Posted on 12/07/2001 5:01:33 AM PST by jackbill
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:49:36 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
This is very possible.
Not if the aim was to anger the American people enough that they would support American involvement.
Starting with second paragraph:
"It was not to be. No sooner had At Dawn We Slept appeared than it became clear just how much recent important evidence Golstein and Dillon in fact ignored. Their statement that they had searched through all publications released up to May 1, 1981, was simply not the truth -- as later admitted by Golstein, who explained that he and Dillon had relied for this statement on the assuracnes of another historian, Ronald Lewin, that none of the volumninous National Archives Records Service (NARS) and other data released in 1980-81 supported the revisionist view. Even if Lewin wasa right, which he wasn't it was a reflection of Goldstein and Dillon's level of scholarly integrity that they would make a sweeping assertion od up-ro-date accuracy and comprehensiveness on a claim of personal familiarity which was false."
You were saying ...
Point goes to Stinnett.
Your serve.
Note the difference - now look up the "Zimmerman Telegraph."
Note the difference - now look up the "Zimmerman Telegraph."
Note the difference - now look up the "Zimmerman Telegraph."
Note the difference - now look up the "Zimmerman Telegraph."
Note the difference - now look up the "Zimmerman Telegraph."
Your second point ... the desire as posited in McCollum's 8-point memo, and in several diaries (e.g., Stimson, ...) was for the Japanese to strike the first blow .... "First overt act ..." That way absolutely no question about who fired first!!!
On the fish, wooden baffles on the screws ...
I'll need to refresh my memory on that at my parents' home- the family copy is kept there!
WhiskeyPapa, and all others on this thread:
Please accept my apology of my multiple postings of the same reply. No excuse! I am sorry.
"Is there any other file bearing on the Pearl Harbor attack that we have not seen. The lieutenant replied, "Well, there is the 'White House file'." ... My requests to the Secretary and to the President to examine this file were disapproved. We never found out what the file contained."
To my knowledge this "White House file" has ever been found; it is like the famous "Winds Execute" message - here and then GONE !!!
Are there really 60 year old “military secrets” that our government must protect?
Yes very much so...
The NVA dug large caves pointed in the direction US Bombers would normally take heading towards Hanoi.. The planes were subsonic which meant a few guys sitting in the caves would hear the planes approaching before they arrived..Passive Radar nearly 100% effective.
That is an unconventional technique which the NVA were probably most unhappy to have revealed..
We are no different....
Military Doctrine is generally evolutionary vs revolutionary because the consequences of failure are very high so people are generally conservative in their approach to problem solving.. That means the process of decision making does not change as much in 60 years within the Military as 60 years in the civilian world where most decisions will not get you killed and your country destroyed if you make the wrong choice. Just the nature of the secret not even how the intelligence was gathered provides your enemy with an insight into you militaries thought process.
So really, yes, those secrets are still important. If not for the secret itself for the techniques of gathering and the nature of the information which impugns the measure of import placed on that particular aspect of intelligence.
Does that help or confuse?
W
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.