Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Truth About Pearl Harbor: A Debate [Did FDR know about Japan's plans in advance?]
The Independent Institute ^ | 30 January 2003 | Robert B. Stinnett, Stephen Budiansky

Posted on 12/07/2009 7:25:33 AM PST by oblomov

Introductory Remarks:

On December 7, 1941, U.S. military installations at Pearl Harbor in Hawaii were attacked by the Imperial Japanese Navy. Could this tragic event that resulted in over 3,000 Americans killed and injured in a single two-hour attack have been averted?

After 16 years of uncovering documents through the Freedom of Information Act, journalist and historian Robert Stinnett charges in his book, Day of Deceit, that U.S. government leaders at the highest level not only knew that a Japanese attack was imminent, but that they had deliberately engaged in policies intended to provoke the attack, in order to draw a reluctant, peace-loving American public into a war in Europe for good or ill. In contrast, historian and author Stephen Budiansky (see his book, Battle of Wits) believes that such charges are entirely unfounded and are based on misinterpretations of the historical record.

It’s been often said that “Truth is the first casualty of war.” Historians and policy experts now know that the official government claims, including those made by U.S. Presidents, that led to the Spanish-American War, World War I, Vietnam War, Gulf War, and other conflicts were deliberate misrepresentations of the facts in order to rally support for wars that the general public would otherwise not support. Was this also the case regarding the tragedy at Pearl Harbor and the U.S. entry into World War II—or are such charges false? We are very pleased to provide a debate between these two distinguished experts.

(Excerpt) Read more at independent.org ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; Japan
KEYWORDS: conspiracytheory; fdr; godsgravesglyphs; japan; nutters; pages; pearlharbor; presidents; tinfoilalert; wwii
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-271 next last
To: oblomov

Nope and still nope...


121 posted on 12/07/2009 1:09:45 PM PST by LowOiL (Benjamin Rush....I am neither (Republican or Democrat), I am a Christocrat...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WKUHilltopper
Recall who fired the "Shot Heard Around the World" on the Lexington Green from ... oh, a long time ago? O.K., no one knows!

During the period that FDR ordered US Navy actions in the Atlantic which were acts of war by international law (e.g., convoying), several "incidents" somehow happened - say USS GREER, USS REUBEN JAMES, ... and FDR cried "Germany is the aggressor" ...

However, Stark, before the Congress, ... lets it slip that the US Navy fired first. FDR is not happy. No further action is taken by Congress ... they know a bit more of the character of FDR by then.

So ... moving on. Cannot Hitler to take the bait, FDR attempts for "incidents" are shown to be a fraud, ... so on even more, on 26Nov41 is said to US Pacific Fleet ... "This is a war warning. ... Allow Japan to take the first overt action ..." Or, make sure that the entire world cannot question who fired the first shot.

A minor point, but an important point, FDR (as well as Churchill) knew days before the Pearl Harbor attack,that Hilter would declare war on the US if the Japan started a war against the US.

So, 'ems are just some of my dots - you may connect them differently. Please have at it.

Oh, yes, Stark was a great supporter of "Europe First" ... but that is another path ("Stark: The Architect of Victory")

122 posted on 12/07/2009 1:29:00 PM PST by jamaksin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: gman992

“where Vietnam had no resources worth fighting over”

The French were there because of the rubber trees. And we were there, to some degree, because the French had been, I think.


123 posted on 12/07/2009 1:47:12 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

Not to change the subject, but I just read an interesting article on the LA Times that suggested that one of the midget-subs got her fish off and possibly sank the Oklahoma or hit the West Virginia. NOVA is apparently doing a program on it.


124 posted on 12/07/2009 1:47:27 PM PST by WKUHilltopper (Fix bayonets!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

“I always wondered had he not declared war on the US, what would have happened.”

There’s no doubt. Once we were in we were in. They could have pointed to some American tourist who got stuck in Poland and didn’t even die but was moderately inconvenienced for justification. To be in the war was to be in the war. There would never have been a seperate war for Japan.


125 posted on 12/07/2009 1:52:03 PM PST by Tublecane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: jamaksin

You could be right. I know the events leading up to the Spanish American War and the fakery related to Tonken Bay has demonstrated we seem to have a propensity to “make up” things to get us involved militarily. So I guess I shouldn’t be surprised if the same circumstances/thinking couldn’t exist in 1941. The Lusitania could have been a sucker punch too.


126 posted on 12/07/2009 1:53:06 PM PST by WKUHilltopper (Fix bayonets!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: WKUHilltopper
SS LUSITANIA ... another tale of woe, costing 129 American lives.

A. Yes, Wilson and his administration knew she was carrying contraband - making her a legitimate target in a declared war zone.

B. After a British underseas film crew released photographs of her cargo - yup, tons of munitions, the US government "found" the original manifest "behind an old file cabinet." - in 1975.

C. The British Admiralty still to this day has not released all of their SS LUSITANIA material.

D. Where were FDR and Churchill during the SS LUSITANIA sinking?

Finally, just a note ... research the "Zimmerman Telegraph" as the trigger for the US entry into WW I.

127 posted on 12/07/2009 2:12:49 PM PST by jamaksin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies]

To: jamaksin

I’m not a “9/11 was an inside job” type of guy, but now I’m starting to wonder—given our track record.


128 posted on 12/07/2009 3:07:54 PM PST by WKUHilltopper (Fix bayonets!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: oblomov; All

This post of mine may take 5, 10, even 20 or more F5’s ( or refreshes ) to pull up, but it’s still here:

http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a3b07b4310a74.htm
Pearl! Dec. 7, 1941- what really happened?

Culture/Society News
Source: various websites
Published: 5-20-01 Author: the heavy equipment guy


129 posted on 12/07/2009 3:25:27 PM PST by backhoe (All Across America, the Lights are being relit again...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Captain Kirk

What a better world this would be today if a Taft had been elected in ‘14 or ‘40.


130 posted on 12/07/2009 4:51:35 PM PST by nkycincinnatikid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: warsaw44; All

Hitler was fooled into declaring war on us.. From what I heard Japan promised Hitler they would invade the Soviet Union..


131 posted on 12/07/2009 5:03:13 PM PST by KevinDavis (Can't Stop the Signal!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: mvpel; All

But they briefly occupied the Aleutian Islands...


132 posted on 12/07/2009 5:17:33 PM PST by KevinDavis (Can't Stop the Signal!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: nkycincinnatikid; All

No....


133 posted on 12/07/2009 5:20:04 PM PST by KevinDavis (Can't Stop the Signal!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: KevinDavis

Right. I meant ‘12 or ‘40, Thanks!


134 posted on 12/07/2009 5:25:28 PM PST by nkycincinnatikid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: nkycincinnatikid; All

Sure, I think we would have been involved in WWI no matter who was President, as for the later Taft he wanted to ignore the Soviet threat...


135 posted on 12/07/2009 5:31:10 PM PST by KevinDavis (Can't Stop the Signal!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: When do we get liberated?
The relevant article of the Tripartite pact reads this way:

“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.”

Japan was not attacked. Hitler could have refused to declare war on the U.S. after Pearl Harbor, but chose to jump in anyway, ignoring not only his WWI experience of a two front war but taking on both the rest of Europe and the U.S. to boot.

136 posted on 12/07/2009 5:42:37 PM PST by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Tublecane
“You think we wouldn't have fought the Hun had they not declared war on us?”

Probably not, but my point is that there was no certainty. If it was just a matter of letting Pearl Harbor happen, why didn't FDR ask for a declaration of war against Germany on Dec. 8, instead of waiting until after Hitler's declaration on Dec. 11?

137 posted on 12/07/2009 5:51:59 PM PST by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: jamaksin
The passage of that message read “ ... He (Ribbentrop) also said that if Japan were to go to war with America, Germany would, of course, join in immediately, and Hitler's intention was that there should be absolutely no question of Germany making a separate peace with England. ...”

This could have been interpreted that Germany would render assistance as they had with Italy against Libya. Furthermore, what if Ribbentrop was speaking without authority? What if Hitler backed out?

I am not saying the idea that letting the Pearl Harbor attack go forward was not possible, simply that it would have been a gamble and no guarantee of war with Germany.

138 posted on 12/07/2009 6:04:37 PM PST by SoCal Pubbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: StayAt HomeMother; Ernest_at_the_Beach; 1ofmanyfree; 21twelve; 24Karet; 2ndDivisionVet; 31R1O; ...

· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe ·

 
Gods
Graves
Glyphs
Never wondered how the Japanese didn't find any of the carriers at Pearl? Weird coincidence.

Roosevelt was right, AFAIC.To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
 

·Dogpile · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology · Biblical Archaeology Society ·
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·


139 posted on 12/07/2009 6:15:45 PM PST by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/__Since Jan 3, 2004__Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv; Grampa Dave
Ever wondered how the Japanese didn't find any of the carriers at Pearl? Weird coincidence.

First off, thanks Dave for your previous post.

Comms security and radio silence was a boon and and a detriment to the attacking fleet. They were as blind as we were. The intercepted stuff was along diplomatic channels; its import was just a guess when analyzed for early warning and tactical value. Luck had it that the carriers were at sea, nothing less.

If the attack had come a couple weeks later, the Japanese task force wouldn't have had the benefit of sailing under the cover of Pacific storm and been detected but the carriers would have been back in port for the Christmas holidays.

That's all speculation or in Naval terms ...BS.
140 posted on 12/07/2009 6:58:54 PM PST by BIGLOOK (Keelhaul Congress!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 139 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 261-271 next 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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