Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

HAWAII NAVAL, ARMY, AIR COMMANDERS OUSTED; ENEMY LANDS IN BORNEO, HARRIED AT HONG KONG (12/18/41)
Microfilm-New York Times archives, Monterey Public Library | 12/18/41 | Charles Hurd, V.H.C. Jarrett, F.Tillman Durdin, Daniel T. Brigham, Hanson W. Baldwin

Posted on 12/18/2011 6:42:56 AM PST by Homer_J_Simpson

Photobucket

2

Photobucket

3

Photobucket

4

Photobucket

5

Photobucket

6

Photobucket

7

Photobucket

8

Photobucket

9

Photobucket

10

Photobucket

11

Photobucket

12

Photobucket

13

Photobucket

14

Photobucket

15

Photobucket



TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: milhist; realtime; worldwarii
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last
To: fso301; Stevenc131; CougarGA7

In today’s (12/20) installment of his series on Pearl Harbor Hanson W. Baldwin identifies as a question for the newly formed investigating board how the Japanese fleet got so close to Hawaii without being detected. Baldwin assumes there was a dawn to dusk, 360 degree air patrol covering all approaches to the islands. He figures the Japanese either got lucky with bad weather or else used some form of trickery. It does not occur to him that there was virtually no air recon.


21 posted on 12/20/2011 4:33:53 PM PST by Homer_J_Simpson ("Every nation has the government that it deserves." - Joseph de Maistre (1753-1821))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GreenLanternCorps; Stevenc131; Homer_J_Simpson
MacArthur and Brereton I have ranted on before, they both should have lost their jobs on December 8th.

I requested details of you in Homer's thread JAPANESE FORCES WIPED OUT IN WESTERN LUZON; MIDWAY, WAKE RESIST; 3 ITALIAN CRUISERS SUNK (12/14/41) but you have not yet replied to that thread so, I will ask again. What first hand participants who were in the Philippine area in 1941/42 agree with your assessment of MacArthur? Given the way SHTF in the Philippines and the natural tendency to point fingers, if you are correct, it should not be difficult to produce a substantial list of ranking officers who were in the Philippines that support your position.

22 posted on 12/20/2011 6:52:28 PM PST by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Homer_J_Simpson
Baldwin assumes there was a dawn to dusk, 360 degree air patrol covering all approaches to the islands.

The moon was full on Dec 3, 1941 meaning on the night of 12/6-12/7, there would still be quite a bit of moonlight in whose reflection an approaching fleet would clearly stand out from considerable distance.

http://www.timeanddate.com/calendar/moonphases.html?year=1941&n=103

23 posted on 12/20/2011 7:33:22 PM PST by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: fso301; Stevenc131; CougarGA7; Homer_J_Simpson
fso301: "All long range observation aircraft sitting on the ground in just one photo of one airfield at Pearl Harbor.
If these didn't belong to Short, who did they belong to and why were they sitting on the ground?"

The argument in defense of Short and Kimmel on this goes as follows:

  1. Short was specifically warned to defend against sabotage, not against a Japanese air attack.

  2. Short fully reported his defensive dispositions to higher-ups in Washington, who made no objections.

  3. Hawaii's commanders had been ordered to maintain a training schedule, not 360 degrees of long-range patrol.

  4. Due to a shortage of aircraft maintenance parts, instituting long range patrols would quickly reduce the Hawaiian air forces to junk-in-the-hanger.
Therefore, it was necessary for commanders in Hawaii to have D A T A suggesting a Japanese attack was likely before they committed their valuable air resources to a program of 360 degree long-range patrols.

And of course, they never received such data.

In recent years, some have pointed to an alleged confusion in the state of alert reported by Short to Washington.
Supposedly, Short's intended report of the lowest state of alert -- defense against sabotage -- was interpreted in Washington as his highest state of alert, meaning full-fledged war footing.

I've seen those allegations, but the actual evidence shows Short reporting exactly what he did -- alert against sabotage.

24 posted on 12/22/2011 6:18:01 AM PST by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK; Stevenc131; CougarGA7; Homer_J_Simpson
Therefore, it was necessary for commanders in Hawaii to have D A T A suggesting a Japanese attack was likely before they committed their valuable air resources to a program of 360 degree long-range patrols.

I understand your point, I just posted the photo as an example of long range maritime patrol aircraft being available at Pearl Harbor contrary to what had previously been posted.

25 posted on 12/22/2011 6:28:24 AM PST by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: fso301; GreenLanternCorps; Stevenc131; Homer_J_Simpson; CougarGA7
fso301: "What first hand participants who were in the Philippine area in 1941/42 agree with your assessment of MacArthur?
Given the way SHTF in the Philippines and the natural tendency to point fingers, if you are correct, it should not be difficult to produce a substantial list of ranking officers who were in the Philippines that support your position."

Iirc, CougarGA7 did once post a report highlighting MacArthur's inexplicable actions the morning Japanese destroyed his air forces on the ground.
From such reports CougarGA7 and others conclude that MacArthur should have been relieved, just as Short was in Hawaii.

It seems to me there is an interesting comparison between MacArthur and Short.
I think both were Old-Army infantry men, representing institutional disdain for the new air force prima donnas and their useless flying contraptions.
Both saw the "real war" as what infantrymen do, on the ground, after the fly-boys had conviently lost their expensive equipment, and could be redeployed as, yes!, more infantrymen.

Short at least had reasonable sounding excuses for why his planes were not in the air.
MacArthur had none, and yet, there they were, just like Short's, sitting ducks waiting for the Japanese to increase the commanders' real fighting force of infantry men.

Of course, that's just my opinion, doubt if we'll ever really know what those people were thinking.

26 posted on 12/22/2011 6:54:15 AM PST by BroJoeK (a little historical perspective....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: BroJoeK; GreenLanternCorps; Stevenc131; Homer_J_Simpson; CougarGA7
BroJoeK: First of all, I owe you a reply to a different thread in which we had a back and forth about Vatican statements concerning the Nazi treatment of Jews. I'm on holiday schedule and just haven't gotten around to it yet. Perhaps this afternoon.

Iirc, CougarGA7 did once post a report highlighting MacArthur's inexplicable actions the morning Japanese destroyed his air forces on the ground. From such reports CougarGA7 and others conclude that MacArthur should have been relieved, just as Short was in Hawaii.

Short at least had reasonable sounding excuses for why his planes were not in the air. MacArthur had none, and yet, there they were, just like Short's, sitting ducks waiting for the Japanese to increase the commanders' real fighting force of infantry men. Of course, that's just my opinion, doubt if we'll ever really know what those people were thinking.

I will address your belief about MacArthur on Dec 8 but not in this post since I'm on holiday schedule. Hopefully tonight or tomorrow I can get to it as a general post concerning popular belief about MacArthur on Dec 8 versus first hand accounts of what actually happened on Dec 8 in the Philippines. It won't be a large or comprehensive post but I just need a little time to sit down and pull citations from first hand accounts.

27 posted on 12/22/2011 7:13:43 AM PST by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-27 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson