands of lives and what I can only assume is billions in taxpayer equipment for what amounts to a photo op. Its treachery, murder, and playing god all rolled into one. If I ever come to FDR's grave I'll spit on it.

Blogger Azimus June 16, 2019 10:08 PM  

By the way I'm not convinced the Panay Incident was not a forebear of the exact same strategy.

Blogger WOPR June 16, 2019 10:15 PM  

First, no all navy people did not consider carriers to be the new ultimate weapon of naval warfare. Navies of the time were split on the matter. Ask a bunch of navy guys which would they rather lose, their carriers or their battleships and majority would go carriers.

At the time of Pearl Harbor the Japanese had already driven the British out of the Asia by sinking two battleships, and both were sunk with airplanes.

No, that happened after Pearl Harbor. The British navy believed that aircraft were only a danger to ships in port and not dreadnoughts underway with readied AA defenses.

Second, it wasn't necessarily expected that the Tripartite Pack would bring Germany into the war. Japan had already stuck it to Germany by signing a non-aggression pack with Russia thereby allowing Russia to shift forces west. The German high command didn't expect it to happen. They believed it to be a huge blunder, which it was.

Third, it's been a while since I read Stinnett's book, but I remember being less than impressed. It was a lot of little pieces that somehow, maybe, showed how FDR at a minimum knew the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbor. Basically Monday morning QB'ing. And even all of those pieces weren't some definite proof of an attack.

Could you say that FDR was goading the Japanese? If you want to say that we were required to sell steel and oil to the Japanese, then yes.

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 16, 2019 10:30 PM  

@59
Lusitanua- Going into a war zone carrying munitions to one of the belligerents and the passengers were not told of the war materiel being transported.
Ft. Sumter- They were not hungry.

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 16, 2019 10:34 PM  

@58
Secession was well understood to ve a retained power to the principals in the compact:
Lousiana Purchase
War 1812 - Hartford Convention
Texas Annexation
Tarrifs Of Abomination

There was a common denominator in the opposition.

Blogger Thad Tuiol June 16, 2019 10:45 PM  

Lol, you think this false flag crap started in 1941 or even 1898? Try since man learned to club other man with a branch or jaw bone of an ass. Even with the patchy historical records and sources from Antiquity, we can see that most of Rome's wars were started with the fabrication of pretexts. When it comes to war it's "Delenda Est Veritatem!"

Blogger English Tom June 16, 2019 10:45 PM  

@Seeingsights

The British had an organisation for the purpose of heavily,influencing the,US called the BSC British Security Coordination.
Also check out a book called, Friendly Fire: the secret war between the allies by Lynn Picknett and others. The book makes the claim the 2nd world war was kept going for 2 years longer than it should have.
The book is based on documents released under the 60 year rule.

Blogger DonReynolds June 17, 2019 12:42 AM  

Mr. B wrote:Let's get real. Up to the War between the States, it was an unanswered question whether a State couldleave the Union. According to the Declaration of Independence,they absolutely could.

According to the tyrant Lincoln they could not.


If 1861 was illegal, or wrong, or immoral, so was 1776.

The shooting war against the British had actually started in April 1775 by state militia, but independence was not declared until more than a year later.

Blogger Audacity17 June 17, 2019 12:52 AM  

Don't confuse intent with capability.

https://chicagoboyz.net/archives/26430.html

Blogger DonReynolds June 17, 2019 1:01 AM  

The first casualty in any war...American or foreign....is the Truth.

Churchill said that during wartime the truth is so precious that it must be protected by a bodyguard of lies. He would know.

Behind all of this is the relatively modern idea in this country that each of us has the right to decide for ourselves whether the cause, or purpose, or the conduct of the war is worthy or acceptable. What is implied is the notion that citizens can decide for themselves whether the war is right or correct and either resist the war or support it.

I first encountered this during the Vietnam conflict in the 1960s and rejected it with considerable debate. We seldom get to decide these things and treason (or sedition) cannot be excused so easily. If anything, the Pentagon Papers proved that very little of the factual information regarding the war is ever available to the public, so any conclusion that individual citizens might make about the war must necessarily be based on limited or false information.

For some people, that means there cannot be a war without full and complete disclosure of all relevant facts and intelligence, but that has never been the case. Whether it should or not, I leave for others to debate, but I doubt it is a realistic expectation.

Blogger js June 17, 2019 2:35 AM  

ummm...no ever, seems to ask "Why would FDR have been so certain that an attack by Japan on the United State would lead to the United States going to war with Germany" Cold FDR read minds or predict future events?

Because Hitler declared war on the United States, Remember? Hitler was under no obligation to do that. The Tripartate Pact, even if Hitler was a fanatic about following all agreements to the letter (which, uh, he really wasn't) was pretty specific "ARTICLE 3. Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict."Note is attacked by." Not that folksy old Adolf, thinking with the blood, was tied down by a scrap of paper.

Hitler, as far as Roosevelt knew, might not have reacted to Pearl Harbor by declaring war on the US. He could very easily have sat back and said "The geman volk are deeply stirred by the heroic struggle of our samurai friends against the dollar worshipping plutocratic USA, and we extend every sympathy and spiritual support!" Rationally, that would have been his best move. A Roosevelt Administration fighting solely with Japan would have had no public support for aid to Britain and certainly not the Soviet Union while Yamamoto's carriers were threatening the West Coast! (we would have been allies with Britain in the Pacific and the defence of India and Australia, but that doesn't get you to Berlin!) Such a war fought only in the Pacific might have been shorter, much shorter - but it would have set back, not advanced any Roosevelt secret scheme to go to war with Germany.

So again, could someone please explain - how does Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor cause the US to go to war with Germany? The reason the US went to war with Hitler is because Hitler - acting against his rational self-interest - obligingly declared war on the United States, because Hitler was Hitler, and he acted with the assurance of a "sleepwalker" as he told his admirers. And the sleepwalker. led millions of Germans right over the edge of a cliff. But who could have predicted with any certainty, that the sleepwalker would be that stupid?

So yeah, the Pearl Harbor plot nonsense is just that - nonsense. Unless you really do think that Roosevelt had supernational powers allowing him to read Adolf's mind and know what he'd do next.

No doubt Diana West will explain the errors in the above post sooner or later, though.

Blogger js June 17, 2019 2:45 AM  

If Hitler had decided not to declare war on the US, the Tripartate Pact would have meant less than nothing. what recourse would the Japanese have had? Lawsuits? Strongly worded editorials in leading newspapers of the Co-Prosperity Sphere?

Blogger js June 17, 2019 2:51 AM  

ummm...no ever, seems to ask "Why would FDR have been so certain that an attack by Japan on the United State would lead to the United States going to war with Germany" Cold FDR read minds or predict future events?

Because Hitler declared war on the United States, Remember? Hitler was under no obligation to do that. The Tripartate Pact, even if Hitler was a fanatic about following all agreements to the letter (which, uh, he really wasn't) was pretty specific "ARTICLE 3. Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict."Note is attacked by." Not that folksy old Adolf, thinking with the blood, was tied down by a scrap of paper.

Hitler, as far as Roosevelt knew, might not have reacted to Pearl Harbor by declaring war on the US. He could very easily have sat back and said "The geman volk are deeply stirred by the heroic struggle of our samurai friends against the dollar worshipping plutocratic USA, and we extend every sympathy and spiritual support!" Rationally, that would have been his best move. A Roosevelt Administration fighting solely with Japan would have had no public support for aid to Britain and certainly not the Soviet Union while Yamamoto's carriers were threatening the West Coast! (we would have been allies with Britain in the Pacific and the defence of India and Australia, but that doesn't get you to Berlin!) Such a war fought only in the Pacific might have been shorter, much shorter - but it would have set back, not advanced any Roosevelt secret scheme to go to war with Germany.

So again, could someone please explain - how does Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor cause the US to go to war with Germany? The reason the US went to war with Hitler is because Hitler - acting against his rational self-interest - obligingly declared war on the United States, because Hitler was Hitler, and he acted with the assurance of a "sleepwalker" as he told his admirers. And the sleepwalker. led millions of Germans right over the edge of a cliff. But who could have predicted with any certainty, that the sleepwalker would be that stupid?

So yeah, the Pearl Harbor plot nonsense is just that - nonsense. Unless you really do think that Roosevelt had supernational powers allowing him to read Adolf's mind and know what he'd do next.

No doubt Diana West will explain the errors in the above post sooner or later, though.

Blogger js June 17, 2019 3:05 AM  

It is possible that Roosevelt provokerd a war with Japan in order to go to war with Japan. The idea that Pearl Harbor was not warned because Roosevelt needed the initial Japanese assault to be as destructive as possible is strange. Any attack by Japan on the US would have been a causus belli. are we to believe that if Pearl had been warned and the carriers ready, that the attitude of the American public would have been "Japan attacked Pear Harbor and the Phillipines, but they hardly sank any American ships at all and it was a real failure for them! Guess a defeat like that taught those militarists a good lesson and no need to declare war on them or anything harsh like that! It would be unsportsmanlike to just pile on when they already suffered enough! Let's just pretend it didn't happen - what's a few bombs between friends?"

That's...not how it works. But that is how all the people who claim that "Roosevelt didn't warn Pearl because he wanted the Japanese attack to be a success" seem to think is how it works.

You know know, I don't love Roosevelt. no one has to love Roosevelt. But he did enough foolish, dishonest and destructive things for real, without needing to make up new, impossible, foolish, dishonest and destructive things for him to to do.

Blogger Unknown June 17, 2019 3:53 AM  

@59

The Maine was blown up by a coal bunker fire that reached her powder magazine. Definite accident, but it was used to justify war anyway.

Blogger Unknown June 17, 2019 3:55 AM  

Watchu talkin bout Willis wrote:JAG wrote:Lincoln, Wilson, & FDR. The three most destructive and evil Presidents.

Make it four: Lyndon Johnson

For signing Hart-Cellar into law alone, leaving aside his other nefarious deeds, LBJ deserves to be cursed for all eternity.
-Unknownsailor-

Blogger Станислав Бартошевич June 17, 2019 4:20 AM  

Stinnett confuses three different questions, though unlike many PH conspirologists he appears to be doing so sincerely:

(1)Did the American government foresaw that Japan (which for 20 years built its navy specifically to consfront USA, for approximately the same length of time constantly butted head with USA regarding various Japanese landgrab ambitions, starting with its attempt to permanently retain the Russian Far East in the wake of intervention into Russian Civil War, engaged in a frantic campaign of preparation for a major naval war which could not be completely hidden for the last 1,5 years, and mainly against which USA had been building the largest navy that ever existed for approximately the same length of time) is intending to go to war with United States? The answer is certainly "yes". They had to be brain dead to not expect war. Indeed, there was a substantial effort undertaken to bolster defenses of American bases in the Pacific with yet-limited resources that were on hand in the months before the war.

(2)Was the American government aware of the incoming attack on Pearl Harbor? In other words, was there any piece of solid intel that the Japanese fleet was specifically coming to HAWAII, that such intel was recognized for what it really was at the time, instead of being seen as such with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, that such intel, properly interpreted, was then delivered to the President or the highest level of command before the fact? Stinnett's books still offers no proof of such piece of intel existing.
Furthermore, such awareness contradicts nearly the entire experience of WWII, where 90+% of major offensive moves by either side achieved operational surprise, even if the general intent to attack was evident, and in many cases even when observation methods other than radio intelligence were avaialable. One runaway success at Midway does not undo a history of failure going all the way to Ardennes.

(3)Was USA provoking Japan to enter war? Realistically speaking Japan commited itself to war the moment rebuilding of the "shadow fleet" into carriers was decided, which happened in October of 1940, in response to USA making it clear that further grabbing colonial possessions of the European powers defeated by Germany would not be tolerated by imposing sanctions in response to Japanese occupation of Vietnam. I find arguments that USA provoked Japan into war by having interests different from those of Japan in the region that Japan blatantly intended to occupy by naked force rather difficult to take seriously.

Blogger English Tom June 17, 2019 7:33 AM  

@Chris Mallory

FDR also made promises to the Poles, see: Friendly Fire by Picknett et al.

Blogger English Tom June 17, 2019 7:37 AM  

@Tublecane

East wind, rain.

Blogger Avalanche June 17, 2019 8:09 AM  

@10 "The USN Cryptologic Veterans’ Association is a lot less impressed with this book. https://usncva.org/day-of-deceit.html"

The usual two-edged sword for history: whom do you believe?

From the link:
Roosevelt had no assurance that Germany would declare war on the U.S. if the Japanese did attack Pearl Harbor thus negating any reasonable conspiratorial design to get the U.S. into war with Germany by forcing Japan to attack the U.S.

And right there is weaseling: IF the U.S. maneuvered Japan into causing the U.S. to declare war ON Japan, then that ALSO meant the U.S. declared war on Japan's treaty PARTNERS in Europe! Just as the invasion(s) of Poland 'let' France and England begin WWII.

Why, it's ALMOST like a false flag, innit?


Got defensiveness?
However, Stinnett omits the fact that Clausen also tried to place the blame for not fully informing Hawaiian commanders on Navy cryptologic officers. The latter effort is also part of the aim of this book, but its shot is far wide of the mark.

and:
available documentation in the Pearl Harbor arena

Meaning, the cryptographers did not / do not include the information available about the machinitions IN D.C.! Are they defending themselves rather than trying to untangle history? "We cryptographers were not to blame, this Stinnett guy is wrong, the orthodox story is right, pay not attention to the men behind the political curtain; only listen to us in the trenches."

Hmmmm; don't want to face the false entry into THAT war too?


Side-trail: interesting article on the Poland invasions in, of ALL Places HuffPo! https://www.huffpost.com/entry/time-to-face-the-truth-ab_b_282379

Blogger Avalanche June 17, 2019 8:13 AM  

@11 "We have been falsely led into war in every conflict since at least the war of northern aggression."

OOPS. That would be the war purported to be over slavery, and the non-mention of northern tariffs on Southern goods? That would be Old Lying-Abe using rhetoric -- and forced recruitment! -- to prevent the South from leaving?

Good old book: "The South Was Right" by James Ronald Kennedy and Walter Donald Kennedy. There are some inaccuracies -- and a good bit of butthurt -- but it's basically sound; and an AMAZING eye-opener for a Northerner steeped in the lies of the orthodoxy!

Blogger Avalanche June 17, 2019 8:24 AM  

@28 "Interesting that all of our carriers were at sea for the attack"

No, I believe this is incorrect. Admiral Kimmel TRIED to send his ships out to sea in the days before so they would NOT be so vulnerable -- and FDR ORDERED THEM BACK TO PEARL! Then blamed Kimmel for 'letting' his ships get bombed...

Hey look! Here it is again: LBJ ordered the air missions BACK from saving the USS Liberty and the Obamination(?) ordered the air mission BACK from trying to save Ambassador Chris Stevens and the military guys who fought for eight hours on their own.

Well, you know the old saying: "when you find something that works..."

Blogger Avalanche June 17, 2019 8:40 AM  

Let me second the recommendation for this link: https://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/history/item/4740-pearl-harbor-hawaii-was-surprised-fdr-was-not

Yes, I've got confirmation bias going on, but then -- the article has many refs that are NOT USN cryptographers... and stuff I've learned a decade ago, so a bit fuzzy on the details in my old brain. Worth the read, to see the depth and breadth.

Dutch Army decoded
Nazis ordered Popov to Hawaii to make a detailed study of Pearl Harbor and its nearby airfields. The agent deduced that the mission betokened a surprise attack by the Japanese. In August, he fully reported this to the FBI in New York. J. Edgar Hoover later bitterly recalled that he had provided warnings to FDR about Pearl Harbor, but that Roosevelt told him not to pass the information any further and to just leave it in his (the president's) hands.
Sino-Korean People's League, received definite word from the Korean underground that the Japanese were planning to assault Hawaii "before Christmas."

and this:
The Navy has traditionally followed the rule that, when international relations are critical, the fleet puts to sea. That is exactly what Admiral Kimmel did. Aware that U.S.-Japanese relations were deteriorating, he sent 46 warships safely into the North Pacific in late November 1941 — without notifying Washington. He even ordered the fleet to conduct a mock air raid on Pearl Harbor, clairvoyantly selecting the same launch site Admiral Yamamoto chose two weeks later.

When the White House learned of Kimmel's move it countermanded his orders and ordered all ships returned to dock, using the dubious excuse that Kimmel's action might provoke the Japanese. Washington knew that if the two fleets met at sea, and engaged each other, there might be questions about who fired the first shot.

Blogger Avalanche June 17, 2019 9:08 AM  

@62 "Lincoln, Wilson, & FDR. The three most destructive and evil Presidents.
Make it four: Lyndon Johnson"

Have y'all just FORGOTTEN the Obamination? Or was his additional damage and destruction just icing on an already-shite-cake?!

Blogger Johnny June 17, 2019 9:38 AM  

Forget the legalistic BS, the difference between a union and an empire is that membership in a union is voluntary. What Lincoln accomplished was the conversion of the United States from being an an apparent union into a for sure empire. As things worked out the southern states should never have rebelled from England. Even the worst case, if a war did break out over slavery, it is unlikely England would have been as vengeful as the New England states were following the war.

Blogger OneWingedShark June 17, 2019 11:40 AM  

Avalanche wrote:@62 "Lincoln, Wilson, & FDR. The three most destructive and evil Presidents.

Make it four: Lyndon Johnson"

Have y'all just FORGOTTEN the Obamination? Or was his additional damage and destruction just icing on an already-shite-cake?!

Honestly, Obama was (policy-wise) essentially terms 4 and 5 of Bush II — so, yes, icing.
Now, there is some argument to be made about the internal bureaucratic/executive operations — things like Fast and Furious and escalating [ab]use of executive orders and executive privilege — but these were largely recapitulations of the massive corruption already entrenched in the system [likely from the Clinton era].

Remember that the bailouts didn't start with Obama, but with Bush with the post-9/11 airlines, and then later with the whole "I've Abandoned Free Market Principles To Save The Free Market System" crap.

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 17, 2019 11:53 AM  

These uSA took over the Philipines in 1898. These uSA backed certain European countries' colonies in Southeast Asia. These uSA and European colonies began an embargo against Japan because of Manchuria. Japan, remembering these uSA Gunboat Diplomacy and experiencing industrial difficulties due to lack of raw material, either capitulate on Manchuria or take some other tyoe of action. If Europe could have colonies on SE Asia, why not Japan, to secure access to raw material.
Japan's mistake was that they over extended their perimeter.

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 17, 2019 12:09 PM  

There was no desire to go to war against Germany. Against Japan? Sure, why not, these uSA was already running the show in the Philipines. Harass and aggravate until Japan, convinced that these uSA was going to attack, decides to take the initiative. Once these uSA went into war and into war production economy, war against Japan, adding was against Germany would have been another aspect of military necessity.

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 17, 2019 2:04 PM  

**Edited**
There was no desire to go to war against Germany. Against Japan? Sure, why not, these uSA was already running the show in the Philippines. Harass and aggravate until Japan, convinced that these uSA was going to attack, decides to take the initiative. Once these uSA went into war against Japan and into war production economy, adding war against Germany would have been another aspect of military necessity.

Blogger JAG June 17, 2019 3:18 PM  

Avalanche wrote:@62 "Lincoln, Wilson, & FDR. The three most destructive and evil Presidents.

Make it four: Lyndon Johnson"

Have y'all just FORGOTTEN the Obamination? Or was his additional damage and destruction just icing on an already-shite-cake?!


As bad as Obama was, he is a rank amateur compared to the ones I listed. Just compare body counts.

Blogger JaimeInTexas June 17, 2019 5:47 PM  

These uSA took over the Philipines in 1898. These uSA backed certain European countries' colonies in Southeast Asia. These uSA and European colonies began an embargo against Japan because of Manchuria. Japan, remembering these uSA Gunboat Diplomacy and experiencing industrial difficulties due to lack of raw material, either capitulate on Manchuria or take some other tyoe of action. If Europe could have colonies on SE Asia, why not Japan, to secure access to raw material.
Japan's mistake was that they over extended their perimeter.

Blogger DonReynolds June 17, 2019 7:30 PM  

Some relevant historical information is worth adding to the discussion.

1. The Japanese had already accomplished their role with a border threat against Soviet Siberia from Manchuria. Over a hundred of the best Soviet divisions were parked along that border, with General Zhukov, to prevent what had already happened in the past....the Japanese occupation of Siberia in the 1920s (in cooperation with the US military under General Leonard Wood). The attack on Pearl Harbor convinced the Soviets that the Japanese were not coming in strength, thus the massive shift to the other end of the country and the victory at Stalingrad.

2. Hitler was neither stupid or reckless in declaring war on the US after Pearl Harbor, and yes, it was probably part of the plan. The US had already declared war on Germany with the Lend-Lease Act of 1940, taking over the defense of Iceland and other UK bases, transferring fifty destroyers to the Royal Navy, extending anti-submarine patrols, providing US escort vessels to "British" convoys, providing the improved weapons and supplies (including Catalina and Liberator long range aircraft), and financing more of the British war effort. This undeclared war became an open undeclared war in the Atlantic, involving the air and naval forces of the US on September 13th, 1941....three months before Pearl Harbor.

3. I am not convinced that there was a lot of affection for the British in the Roosevelt administration or the American public. There has always been a strong Irish influence in the US and the rebellion in the 1920s was still fresh. Admiral King was openly anti-British. The American ambassador to the UK was certainly annoying, as a pro-Hitler, Irish Roman Catholic, who expressed the belief that the British would lose the current and on-going war with Germany. There simply was not a lot of interest in getting too supportive of the British and Roosevelt's advisers were somewhat pessimistic regarding the ability of the British to hold out for much longer. The British had not had any major successes in dealing with the Germans in 1939-1941 and war is less about rescue missions than capable allies.

4. There was always a strong faction that expected the Japanese to attack Hawaii, as was predicted by Billy Mitchell at his court martial in 1925. The same attack that had been wargamed by both the Japanese and the American military long before the Pacific fleet was moved from San Deigo to Hawaii in mid 1940. The original Plan Orange of the US military had imagined a force of 40,000 to defend the Philippines, but McArthur insisted on a force ten times as large. The rapid build-up of air and ground forces in the Philippines resulted in the largest loss (and surrender) in US history, this WAS the battle for control of the Pacific, not Hawaii. The Japanese seizure of Indochina and the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) were only after the relevant colonial powers, France and the Netherlands, had been overrun and occupied by the Germans by mid 1940. The only “colonial” powers remaining in the south Pacific were the US and Britain.

Blogger Rex Little June 17, 2019 9:39 PM  

The most likely scenario, IMO, is that FDR didn't care who he went to war with, and found Japan to be easier to draw in. (Germany certainly wasn't about to send an aircraft carrier to attack a US base--did they even have carriers?) Also, war with Japan would have been easier to sell to the public. Whatever Jewish influence there was in the administration would have wanted to go after Germany, but the general public included a lot of people whose opinion of Jews matched Hitler's, and whose sympathies lay with Germany right up to the point war was declared.

Blogger DonReynolds June 18, 2019 12:53 AM  

To answer your question....yes.
The Germans built one aircraft carrier and expected to build a second one. But for sound reasons, it never put to sea in combat and was scuttled by the crew at the end of the war.

The Russians found it and raised it and it became the first Soviet aircraft carrier and used the same name Zeppelin. In fact, the Soviets would not build their own aircraft carrier until 1967. The Zeppelin was in use in the Soviet navy until 1947, when it was used for target practice and sunk in 300 feet of water.

Blogger binks webelf June 18, 2019 7:54 AM  

"The Russians found it and raised it and it became the first Soviet aircraft carrier and used the same name Zeppelin"

The class & lead ship of two planned carriers was named "Graf Zeppelin" [Flugzeugträger A, or Aircraft Carrier A]. Wiki: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_aircraft_carrier_Graf_Zeppelin

After the Germans took Norway, they had less need for such vessels, and the demand for steel for other military purposes meant that though 85% complete by 1939, she sat in dockyard until war's end.

After the Soviets sank it for target practice in 1947, a Polish oil company rediscovered the wreck in 2006, in Baltic waters north of Poland.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5223514.stm

It is currently a popular wreck for SCUBA diving.

https://www.google.ca/search?&q=Graf+Zeppelin+wreck

Blogger Up from the pond June 19, 2019 7:19 PM  

They lied to start World War 1.

Here's a 10-minute red pill on the Lusitania
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYO_gK3P2ls

Of course they could lie to plunge us into the second world war. More was at stake in 2. For example, Uncle Mustache's inappropriate behavior.

But what could Joe Citizen do about it, then or now? The idea that a common man should even have a political opinion is an historical anomaly. Political opinions were always in the domain of men who had an army or could raise an army, not peasants in the fields or rice paddies. Democracy is a giant pretense.

Blogger Stephen St. Onge June 24, 2019 7:17 AM  

        My this has been amusing.  One seldom sees such concentrated ignorance, circular argument, and general illogic in one place.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts