History Lies. A start at debunking [NRO interviews Larry Schweikart]

NRO ^ | September 09, 2008

[thirst4truth]

Why do teachers/professors become increasingly more liberal the higher one goes in education? There are plenty of conservative kindergarten teachers! Is it because the teachers with higher degrees are exposed to (brainwashed by) Marxist professors longer?

And the students get lower and lower test scores as they go through high school. Grade schools and middle school tests show pretty high then 9th grade and beyond, is pathetic and many drop out.

[neverdem]

BTTT!

[LS]

Am doing a podcast with NRO in about 10 minutes!

[cvq3842]

Thanks - I noticed that when I ordered it on Amazon. good luck with it. :)

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

What really makes me shake my head over the Pearl Harbor conspiracy theory is that it depends on believing that FDR felt he wouldn’t get a declaration of war from Congress if he brought them evidence of a Japanese plan for a surprise attack, or the attack went off and the Navy successfully defended themselves with few losses. You have to believe he thought he could only take us to war if thousands of sailors and Marines were killed, but not if, say, 100 were killed.

I would like to know that you have read The New Dealers' War: FDR and the War Within World War II before you discuss what FDR didn't know and when he didn't know it. And why.

[Mr. Silverback]

Why would I need to read a particular book to know that the idea that we could be attacked by Japan and not declare war is moronic? And why would I care about the opinion of a historian who operates from the ludicrous position that unconditional surrender was too much to ask from the folks who started a war that killed at least 60 million people? He might as well say the Civil War was fought over the outcome of a zoning committee hearing.

Ergo...

NO SALE.

[spacewarp]

I get to ask stupid question of the day.

It says in the article, 49. The response is 49. The book on the Amazon link shows the cover saying 48.

What am I missing?

[NonValueAdded]

Bravo, professor!

[LS]

LOL. You’re not missing anything. K-Lo got the number wrong, and it’s too late to change it. You’ll just have to make do with 48, and I’ll include #49 in volume two.

[LS]

I have indeed read it and found it unconvincing to the central argument. I will repeat what I say in the book. There is zero-—ZERO-—evidence that any American radio listening station or cryptanolist received ONE SINGLE transmission or piece of evidence that the Kido Butai was anywhere near Pearl Harbor. Indeed, they were picking up “chaff” from several Japanese transmitting stations in Japan broadcasting messages designed to make the fleet appear all over the Pacific, but nothing from the fleet itself.

[LS]

A lot of it has to do with the nature of the graduate school system, which winnows out conservatives by topic (i.e., you can’t write about military history, or biography) and forces students into writing “social” or “ethnic” history in order to get a degree. Likewise, once in power in the university faculties, they only hire like-minded people.

[Philo-Junius]

I would argue that Roosevelt knew a Japanese military response to the embargo was nearly certain, but thought it would either be aimed specifically at the Philippines or would be repulsed if aimed at Pearl Harbor.

It’s certainly extremely hard to argue that he knew going to bed on Dec. 6th that the Japanese fleet was on its way to Pearl Harbor.

[conservatism_IS_compassion]

I have indeed read it and found it unconvincing to the central argument. I will repeat what I say in the book. There is zero-—ZERO-—evidence that any American radio listening station or cryptanolist received ONE SINGLE transmission or piece of evidence that the Kido Butai was anywhere near Pearl Harbor. Indeed, they were picking up “chaff” from several Japanese transmitting stations in Japan broadcasting messages designed to make the fleet appear all over the Pacific, but nothing from the fleet itself.

I didn't read the book as saying that FDR knew there would be an attack on Pearl Harbor. Only that the circumstantial evidence suggested that FDR was pretty sure the Japanese would do something on or about December 7 which would not endear them to the American public.

[LS]

Ok. Then that is right-—but I think his point is much deeper than that. I kind of know the guy’s reputation. He’s an FDR hater-—and I’m not fond of FDR, but the notion that FDR orchestrated an attack is silly. Actually, he already had TWO destroyers sunk that he could have used as an excuse to declare war on Germay.

[LS]

Exactly right. The real question is why MacArthur was so incredibly ill prepared in the Philippines. Mac could be great, but like Custer, he could be a boob sometimes.

[Revolting cat!]

Soup-herb!

[BroJoeK]

"I didn't read the book as saying that FDR knew there would be an attack on Pearl Harbor. Only that the circumstantial evidence suggested that FDR was pretty sure the Japanese would do something on or about December 7 which would not endear them to the American public. "

I recommend The Pearl Harbor Myth by George Victor c2007:

Yes, there is no "proof." But there is a lot of suggestive evidence. It can begin conceptually, by understanding the difference between a "provocation" and "deterrence."

Page 168: "From a military viewpoint, the conceptual difference between deterrence and provocation is simple. A force powerful enough to be intimidating tends to deter. A weak force invites attack..."

[Mr. Silverback]

Hmmm...somebody’s ignoring the Congress’ role in our lack or preparedness...and generally making us look like tinfoil hat central.

[LS]

I've read most of these, including the newer ones with supposedly "better" evidence. It's baloney. The only thing to remember is for "FDR to know" mean willing and active complicity by hundreds of cryptanalysts and radio men THEN, and their lying about it for 50 years after the fact. Yet every single one of them tells the same story. There was no advance information.

These guys get a little irate when you start calling them traitors, and that's the ONLY way a conspiracy could have worked. Please check out my endnotes. Phil Jacobsen, a specialist in decoding and WW II radio signals, has written a number of debunkings on these myths.

[Skooz]

bump