[Timesink]

The thing I find most goofy about the "FDR knew" debate is that everyone knew the Japanese were likely to attack. What people didn't know was where.

The thing I find most goofy about the "Bush knew" debate is that everyone knew Al-Qaeda were likely to attack. What people didn't know was where.

The more things change...

[colorado tanker]

LOL! Excellent point.

[tcuoohjohn]

Yes...I have found that if you take the word " conspiracy" and substitiute " incompetence" many things become very clear and explainable. Incompetence is a ubiguitous phenomenon in the modern world. Effective conspiracy is much less prevalent.

Most of the theories about " FDR Knew" require the cooperation of hundreds or thousands of people to accomplish. The success of a conspiracy is inversely proportional to the number of people particpating in the conspiracy.

Incompetence on the other hand doesn't require a large number of people to accomplish. All it requires is laggard leadership on the Strategic and Tactical level. It was abundantly clear to me that there was incompetence at Pearl Harbor ( Kimmel and Short) and in Washington ( Marshall and Stark). Incompetence however is not conspiracy.

[tcuoohjohn]

Yes...I have found that if you take the word " conspiracy" and substitiute " incompetence" many things become very clear and explainable. Incompetence is a ubiguitous phenomenon in the modern world. Effective conspiracy is much less prevalent.

Most of the theories about " FDR Knew" require the cooperation of hundreds or thousands of people to accomplish. The success of a conspiracy is inversely proportional to the number of people particpating in the conspiracy.

Incompetence on the other hand doesn't require a large number of people to accomplish. All it requires is laggard leadership on the Strategic and Tactical level. It was abundantly clear to me that there was incompetence at Pearl Harbor ( Kimmel and Short) and in Washington ( Marshall and Stark). Incompetence however is not conspiracy.