Türk porno yayini yapan http://www.smfairview.com ve http://www.idoproxy.com adli siteler rokettube videolarini da HD kalitede yayinlayacagini acikladi. Ayrica porno indir ozelligiyle de http://www.mysticinca.com adli porno sitesi devreye girdi.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 26

Thread: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,413

    Default 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    This map predicted how Japan would attack the US during World War II

    Jeremy Bender,Business Insider 6 hours ago Comments

    On November 7, 1937, the Los Angeles Examiner published a prescient map predicting how Imperial Japan could attack the US during World War II.

    Created by Howard A. Burke, the map imagined a Japanese attack on the US that closely predicted the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor four years later on December 7, 1941. Burke rightly noted that Japan's first target would be Hawaii and the US fleet docked at Pearl Harbor.

    "The first objective must be capture of Hawaii," Burke notes on the map. "This would mean crippling or annihilating the U.S. fleet, giving Japan one of the world's greatest naval bases — Pearl Harbor."

    After that attack, Burke then imagined that Japan would follow up the assault with a two-pronged naval and aerial strike from Hawaii against Los Angeles and San Francisco, with a simultaneous Japanese assault from Alaska working its way down the Pacific Northwest.

    You can see Burke's map below:

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	This_map_predicted_how_Japan-.jpg 
Views:	321 
Size:	99.6 KB 
ID:	7701

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Northern Greece Macedonia Drama
    Posts
    271

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    I dont think there was a plan with more strategic value, than attacking Hawai. Although landing in Alaska might work for the Japanese to. No one bat an eye though
    Respectfully Kall

    The blade itself incites to violence
    -Homer

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,288

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    Quote Originally Posted by kallinikosdrama1992 View Post
    I dont think there was a plan with more strategic value, than attacking Hawai.
    Debatable, but one has to try to balance knowledge at the time with 20/20 hindsight.

    If Japan hadn't attacked the US in Hawaii, the Philippines or elsewhere, and despite the erosion of isolationism as evidenced by watering down of the Netrality Acts so that they were virtually irrelevant by November 1941 despite a seeming majority of the American people not wanting to get involved in external wars, it's debatable whether the US would have gone to war with Japan if Japan had limited its conquests to Malaya and the Netherlands East Indies as territories of two imperial / colonial powers which offended everything many politicians and people in America stood for as staunch anti-imperialists / anti-colonialists. Then again, Roosevelt and Co were determined that Japan should not get its hands on NEI oil to overcome the US and British embargoes on oil exports to Japan, so on that basis Japan didn't have a choice but to attack the US as a potential enemy.

    Japan had to decide whether, even if it didn't attack the US, the US would allow Japan to exploit the resources from its conquests in Indo-China, Malaya, Burma and the NEI, all of which required Japan's ships to transport their bounty in range of the Philippines with its US forces. If Japan saw the Philippines as a threat then it had to take the Philippines. If Japan took the Philippines, then it made sense to destroy the fleet at Pearl to prevent it coming to the rescue of the Philippines.

    Regardless, the Japanese attack on Hawaii was a tactical success but a strategic failure because, essentially:
    1. The IJN attack was pretty much on rails to launch the attack at a fixed time and place, largely to ensure the fleet’s route to Hawaii wasn’t detected by the US or others, so it missed the opportunity and intelligence to await the return of the critical US carriers to Pearl. But also to ensure that the fleet and its oilers and fleet train could return to Japan to continue the war Japan started to overcome its domestic scarcity of oil.
    2. Despite basing its attack on the lessons of Taranto where the British succeeded in damaging enemy ships in a shallow harbour, the IJN sunk very few US ships. Most were grounded in the shallow harbour and later returned to service (for example, IIRC, about six of the eight US battleships supposedly sunk by the IJN at Pearl returned to service and sunk a good number of IJN ships later in the war and in a combined action by most or all of those US battleships in the Philippines later in the war).
    3. Critically, the IJN focused on sinking US ships rather than destroying the oil storages and general supply and repair facilities without which the US capital ships would have been forced to return to the US West Coast, whether or not they were damaged, and to conduct the rest of the war from there. At least until the oil storages etc at Hawaii were able to sustain operations from Hawaii, which would have required considerable transport and other resources to reinstate Hawaii.
    4. Hawaii was just a large scale hugely tactically impressive but strategically not very successful raid by the IJN. It fell a long way short of forcing the US fleet back to the West Coast of the USA while Japan went southwards into Malaya, NEI etc in pursuit of its war plans to grab resources, trade and labour in those regions. Japan did not have the troops, ships, fuel, and any other logistical requirements to invade and hold Hawaii, which is why it didn’t do so when it had its best chance early in December 1941. Meanwhile, Japan left the crucial US carriers and most of the fuel and facilities at Pearl in good working order.
    5. Overall, Japan’s raid on Hawaii was an own goal by outraging the American people and bringing them into a war, determined to destroy Japan, which Japan’s smartest leaders knew before it started was a war Japan could not win.
    6. The fundamental flaw in Japan’s war strategy was that it didn’t really have a clearly articulated strategy with defined territorial aims beyond grabbing territory and resources to the south and south east in a ribbon defence which Japan thought it could hold while it wore down the Allies until Japan was allowed to hold those territories. The first (strictly second, but first will do for here) phase of Japan’s advance stopped with its necessary oil gains in the NEI but, under the influence of what some senior Japanese military, naval and other leaders correctly identified as ‘the victory disease’ flowing from unexpected successes, expanded to Papua New Guinea and Guadalcanal. Japan suffered its first land defeats in those two places, which started the land campaigns which ended up with Japan in ruins.

    Comment: The absence of clearly defined strategy and aims has seen plenty of other powers come unstuck since, notably the US and its allies in Vietnam; the USSR in Afghanistan; and the US and its allies in the last version of Iraq. These failures might be contrasted with the success of the British Commonwealth forces in suppressing the communists during the Malayan Emergency. (And, for cynics like me, anyone want to know why it was called an Emergency rather than a war? I haven’t been able to verify it as accurate, but there is a view that this was to allow the colonial rubber planters to keep insurance cover on their plantations. http://www.thelincolnshireregiment.org/malayemerg.shtml )
    Then again, it’s always easier to define the aim to defeat an aggressor than to specify the territorial or other limits of aggression. One day Hitler is going to invade Britain, then he’s cleaning up the Italian disaster in Greece and pursuing the defeated British Commonwealth forces into Crete while he’s continuing his war with the British Commonwealth in North Africa and on the seas, just before he blasts into the USSR. All Hitler’s enemies had to do for strategy was to resist and repel him until Germany was defeated. Ditto for Japan.

    Quote Originally Posted by kallinikosdrama1992 View Post
    Although landing in Alaska might work for the Japanese to. No one bat an eye though
    See 4 above, only more so with Alaska and less tactical and strategical threat to the US by any large Japanese land and naval forces pretty much marooned and easily contained there.
    Last edited by Rising Sun*; 05-17-2016 at 10:52 AM.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    delft
    Posts
    126

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    The DEI oil fields/refineries:
    These fields produced 65 million barrels of oil in 1940, a rate which should have been more than adequate for Japan’s import needs.
    The United States, was a major producer of oil ;1.35 billion barrels a year in 1940, 63% of world production.

    and oh: "Unlike gasoline, fuel oil is not easily ignited and fuel oil tanks were not as easy a target to destroy as might be supposed. One Japanese pilot who participated in the raid on Wheeler Field recalled strafing some nearby fuel tanks and being surprised that they refused to ignite even after several strafing runs."



    It is said that the US would (be willing to?) attack Japan if Japan wld only attack the DEI.
    (any links to such agreements and detail battle order ?).

    I think if that would happen, the US (with intact Pearl Harbor fleet) would not know how to invade, attack or strike Japan as hard or tough as it did in 1942. And the IJN would be able to set up traps and be able to cripple the US better/more effective than what actually happened.
    Simply because the US would not go full throttle for "somebody else's war" (either for some chinese peasants, or dutch colonials, or british colonials).
    Last edited by Frankly Dude Really; 05-18-2016 at 06:28 AM.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,413

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    The infamous "Third Wave" of Japanese Naval aircraft was never sent against Pear Harbor. That was the main attack wave that was to target primarily the oil facilities. They of course would have used bombs rather than just ineffectual 7.7mm machine gun fire. IIRC, the main problem for the Japanese Navy was that they were to have been launched late in the day, and it would have been dark as they returned making it a rather dicey preposition for the IJN as they did not have much, if any, practice in nighttime carrier landings.

    A Third Wave also exposed the fleet to greater risk of a counter strike by the missing USN carriers, or even surviving land based aircraft at Pearl. Not that many USAAC aircraft were left, but the Japanese would have to assume that a credible force might have been assembled. Also, the Japanese suffered a large majority of their casualties in the second attack wave from increasingly accurate ground fire, as Navy and Army AAA gunners were more awake and grew more proficient after the First Wave bombed and strafed with near impunity. It was thought a third attack wave would have contended with even greater ground fire may have suffered serious losses of planes, but more importantly, the nearly irreplaceable pilots...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,288

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    Quote Originally Posted by Frankly Dude Really View Post
    and oh: "Unlike gasoline, fuel oil is not easily ignited and fuel oil tanks were not as easy a target to destroy as might be supposed.
    Which merely reinforces my point that the Japanese failed to identify the oil storages as a target and didn't have the necessary munitions to set them on fire. Although it wasn't necessary to set fire to them as breaching the above ground and recently filled to capacity tanks at ground level would have been sufficient.

    If any USN ships had to draw water from the harbor to cool their engines, I expect that oil flooding into the harbor from the tanks wouldn't have improved their performance.

    As for not being an easy target, that would apply only if the Japanese planes were being flown by the blind pilots' guide dogs with blindfolds on the dogs.











    Quote Originally Posted by Frankly Dude Really View Post
    One Japanese pilot who participated in the raid on Wheeler Field recalled strafing some nearby fuel tanks and being surprised that they refused to ignite even after several strafing runs."
    1. Wheeler Field was a long way inland from the naval oil tanks at Pearl Harbor.
    2. Any fuel storage tanks at Wheeler Field presumably would have been holding highly inflammable fuel for aeroplanes or motor vehicles rather than less inflammable naval fuel oil.
    3. The Wheeler Field event you mention is irrelevant to the naval storage tanks at Pearl Harbor, except to reinforce the point that Japanese planes were not equipped with munitions to destroy even highly inflammable aviation fuel storage tanks although, as with the recently filled naval oil tanks, it is much more difficult to cause an explosion or fire in full tanks of any oil / petrol type fuel than it is in ones which have a good deal of vapour rather than liquid in them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Frankly Dude Really View Post
    and oh:
    It would be refreshing to see you post without being a sarcastic smart arse, and more so when you are hopelessly wrong as in your last post.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,288

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    The infamous "Third Wave" of Japanese Naval aircraft was never sent against Pear Harbor. That was the main attack wave that was to target primarily the oil facilities. They of course would have used bombs rather than just ineffectual 7.7mm machine gun fire. IIRC, the main problem for the Japanese Navy was that they were to have been launched late in the day, and it would have been dark as they returned making it a rather dicey preposition for the IJN as they did not have much, if any, practice in nighttime carrier landings.

    A Third Wave also exposed the fleet to greater risk of a counter strike by the missing USN carriers, or even surviving land based aircraft at Pearl. Not that many USAAC aircraft were left, but the Japanese would have to assume that a credible force might have been assembled. Also, the Japanese suffered a large majority of their casualties in the second attack wave from increasingly accurate ground fire, as Navy and Army AAA gunners were more awake and grew more proficient after the First Wave bombed and strafed with near impunity. It was thought a third attack wave would have contended with even greater ground fire may have suffered serious losses of planes, but more importantly, the nearly irreplaceable pilots...
    All correct.

    Plus Admiral Nagumo was concerned that the long turn around time to mount the third strike exposed his fleet to the risk of US carrier or land based air attacks, while his fleet
    was about at the end of its logistical tether and he feared that further action and the associated delay might have jeopardised the safe return of the fleet to Japan.

    However, those who claim that the Japanese recognised the importance of destroying the oil and maintenance facilities by planning for the third wave ignore the fact that if Japan had seen those facilities as the priority then they would have been attacked in the first wave when Japan had the advantage of surprise.

    The oil storages etc were not a priority in Japan's ill thought out attack.

    EDIT: Japan's attack was not 'ill thought out' but was well planned and executed to the extent that its aim was to prevent the USN steaming from Hawaii to interfere in Japan's assaults on Malaya, the Philippines and the NEI, although for reasons beyond Japan's control the US carriers it most needed to destroy weren't at Pearl Harbor.

    However, as longer term strategy it was 'ill thought out' not to force the US fleet back to the US West Coast by destroying the oil storages and other facilities on Pearl, which would have given Japan a much greater breathing space while advancing southwards to the NEI and was a much more sensible plan. And that would have applied regardless of whether or not the US carriers were at Pearl as they would have had to return to the West Coast if denied fuel at Hawaii.

    Separate issue: if the carriers couldn't refuel at Pearl if Japan had destroyed the oil there, did the carriers have enough fuel to reach the West Coast or would they have needed oilers to come out them them?
    Last edited by Rising Sun*; 05-18-2016 at 10:50 AM.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Buffalo, New York
    Posts
    7,413

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    Or did the Japanese have some sort of inane hope that THEY would shortly capture the fuel oil at Pear for their use?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    delft
    Posts
    126

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    Quote Originally Posted by Rising Sun* View Post

    It would be refreshing to see you post without being a sarcastic smart arse, and more so when you are hopelessly wrong as in your last post.
    WHat the fokk are you on about ? ARSE ? ARSE ????
    and "you are wrong " ???
    YOu make it personal ...why ?

    You want it personal ?:
    you dipshit armchair failed in life amateur douchebag.


    Look at this " These failures might be contrasted with the success of the British Commonwealth forces in suppressing the communists during the Malayan Emergency. (And, for cynics like me, anyone want to know why it was called an Emergency rather than a war? I haven’t been able to verify it as accurate,"...
    WHO IS ASKING FOR MALAYAN AFTER WW2 SHIT ???????
    AND WHO IS ASKING FOR YOUR OPINION ON AFTER WAR MALAYAN SHIT ???

    (and that is just ONE of your ill conceived contemptuous remarks and just bark into the air thoughts)


    and what about this:
    Comment: The absence of clearly defined strategy and aims has seen plenty of other powers come unstuck since, notably the US and its allies in Vietnam; the USSR in Afghanistan; and the US and its allies in the last version of Iraq. These failures might be contrasted with the success of the British Commonwealth forces

    OH yeah? EVERYBODY fails in this world EXCEPT THE MOTHERFOKKING AWESOME BRITISH EMPIRE ...(btw also failed in Afghanistan in 19th c..you fool)
    YOu arrogant TWAT.
    How the FOK can you compare STRATEGY concepts in coldwar GLOBAL affairs in Vietnam, afghanistan with a LOCAL small scale uprising of SOME handfull of communists in Malaya !!! STRATEGY ??? in Malaya ???
    That is at a scale of POLICING action in Belfast !
    Last edited by Frankly Dude Really; 05-19-2016 at 04:33 AM.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    delft
    Posts
    126

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    or this :

    "Despite basing its attack on the lessons of Taranto where the British succeeded in damaging enemy ships in a shallow harbour, the IJN sunk very few US ships. Most were grounded in the shallow harbour and later returned to service (for example, IIRC, about six of the eight US battleships supposedly sunk by the IJN at Pearl returned to service "..

    Well, have a look at Taranto: The italian damaged ships didnot sink deep in the water , hey ?
    1 battleship lost
    2 battleships heavily damaged
    1 heavy cruiser slightly damaged
    2 destroyers slightly damaged
    2 aircraft destroyed on the ground
    (actually, the above list is NOT AT ALL intimidating..ppfff)


    So why is it then that the italian vessels were NOT repaired (..in time...) and the US ships in PH were repaired ????
    Is it because the Brrrrrritish were MARVELlous ? and smart and keen and brilliant warriors ???? AND THE JAPANESE SUCKED COMPARED TO THE BRITISH ???
    NO!
    It is because the italians HAD NO RESOURCES IN MONEY,MANPOWER, RAW MATERIAL, AND INTEREST TO LIFT AND REPAIR THESE DAMAGED VESSELS AND THE USA IN CONTRAST DID HAVE THE VAST RESOURCES !!!!

    And this is just another one of the examples of your short sightedness, arrogance and contempt of other nation's efforts and peoples, rising sun.



    add info:
    "Littorio was repaired with all available resources and was fully operational again within four months, while restoration of the older battleships proceeded at a much slower pace (repairs took seven months for Caio Duilio, and the repairs for Conte di Cavour were never completed)".

    WOW just WOW. Littorio repaired in FOUR months and OPERATIONAL during the war.
    Shows that YOU Rising SUn , talk CRAPP.
    Last edited by Frankly Dude Really; 05-19-2016 at 04:54 AM.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,288

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    Or did the Japanese have some sort of inane hope that THEY would shortly capture the fuel oil at Pear for their use?
    I doubt it.

    The third wave was intended to destroy the oil storages. They survived only because of the abandonment of the third wave.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    delft
    Posts
    126

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    and to all you self repeating armchair suckers, wrt "strategic blunder" of not bombing oil tanks at PH;
    again I repeat:
    The United States, was a major producer of oil ;1.35 billion barrels a year in 1940, 63% of world production.
    SIXTY THREE PERCENT !!!

    EVEN if the tanks at PH were blown, it is REPAIRED (simple steel containers) within 3 months, and the oil "losses" is restocked in the same time or even faster (all you need is four oil tankers in harbour).
    It is safe to say that the oil "losses" of PH are QUICKER restored than the wrecked Battleships in PH .



    And for the advanced strategic "class"; again my repetition of the STRATEGIC alternative (suggestion):
    HAd Japan attacked ONLY DEI , the resulting war with USA would have been MORE favourable to the IJN than as it did now.
    Yes, or no ...debate.
    (instead of repeating the same shit all over about what Japan did wrong with PH...djeeesh).

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,288

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    Quote Originally Posted by Frankly Dude Really View Post
    WHat the fokk are you on about ? ARSE ? ARSE ????
    and "you are wrong " ???
    YOu make it personal ...why ?

    You want it personal ?:
    you dipshit armchair failed in life amateur douchebag.


    Look at this " These failures might be contrasted with the success of the British Commonwealth forces in suppressing the communists during the Malayan Emergency. (And, for cynics like me, anyone want to know why it was called an Emergency rather than a war? I haven’t been able to verify it as accurate,"...
    WHO IS ASKING FOR MALAYAN AFTER WW2 SHIT ???????
    AND WHO IS ASKING FOR YOUR OPINION ON AFTER WAR MALAYAN SHIT ???

    (and that is just ONE of your ill conceived contemptuous remarks and just bark into the air thoughts)


    and what about this:
    Comment: The absence of clearly defined strategy and aims has seen plenty of other powers come unstuck since, notably the US and its allies in Vietnam; the USSR in Afghanistan; and the US and its allies in the last version of Iraq. These failures might be contrasted with the success of the British Commonwealth forces

    OH yeah? EVERYBODY fails in this world EXCEPT THE MOTHERFOKKING AWESOME BRITISH EMPIRE ...(btw also failed in Afghanistan in 19th c..you fool)
    YOu arrogant TWAT.
    How the FOK can you compare STRATEGY concepts in coldwar GLOBAL affairs in Vietnam, afghanistan with a LOCAL small scale uprising of SOME handfull of communists in Malaya !!! STRATEGY ??? in Malaya ???
    That is at a scale of POLICING action in Belfast !
    Thank you for that well reasoned and valuable contribution to the discussion, ably supported by historical evidence.

    After reading your concise and penetrating insights into history, not to mention your concise and penetrating analysis of me, I am sure that all members will agree that you are correct and I was wrong.

    On a personal note, I resent your description of me as an amateur douchebag. I am widely regarded as a professional douchebag.
    Last edited by Rising Sun*; 05-19-2016 at 05:22 AM. Reason: Post interrupted as I had to clean out my douchebag
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,288

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    Quote Originally Posted by Frankly Dude Really View Post
    and to all you self repeating armchair suckers, wrt "strategic blunder" of not bombing oil tanks at PH;
    again I repeat:
    The United States, was a major producer of oil ;1.35 billion barrels a year in 1940, 63% of world production.
    SIXTY THREE PERCENT !!!

    EVEN if the tanks at PH were blown, it is REPAIRED (simple steel containers) within 3 months, and the oil "losses" is restocked in the same time or even faster (all you need is four oil tankers in harbour).
    It is safe to say that the oil "losses" of PH are QUICKER restored than the wrecked Battleships in PH .



    And for the advanced strategic "class"; again my repetition of the STRATEGIC alternative (suggestion):
    HAd Japan attacked ONLY DEI , the resulting war with USA would have been MORE favourable to the IJN than as it did now.
    Yes, or no ...debate.
    (instead of repeating the same shit all over about what Japan did wrong with PH...djeeesh).
    I think you should have stopped with your previous post, parts of which were coherent.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    9,288

    Default Re: 1937 Newspaper Accurately Predicted Pearl Harbor Attack

    Quote Originally Posted by Nickdfresh View Post
    Or did the Japanese have some sort of inane hope that THEY would shortly capture the fuel oil at Pear for their use?
    Good article at http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~tpilsch/IN...ar=Donovan.pdf

    The author's opening quotation is wrong, as amateurs talk tactics rather than strategy, but the rest of it is a sound treatment of the oil issue.
    Last edited by Rising Sun*; 05-19-2016 at 05:52 AM.
    ..
    A rational army would run away.
    Montesquieu

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •