Where is FTL???

First topic message reminder :

We miss you....

Brasidas wrote:Yes I was talking about history so was Irn, but clearly you were talking fiction.

But somewhere you and Irn got lost, eh? Talking about how to phrase an idea rather than the idea itself. Bad form.

Brasidas wrote:As I say, all can see for themselves here who has the evidence to back their case, and you have none, just assumptions incorrect information from the time.

So you say Didge. Words are cheap. You have no substance…only grunts of assertions and denials. You appear unwilling to discuss the subject matter.

Brasidas wrote:It was nothing about how to phrase things, you made it clear what you said and back tracked and now lie.
You live without as all can see you did and even worse trying to worm out of it.

Hope you have a good weekend

Didge, at the risk of sounding rude, may I point out that you are still talking about semantics. You obviously have lost interest in history.

You have a good one yourself.

How.....HOW...did this thread go from looking for our beautiful FTL to......aircraft thingamajigs?

A reminder of where we are...

Didge wrote:
...the aircraft Carriers, which two of them at this time were on missions to deliver fighters to Wake and Midway Islands..

Your response was...

Quill wrote:
Fighters could get themselves to Wake I. and Midway I. You don't need capital ships to deliver aircraft, FGS. Use of such a flimsy excused by the authorities, is further evidence that it was all a cover up..

Your response above  clearly shows that it was  ‘aircraft carriers’ you were referring to in your response (capital ships as you called them)  and never about battleships doing the job. Never mind though because you now acknowledge that the only method available to get the fighters to Wake and Midway would be on aircraft carriers because the fighters couldn’t get themselves there as you first claimed. Well done.
So now that that’s that out of the way on with the show.

Quill wrote:
You should be able to answer that yourself.  As the Army Board itself concluded: "...everything that the Japanese were planning to do was known to the United States..." ARMY BOARD, 1944.  

“FDR blinded the commanders at Pearl Harbor and set them up by -
1. denying intelligence to Hawaii (HI)
2. on Nov 27, misleading the commanders into thinking negotiations with Japan were continuing to prevent them from realizing the war was on
3. having false information sent to HI about the location of the Japanese carrier fleet“

Of course the Navy would have a cover story for the absence of the carriers on December 7th.

The idea that Pearl Harbor was an ideal target for a Taranto-style attack was well known.  The US Navy itself had in fact attacked Pearl Harbor in war exercises.  And...

“A Navy report by Bellinger and Martin predicted that if Japan made war on the US, they would strike Pearl Harbor without warning at dawn with aircraft from a maximum of 6 carriers.

“For years Navy planners had assumed that Japan, on the outbreak of war, would strike the American fleet wherever it was. The fleet was the only threat to Japan's plans. Logically, Japan couldn't engage in any major operation with the American fleet on its flank. The strategic options for the Japanese were not unlimited.

“On 23 Jun 1941 advisor Harold Ickes wrote FDR a memo the day after Germany invaded the Soviet Union,

"There might develop from the embargoing of oil to Japan such a situation as would make it not only possible but easy to get into this war in an effective way. And if we should thus indirectly be brought in, we would avoid the criticism that we had gone in as an ally of communistic Russia."

Clearly, preparations were being contemplated.  Having aircraft carriers ‘otherwise occupied’ would be the least of the worries. ..

What a load of nonsense that lot is at the top of that post. Far from being a knowledgeable historian for that era you just rely on fiction and conspiracy instead of fact. It’s a good try Quill but time you gave up trying to get yourself out of the mess you have ended up in by using misinformation, twisting what people are saying and using a whole load of meaningless words to disguise what you originally said.

So can I ask again - who issued the orders for the carriers to deliver the fighters to Wake and Midway?

eddie wrote:How.....HOW...did this thread go from looking for our beautiful FTL to......aircraft thingamajigs?

Quill stated that he never loses a historical argument to anyone. Didge rightly disputed this and gave him examples where he had lost and since then Quill has been running around trying to prove Didge wrong - which he isn't.

Original Quill wrote:

Brasidas wrote:Oh well not able to post up the poor lies he claimed I made.

Nothing to refute any of my facts.

Nothing to back with evidence that Aircraft Carriers were seen as Capital ships before Pearl Harbour, when they were classed as scouting ships. Ignoring all the evidence of Hitler planning to go to war with America.

The lists are endless and if people refuse to acknowledge facts, as Quill is doing when all his arguments are based off assumptions, then there is no point debating. He even failed to see the memo on the Taranto attack.

I think you are cool Quill but here you have been utterly dishonest and poor. The facts are there for all to see you got thing wrong, and I am not going to go around in circles again.

Laters

On the basis of semantics?  You are quite a wordsmith, to be sure Didge.  

But this was not supposed to ba a discussion about how to phrase things.  It was to be a discussion about history.  You seem to have ignored history, in the discussion as well as in life.  

Do you see why I tire of these gotcha games on threads?  They are not worthy of me.  You and Irn go at Toms and nicko all the time in this way, so I guess y'all love this stuff.  However, I was trained as an academic...and love of the subject matter is the only way to develop the theories and interpretations.

More lies. I have never been having a go at Tommy or Nicko in the way you suggest. I may not agree with a lot of what they say but any exchanges between us has always been civil and never abusive in any way.

You really are trying to dig the dirt now and rope in some others but I suppose that's what happens when your argument has hit the buffers and you have nothing else to offer.

If you are looking for someone who is always having a go at these two posters I would suggest you look to one of your friends for that

Give up Quill. Let it go and just accept that you made a big mistake. It's the way forward and there is no shame in doing just that.

Irn Bru wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

On the basis of semantics?  You are quite a wordsmith, to be sure Didge.  

But this was not supposed to ba a discussion about how to phrase things.  It was to be a discussion about history.  You seem to have ignored history, in the discussion as well as in life.  

Do you see why I tire of these gotcha games on threads?  They are not worthy of me.  You and Irn go at Toms and nicko all the time in this way, so I guess y'all love this stuff.  However, I was trained as an academic...and love of the subject matter is the only way to develop the theories and interpretations.

More lies. I have never been having a go at Tommy or Nicko in the way you suggest. I may not agree with a lot of what they say but any exchanges between us has always been civil and never abusive in any way.

You really are trying to dig the dirt now and rope in some others but I suppose that's what happens when your argument has hit the buffers and you have nothing else to offer.

If you are looking for someone who is always having a go at these two posters I would suggest you look to one of your friends for that

Give up Quill. Let it go and just accept that you made a big mistake. It's the way forward and there is no shame in doing just that.

Frankly Irn, I'm generally rooting for you when you and Didge are in 'Internet-combat' with Toms and nicko.  I'm a proud liberal.  One of the reasons why I don't join in is because I am much less knowledgeable about British politics that y'all.  But the other reason is that I like to deal in facts and truth.  Y'all (Brits) are always reducing your debates down to semantic free-for-alls.  That's not what I was trained to do.

This time you and Didge have done the same thing on me, on a subject much less political.  Once again, I find it uncomfortable to be in one of these he-said-she-said-they-said-we-said-you-said kind of merry-go-round.  I like to stick to the facts of a subject, and leave the rhetoric to others.  To me, it doesn't matter how one puts forward his point, as long as he makes his point.  

And if it turns out two people misunderstood one another, well I can accept clarification.  The issue is before them, not inside them.  But you and Didge revel in jumping on someone for these kinds of rhetorical tangles.  In politics they call them gotchas...and you and Didge are usually talking politics with Tommy and nicko, so It goes unnoticed generally.  But it is decidedly not the way to discuss academic matters.  This is not Rush Limbaugh's radio program.

Cheers...

Dear me, so now deflection bringing in other posters to a debate to deflect away from his massive errors and proving he is trying to divert away now the fact he has been proven wrong.
I find that dishonest in every way to be honest and Quill you are digging an even bigger hole coming out without being able to provide any evidence to your points or the fact countless academics would laugh at your disposition.

You have at every turn ignored all the evidence, the factual evidence that is of the time which clearly disproves your hypothesis. The reality is your views have been formed from assumptions on your part and even worse these assumptions clearly do not understand US Navy polices within the war and pre-war period. There is nothing to even suggest Roosevelt had some grand scheme to entice Germany and Japan into war, where again Germany had already planned to go to war with America in the future. It ignores how he could have placed much of allied shipping in the paths of U-boats. It ignores the Japanese policies and the advances of German wins. Your view clearly speak in hindsight to events, not taking a view of how events were seen at that given time.

You are boring the fuck out of me now with your pathetic and childish excuses, if you cannot concede that is your issue, but you are making yourself look a right infantile dick and not someone who claims to be an academic, far from it in fact.

Irn Bru wrote:A reminder of where we are...

Didge wrote:
...the aircraft Carriers, which two of them at this time were on missions to deliver fighters to Wake and Midway Islands..

Your response was...

Quill wrote:
Fighters could get themselves to Wake I. and Midway I. You don't need capital ships to deliver aircraft, FGS. Use of such a flimsy excused by the authorities, is further evidence that it was all a cover up..

Your response above  clearly shows that it was  ‘aircraft carriers’ you were referring to in your response (capital ships as you called them)  and never about battleships doing the job. Never mind though because you now acknowledge that the only method available to get the fighters to Wake and Midway would be on aircraft carriers because the fighters couldn’t get themselves there as you first claimed. Well done.
So now that that’s that out of the way on with the show.

I'm glad you cleared that up.  What you also made clear was that ferrying aircraft to Wake I. and Midway I. was a ruse.  You don't use combat ready aircraft carriers for ferrying aircraft.  It would be like using a Rolls Royce for pizza deliveries.  You have what they call escort carriers, or baby flattops for that duty.

Didge was urging the absurd claim that the US was serious when they put out the cover story that these huge, full-sized, combat ready aircraft carriers were being used as taxis for planes.  Sometimes it's not just the nature of the cover up, but the extreme absurdity of the claim that reveals the falsity.

Irn Bru wrote:

Quill wrote:
You should be able to answer that yourself.  As the Army Board itself concluded: "...everything that the Japanese were planning to do was known to the United States..." ARMY BOARD, 1944.  

“FDR blinded the commanders at Pearl Harbor and set them up by -
1. denying intelligence to Hawaii (HI)
2. on Nov 27, misleading the commanders into thinking negotiations with Japan were continuing to prevent them from realizing the war was on
3. having false information sent to HI about the location of the Japanese carrier fleet“

Of course the Navy would have a cover story for the absence of the carriers on December 7th.

The idea that Pearl Harbor was an ideal target for a Taranto-style attack was well known.  The US Navy itself had in fact attacked Pearl Harbor in war exercises.  And...

“A Navy report by Bellinger and Martin predicted that if Japan made war on the US, they would strike Pearl Harbor without warning at dawn with aircraft from a maximum of 6 carriers.

“For years Navy planners had assumed that Japan, on the outbreak of war, would strike the American fleet wherever it was. The fleet was the only threat to Japan's plans. Logically, Japan couldn't engage in any major operation with the American fleet on its flank. The strategic options for the Japanese were not unlimited.

“On 23 Jun 1941 advisor Harold Ickes wrote FDR a memo the day after Germany invaded the Soviet Union,

"There might develop from the embargoing of oil to Japan such a situation as would make it not only possible but easy to get into this war in an effective way. And if we should thus indirectly be brought in, we would avoid the criticism that we had gone in as an ally of communistic Russia."

Clearly, preparations were being contemplated.  Having aircraft carriers ‘otherwise occupied’ would be the least of the worries. ..

What a load of nonsense that lot is at the top of that post. Far from being a knowledgeable historian for that era you just rely on fiction and conspiracy instead of fact. It’s a good try Quill but time you gave up trying to get yourself out of the mess you have ended up in by using misinformation, twisting what people are saying and using a whole load of meaningless words to disguise what you originally said.

So can I ask again - who issued the orders for the carriers to deliver the fighters to Wake and Midway?

No one.  It was a cover story, stupid.  Jeeze, I've finally met a Scot who lacks intelligence.  But then, Edinburgh is not real Scotland.

The whole point of this discussion is that it was all a ruse.  Here are the logical points of the debate:

1. Roosevelt and Churchill wanted the US in Europe's war.

2. Congress wanted to say out and passed the Neutrality Act prohibiting.

3. Roosevelt could not violate the Neutrality Act, so he had to nullify its effect.

4.  Germany, Italy and Japan entered into the Tripartite Pact, stating that if one of them went to war with any outside nation, all three would commit to war against the same nation.

5. Roosevelt saw his opportunity to nullify the Neutrality Act if in fact he positioned the US as the innocent victim of an attack by one of the signatories of the Tripartite Act.

6.  The easiest way to goad a nation into attacking the US was to provoke Japan, which had expansionist aims on the western Pacific.

Now, let’s pause for a reprise here.  For the first two decades of the 20th-century, the big powers had been in a race to build the most and best of what were considered the ‘capital’ ships, the huge steel dreadnaught battleships.  It was thought that they were the future of the navy warfare.  However, some countries including the US had been experimenting with a novel idea, namely to fly an aircraft off and onto the deck of a ship…the difficult problem being landing.  In January 1911 a pilot named Eugene Ely flew a Curtiss landed pusher plane on the deck of the USS Pennsylvania in San Francisco Bay, to become the first to do so.  After such experience, navies began to modify decks to make landing fields atop ships.  The aircraft carrier was born.

For a few decades from 1911 to 1940, aircraft flown off ships were used for reconnoitering missions, not for combat.  In November 1940 the British used biplanes off the deck of the HMS Illustrious to sink Italian ships in Taranto Harbor, thus first establishing the notion that aircraft carriers were actual weapons of war.  The phenomenal success of Taranto so shocked the big powers that within weeks navies all over the world were designing ways to utilize this new weapon.  Indeed, as mentioned, the US was using Pearl Harbor as a model for exercises; so was Japan, unfortunately.  During the year 1940, navies all around the world rushed to reequip battleship hulls with flight decks in an effort to create new naval air forces.  Overnight aircraft carriers became the new gems of all great navies.

To resume:

7. In order to goad the Japanese into declaring war on the US, Roosevelt began a series of audacious and intimidating moves, including moving the Pacific Fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor, half a world closer to Japan.  

8.  Roosevelt’s biggest problem was to make the pending, anticipated attack on Pearl Harbor look genuine, so that he would not be beset by critics in Congress who would descend like wolves if they smelt the ruse to do an end-run on the Neutrality Act.

9.  But, in effect, Roosevelt was using the US fleet as bait for the Japanese fish.  In this context, Roosevelt had a secondary, perhaps bigger problem: keep the Pacific Fleet viable.  He hoped the US military would acquit itself in an attack, but at a minimum he could not risk the four new ships that had just recently proved themselves the most valuable assets afloat: the aircraft carriers Enterprise, Lexington, Saratoga and Yorktown.

10.  So the plan was to devise ‘other assignments’ that would conveniently keep the mighty aircraft carriers otherwise busy, busy, busy…

11.  USS Yorktown was assigned to the Atlantic Ocean, for anti-submarine duty, essentially the task of a destroyer escort.

12.  USS Enterprise, was to ferry 12 Grumman F4F-3 Wildcats of Marine Fighting Squadron (VMF) 211 to Wake Island. A whole mighty aircraft carrier to taxi a mere 12- aircraft?!  Upon completion of the mission on 4 December, she was to set course to return to Pearl Harbor. Dawn on 7 December 1941 found TF-8 about 215 miles west of Oahu.  How convenient.

13. USS  Lexington was a part of a task force which sailed from Pearl to ferry 18 Vought SB2U-3 Vindicators of Marine Scout Bombing Squadron 231 to Midway Island.  A few more aircraft, but still incomprehensible.

14.  The USS Saratoga, having recently completed an overhaul at the Puget Sound Navy Yard, Bremerton, Washington, reached NAS San Diego [North Island] late in the forenoon watch on 7 December.  If the Fleet was in Pearl, what was Saratoga doing sailing to San Diego?  Again, it doesn't make sense.

So you see it doesn’t matter who exactly divined up these plans to make the aircraft carriers go missing on the crucial weekend of December 7, 1941.  All that mattered was that they saved the vital elements of the Pacific Fleet on the convenient date of the attack.  America, Congress and the people, were so pissed off at the Japanese that they never stopped to notice the odd coincidence.  Didge still can’t believe it.

15.  Germany quietly declared war on the US on December 11, 1941 and the plan worked perfectly.

Flaw one and do not need to do anymore.

Bellinger view was dismissed by the U Navy


http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_conspiracy_theory







The Theory:

Conspiracy theories didn't begin with Kennedy. Look back through history and you'll find that any time some disgruntled foreign agent ever committed an atrocity on American soil, there were people screaming "false flag!" -- meaning the government intentionally staged the attack to drum up support for some kind of evil foreign policy, or, at the very least, intentionally let it happen for the same reason.
Take Pearl Harbor. After the Japanese air force launched a surprise attack on the American fleet in 1941, it became a widespread belief among conspiracy authors that President Roosevelt knew the attack was going to take place, but allowed it to go ahead. Why? Quite simply, he had a hard-on for war with Germany, but didn't have the public support for it. Since Hitler had signed a pact with Japan, war with either of them meant war with both, and allowing everyone at Pearl Harbor to be murdered would give FDR all the public support he needed to enter the war. He could spank Hitler's ass while still looking like the victim.

The Simple Misunderstanding:

The Tripartite Pact, the pact between Japan, Germany, and Italy, was a defensive alliance only. That means Hitler was under no obligation to attack the United States just because his idiot friends did.

Of course, Germany did declare war after Pearl Harbor, but it had nothing to do with the idea that Hitler's hand was forced by some deal he had with Japan. Instead, he cited the Lend-Lease Act and American naval activity as his reasons. That's because Roosevelt was already pissing Hitler off by ordering his destroyers to sink German submarines on sight while at the same time escorting boatloads of weapons and supplies to Hitler's enemies.

It's true that Roosevelt was pretty keen to enter the war against Germany ... to the point where he actually didn't want to go to war with Japan because a war in the Pacific would distract him from his German hate-boner.



Read more: http://www.cracked.com/article_20466_5-conspiracy-theories-that-are-shockingly-easy-to-debunk.html#ixzz3KUBg47Qg

Official U.S. war warnings[edit]
In late November 1941, both the U.S. Navy and Army sent explicit war with Japan warnings to all Pacific commands. Although these plainly stated the high probability of imminent war with Japan, and instructed recipients to be accordingly on alert for war, they did not mention the likelihood of an attack on Pearl Harbor itself, instead focusing on the Far East. Washington forwarded none of the raw intelligence it had, and little of its intelligence estimates (after analysis), to Hawaiian commanders, Admiral Husband E. Kimmel and General Walter C. Short. Washington did not solicit their views about likelihood of war or Hawaiian special concerns. Washington's war warning messages have also been criticised by some (e.g., the U.S. Army Pearl Harbor Board - "Do/Don't Messages") as containing "conflicting and imprecise" language.

Since the Army was officially responsible for the security of the Pearl Harbor facilities and Hawaiian defense generally, and so of the Navy's ships while in port, Army actions are of particular interest. Short reported to Washington he had increased his alert level (but his earlier change in meaning for those levels was not understood in Washington and led to misunderstanding there about what he was really doing). In addition, Short's main concern was sabotage from fifth columnists (expected to precede the outbreak of war for decades preceding the attack),[103] which accounts for his orders that Army Air Corps planes be parked close together near the center of the airfields. There seems to have been no increased Army urgency about getting its existing radar equipment properly integrated with the local command and control in the year it had been available and operational in Hawaii before the attack. Leisurely radar training continued and the recently organized early warning center was left minimally staffed. Anti-aircraft guns remained in a state of low readiness, with ammunition in secured lockers. Neither Army long range bombers nor Navy PBYs were used effectively, remaining on a peacetime maintenance and use schedule. Short evidently failed to understand he had the responsibility to defend the fleet.[104] In Short's defense, it should be noted he had training responsibilities to meet, and the best patrol aircraft, B-17s and B-24s, were in demand in the Philippines and Britain, both of which had higher priority.

Little was done to prepare for air attack. Inter-service rivalries between Kimmel and Short did not improve the situation. Particularly, most intelligence information was sent to Kimmel, assuming he would relay it to Short, and vice versa; this assumption was honored mostly in the breach. Hawaii did not have a Purple cipher machine (although, by agreement at the highest levels between U.S. and UK cryptographic establishments, four had been delivered to the British by October 1941), so Hawaii remained dependent on Washington for intelligence from that (militarily limited) source. However, since Short had no liaison with Kimmel's intelligence staff, he was usually left out of the loop. Henry Clausen reported the war warnings could not be more precise because Washington could not risk Japan guessing the U.S. was reading important parts of their traffic (i.e., most importantly Purple, despite the fact there was no known tactical or strategic info in that traffic), as well as the fact neither was cleared to receive Purple; Clausen does not answer why Washington could not have said "an exceptionally reliable source" was involved, with very strong instructions to pay attention.

Additionally, Clausen claims military men of Kimmel and Short's seniority and background should have understood the significance of the warnings, and should have been more vigilant than they were, as for instance in scouting plane flights from Hawaii, which were partial at best in the period just before the attack. All other Pacific commands took appropriate measures for their situations.

Like most commentators, Clausen ignores what the "war warnings" (and their context) explicitly warn, though indistinctly, against. Washington, with more complete intelligence than any field command, expected an attack anywhere on a list of possible locations (Pearl Harbor not among them), and since the Japanese were already committed to Thailand, it seems to have been expected another major operation by them was impossible. Clausen, like most, also ignores what actions Kimmel, Short, and Admiral Claude C. Bloch (Commander, Fourteenth Naval District, responsible for naval facilities in Hawaii) actually took. They took precautions against sabotage, widely expected as a precursor to war, and reported their preparations. The Hawaii commanders did not anticipate an air attack; no one did so explicitly. Indeed, the prevailing view at the time was Japan could not execute two major naval operations at once, so with the Thailand invasion convoy known to be at sea, the Hawaii commanders had good reason to feel safe.

One major point often omitted from the debate (though Costello covers it thoroughly) is the Philippines, where MacArthur, unlike Kimmel or Short, had complete access to all decrypted Purple and JN-25 traffic CAST could provide (indeed, Stinnet quotes Whitlock to that effect),[105] and was nonetheless caught unprepared and with all planes on the ground nevertheless, nine hours after the Pearl Harbor attack. Caidin and Blair also raise the issue.

Although it has been argued that there was sufficient intelligence at the time to give commanders at Pearl Harbor a greater level of alert, some factors may take on unambiguous meaning not clear at the time, lost in what Roberta Wohlstetter in her masterful examination of the situation called "noise",[106] "scattered amid the dross of many thousands of other intelligence bits, some of which just as convincingly pointed to a Japanese attack on the Panama Canal."[83]

While some conspiracy theories possess real merit…. the persistent thesis that high-ranking government officials had prior knowledge of the Japanese intention to attack Pearl Harbor warrant little consideration. Here are some of the worst offenders:

The causes of the attack have never been fully investigated… To the contrary, there have been ten separate government inquiries into the events; the earliest in 1941 and the last coming in 1995. All the findings indicate poor strategic planning, lack of proper intelligence channels, inconsistent code-breaking, and a failure of the Army and Navy to coordinate strategic troop disbursements. Sadly, no conspiracies were discovered.

Many people heard Japanese radio traffic discussing the attack… As American as apple pie, this yarn never seems to get old. Trouble is, only Americans will swear to it. Japanese military records indicate strict radio silence was a general order during the journey to Hawaiian waters. The speculation predictably returns to the discovery that Japanese forces were moving. American intelligence located strategic Japanese movements throughout 1941.

American code-breakers cracked the Japanese codes and knew the attack was coming… What a confusing mess of hearsay, half-truths, and misinformation this theory holds. Some codes were broken, including the diplomatic code and some minor military codes. No decoded messages were linked to an attack on Hawaii. The true controversy can be found in American intelligence channels.

Winston Churchill knew about the attack, but wanted it to happen…. Pure poppycock. Churchill wanted America to enter the war sooner rather than later. He was frustrated with Roosevelt’s hedging, but the Lend-Lease Act provided more than enough incentive for patience. Roosevelt did not change his belief that Germany posed the greater threat after Pearl Harbor. Revisionists drive most of this debate and sadly, Nazi-sympathizer and Holocaust denier David Irving is the most prominent. Irving and his cohorts are so desperate to redeem Hitler’s image, they have forged documentary evidence.

December 7, 1941 lives in infamy… Historical study provides the necessary remembrance as well as an opportunity to learn the lessons of our past. Conspiracy theories are part of the discourse, but must be held to the same scholarly standards as other research.


http://practicallyhistorical.net/2011/12/06/myths-of-pearl-harbor-debunked/

Embarrassing Conspiracy Theories: Pearl Harbor
Perhaps one of the longest and most enduring conspiracy theories in this country is the belief that the Pearl Harbor attack on December 7, 1941 was known before hand, and was allowed to happen because Franklin Roosevelt wanted to go to war with Germany and Japan.

Besides the fact that there is no proof that FDR actually knew the attack was actually going to happen, he actually didn't want to go to war with anyone, but was very concerned with Germany and knew that the country may need to go to war with that country, which is why there was an arms build up in this country before we entered the war, which was supported by the Democrats and the Republicans, and why there was a "Europe First" battle plan, because Europe was considered more critical then the Pacific was.

Many people believe that plans for the attack were intercepted by the intelligence community and intentionally ignored. You have to understand that our intelligence agencies weren't very good back then, and often times did not communicate with each other. The reports were not ignored, they mishandled them, and nothing really gave a clear picture about what the Japanese military was planning, and so no one had any real reason to suspect they were going to attack Pearl Harbor, at least in the way they did.

One of the myths about this is that the planes were spotted on radar and intentionally ignored by the base commander, Admiral Husband E. Kimmel. Yes, it is indeed true that the planes were picked up on radar, but they were thought to be US bombers that were coming in from the mainland, that were scheduled to come in that morning, and in fact did land during the attack itself. Also, one of the myths about this is that Adm. Kimmel was made aware of the incoming planes, and ignored them, but, this is not true. Adm. Kimmel didn't ignore them, he wasn't made aware of the planes coming in. It was a lieutenant who was made aware of the incoming planes, and believing they were the bombers that were suppose to come in, didn't bother to tell Adm. Kimmel, because it was most likely not important enough to bother him with.

Many people also cite the fact that none of the three carriers that were stationed there were out at sea at the time of the attacks as proof that the Navy knew an attack was going to happen, and that the Navy sent them out in order to save them. The problem with is that carriers back then weren't considered the primary ships of the fleet as they are today. Battleships were the backbone and work horses of the fleet back then, and at the time, were considered more valuable then carriers, which had been untested in battle. Also, the Navy only had six carriers before we entered the war, and we had a lot more battleships, so it isn't surprising that some of them were in port at the time.

Besides the fact that the carriers were not the work horse of the fleet at that time in history, if the US Navy did know that an attack was coming, they would have most likely moved their ships out of the harbor and into open sea, rather then just let them sit around and get damaged or sunk, which not only weakened the Navy's power due to the lose of the ships, but also clogged up the ports with the damaged and destroyed ships. In fact two of those ship, the USS Utah and the USS Arizona, are still there, under the water, because they were to heavily damaged to move.

The fact is that even after over 70 years, there has never been any real proof what so ever that the US government knew ahead of time that Japan was going to attack Pearl Harbor. When you look at the evidence, this conspiracy theory is very logically faulty.


http://thesoapboxrantings.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/embarrassing-conspiracy-theories-pearl.html



I can post plenty more thta will refute every assumption you make, because lets face it all your views are based on assumptions, which have been created by you in hindsight of the past events. Not of what actually transpired or the views actually held at the time. You have gone off other conspiracy nuts, clearly not recognising their mistakes.

As can be seen you have invented reasons for why countries had a pact, where the pact did not force them to enter a war, to the other poor mistakes, all of which you then form incorrect assumptions based off this.

You have got many points wrong as seen and gone off assumptions why carriers, who at that time were only scouting vessels would be ferrying airplane, when the simple reason is they were the quickest and most suitable type of transport get the planes there, being as America as seen had been on alert from a view Japan may attack. They were all the planes to spare for the islands, others are needed elsewhere.


Sorry but if you cannot see most of your views are assumptions and make in hindsight, then you show little credibility to being an academic

Conspiracy theories will always be a tug-of-war between expectations, and unusual anomalies.  We have expectations that aircraft don’t dash across the sky at a million miles an hour, and yet we have proven observations of flying saucers.  Yet, think back to the 16th-century…people would have laughed at the possibility that the earth was anything but flat.  So…all things are corrigible.

Add to that, hindsight has a lot to do with vindicating history, or historical truth.  After WWII we looked around and saw that we had rid the world of a monster, not to mention a monstrous social and political movement.  Amid that environment, it became a great relief that the US joined in Europe’s war.  The debate on Pearl Harbor was met with that old New York City phrase: fuhgettaboutit!  I feel quite certain you have been taught from that perspective.

But forgetting and truth are two different things.   That’s why context is so important.  Place yourself in the context of issues in, say, March 1941…you see an entirely different picture.  The Neutrality Act—so negligible today—was as real as, for example, the Second Amendment is today.  And it really was important to create a smokescreen behind which the absence from Pearl of aircraft carriers on December 7, 1941 could be explained.

Always remember what I said about politicians on another thread: they are like magicians…while you are looking over there, they will switch the cards on you.  Roosevelt was counting on the absence of the carriers from Pearl to be forgotten, as soon as he whipped up the anger against Japan.  It was not for nothing that he used such strong language:

Roosevelt wrote:Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.

Quill wrote wrote:You should be able to answer that yourself.  As the Army Board itself concluded: "...everything that the Japanese were planning to do was known to the United States..." ARMY BOARD, 1944.  

“FDR blinded the commanders at Pearl Harbor and set them up by -
1. denying intelligence to Hawaii (HI)
2. on Nov 27, misleading the commanders into thinking negotiations with Japan were continuing to prevent them from realizing the war was on
3. having false information sent to HI about the location of the Japanese carrier fleet“

Of course the Navy would have a cover story for the absence of the carriers on December 7th.

The idea that Pearl Harbor was an ideal target for a Taranto-style attack was well known.  The US Navy itself had in fact attacked Pearl Harbor in war exercises.  And...

“A Navy report by Bellinger and Martin predicted that if Japan made war on the US, they would strike Pearl Harbor without warning at dawn with aircraft from a maximum of 6 carriers.

“For years Navy planners had assumed that Japan, on the outbreak of war, would strike the American fleet wherever it was. The fleet was the only threat to Japan's plans. Logically, Japan couldn't engage in any major operation with the American fleet on its flank. The strategic options for the Japanese were not unlimited.

“On 23 Jun 1941 advisor Harold Ickes wrote FDR a memo the day after Germany invaded the Soviet Union,

"There might develop from the embargoing of oil to Japan such a situation as would make it not only possible but easy to get into this war in an effective way. And if we should thus indirectly be brought in, we would avoid the criticism that we had gone in as an ally of communistic Russia."

Clearly, preparations were being contemplated.  Having aircraft carriers ‘otherwise occupied’ would be the least of the worries. .. ..

I did ask that you tell me who issued the instructions for the carriers to deliver the fighters to Wake and Midway and I see you have replied on another post that it was no one.  Well that’s odd but never mind I’ll address that later but first I want to deal with what you say above.

First of all I have checked the Army Board 1944 report and its conclusions and there is no mention of any of what you have written above in it but if you can tell me what page of the report that any of that is on I’ll go look it up.

However, what I did find out when looking where that came from is that what is written above is a c&p that you have plagiarised from a book titled ‘Pearl Harbor -  Mother of all Conspiracies’ by Mark Wiley.  Here’s an extract of the book from a website showing exactly the same wording that you have used   http://www.fepow-community.org.uk/arthur_lane/html/pearl_harbor.htm

I’m sorry but that is just not on. If you are going to use someone else’s work then please attribute it to the original author so that we know who really wrote it and who we are dealing with. To try and pass it off as your own is something no respected academic or teacher would do and you should be ashamed of yourself for doing so. And this isn’t the first time you have done something like this either, is it? All that happens when someone does this is call into question anything that they have written because they just can’t be trusted.

Next time try and come back with something more original including the part from the Army Board report 1944.

Thanks

Original Quill wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:A reminder of where we are...

Didge wrote:
...the aircraft Carriers, which two of them at this time were on missions to deliver fighters to Wake and Midway Islands..

Your response was...

Quill wrote:
Fighters could get themselves to Wake I. and Midway I. You don't need capital ships to deliver aircraft, FGS. Use of such a flimsy excused by the authorities, is further evidence that it was all a cover up..

Your response above  clearly shows that it was  ‘aircraft carriers’ you were referring to in your response (capital ships as you called them)  and never about battleships doing the job. Never mind though because you now acknowledge that the only method available to get the fighters to Wake and Midway would be on aircraft carriers because the fighters couldn’t get themselves there as you first claimed. Well done.
So now that that’s that out of the way on with the show.

I'm glad you cleared that up.  What you also made clear was that ferrying aircraft to Wake I. and Midway I. was a ruse.  You don't use combat ready aircraft carriers for ferrying aircraft.  It would be like using a Rolls Royce for pizza deliveries.  You have what they call escort carriers, or baby flattops for that duty.

Didge was urging the absurd claim that the US was serious when they put out the cover story that these huge, full-sized, combat ready aircraft carriers were being used as taxis for planes.  Sometimes it's not just the nature of the cover up, but the extreme absurdity of the claim that reveals the falsity.

Irn Bru wrote:

Quill wrote:
You should be able to answer that yourself.  As the Army Board itself concluded: "...everything that the Japanese were planning to do was known to the United States..." ARMY BOARD, 1944.  

“FDR blinded the commanders at Pearl Harbor and set them up by -
1. denying intelligence to Hawaii (HI)
2. on Nov 27, misleading the commanders into thinking negotiations with Japan were continuing to prevent them from realizing the war was on
3. having false information sent to HI about the location of the Japanese carrier fleet“

Of course the Navy would have a cover story for the absence of the carriers on December 7th.

The idea that Pearl Harbor was an ideal target for a Taranto-style attack was well known.  The US Navy itself had in fact attacked Pearl Harbor in war exercises.  And...

“A Navy report by Bellinger and Martin predicted that if Japan made war on the US, they would strike Pearl Harbor without warning at dawn with aircraft from a maximum of 6 carriers.

“For years Navy planners had assumed that Japan, on the outbreak of war, would strike the American fleet wherever it was. The fleet was the only threat to Japan's plans. Logically, Japan couldn't engage in any major operation with the American fleet on its flank. The strategic options for the Japanese were not unlimited.

“On 23 Jun 1941 advisor Harold Ickes wrote FDR a memo the day after Germany invaded the Soviet Union,

"There might develop from the embargoing of oil to Japan such a situation as would make it not only possible but easy to get into this war in an effective way. And if we should thus indirectly be brought in, we would avoid the criticism that we had gone in as an ally of communistic Russia."

Clearly, preparations were being contemplated.  Having aircraft carriers ‘otherwise occupied’ would be the least of the worries. ..

What a load of nonsense that lot is at the top of that post. Far from being a knowledgeable historian for that era you just rely on fiction and conspiracy instead of fact. It’s a good try Quill but time you gave up trying to get yourself out of the mess you have ended up in by using misinformation, twisting what people are saying and using a whole load of meaningless words to disguise what you originally said.

So can I ask again - who issued the orders for the carriers to deliver the fighters to Wake and Midway?

No one.  It was a cover story, stupid.  Jeeze, I've finally met a Scot who lacks intelligence.  But then, Edinburgh is not real Scotland.

The whole point of this discussion is that it was all a ruse.  Here are the logical points of the debate:

1. Roosevelt and Churchill wanted the US in Europe's war.

2. Congress wanted to say out and passed the Neutrality Act prohibiting.

3. Roosevelt could not violate the Neutrality Act, so he had to nullify its effect.

4.  Germany, Italy and Japan entered into the Tripartite Pact, stating that if one of them went to war with any outside nation, all three would commit to war against the same nation.

5. Roosevelt saw his opportunity to nullify the Neutrality Act if in fact he positioned the US as the innocent victim of an attack by one of the signatories of the Tripartite Act.

6.  The easiest way to goad a nation into attacking the US was to provoke Japan, which had expansionist aims on the western Pacific.

Now, let’s pause for a reprise here.  For the first two decades of the 20th-century, the big powers had been in a race to build the most and best of what were considered the ‘capital’ ships, the huge steel dreadnaught battleships.  It was thought that they were the future of the navy warfare.  However, some countries including the US had been experimenting with a novel idea, namely to fly an aircraft off and onto the deck of a ship…the difficult problem being landing.  In January 1911 a pilot named Eugene Ely flew a Curtiss landed pusher plane on the deck of the USS Pennsylvania in San Francisco Bay, to become the first to do so.  After such experience, navies began to modify decks to make landing fields atop ships.  The aircraft carrier was born.

For a few decades from 1911 to 1940, aircraft flown off ships were used for reconnoitering missions, not for combat.  In November 1940 the British used biplanes off the deck of the HMS Illustrious to sink Italian ships in Taranto Harbor, thus first establishing the notion that aircraft carriers were actual weapons of war.  The phenomenal success of Taranto so shocked the big powers that within weeks navies all over the world were designing ways to utilize this new weapon.  Indeed, as mentioned, the US was using Pearl Harbor as a model for exercises; so was Japan, unfortunately.  During the year 1940, navies all around the world rushed to reequip battleship hulls with flight decks in an effort to create new naval air forces.  Overnight aircraft carriers became the new gems of all great navies.

To resume:

7. In order to goad the Japanese into declaring war on the US, Roosevelt began a series of audacious and intimidating moves, including moving the Pacific Fleet from San Diego to Pearl Harbor, half a world closer to Japan.  

8.  Roosevelt’s biggest problem was to make the pending, anticipated attack on Pearl Harbor look genuine, so that he would not be beset by critics in Congress who would descend like wolves if they smelt the ruse to do an end-run on the Neutrality Act.

9.  But, in effect, Roosevelt was using the US fleet as bait for the Japanese fish.  In this context, Roosevelt had a secondary, perhaps bigger problem: keep the Pacific Fleet viable.  He hoped the US military would acquit itself in an attack, but at a minimum he could not risk the four new ships that had just recently proved themselves the most valuable assets afloat: the aircraft carriers Enterprise, Lexington, Saratoga and Yorktown.

10.  So the plan was to devise ‘other assignments’ that would conveniently keep the mighty aircraft carriers otherwise busy, busy, busy…

11.  USS Yorktown was assigned to the Atlantic Ocean, for anti-submarine duty, essentially the task of a destroyer escort.

12.  USS Enterprise, was to ferry 12 Grumman F4F-3 Wildcats of Marine Fighting Squadron (VMF) 211 to Wake Island. A whole mighty aircraft carrier to taxi a mere 12- aircraft?!  Upon completion of the mission on 4 December, she was to set course to return to Pearl Harbor. Dawn on 7 December 1941 found TF-8 about 215 miles west of Oahu.  How convenient.

13. USS  Lexington was a part of a task force which sailed from Pearl to ferry 18 Vought SB2U-3 Vindicators of Marine Scout Bombing Squadron 231 to Midway Island.  A few more aircraft, but still incomprehensible.

14.  The USS Saratoga, having recently completed an overhaul at the Puget Sound Navy Yard, Bremerton, Washington, reached NAS San Diego [North Island] late in the forenoon watch on 7 December.  If the Fleet was in Pearl, what was Saratoga doing sailing to San Diego?  Again, it doesn't make sense.

So you see it doesn’t matter who exactly divined up these plans to make the aircraft carriers go missing on the crucial weekend of December 7, 1941.  All that mattered was that they saved the vital elements of the Pacific Fleet on the convenient date of the attack.  America, Congress and the people, were so pissed off at the Japanese that they never stopped to notice the odd coincidence.  Didge still can’t believe it.

15.  Germany quietly declared war on the US on December 11, 1941 and the plan worked perfectly.

More plagiarism only this time it’s worse, much worse, because you have modified it and deliberately omitted certain parts of it to suit your ridiculous argument.

Here’s the original article that you stole (unchanged)

wrote wrote:Enterprise: On 28 November 1941, Admiral Husband E. Kimmel sent TF-8, consisting of Enterprise, the heavy cruisers Northampton (CA-26), Chester (CA-27), and Salt Lake City (CA-24) and nine destroyers under Vice Admiral William F. Halsey, Jr., to ferry 12 Grumman F4F-3 Wildcats of Marine Fighting Squadron (VMF) 211 to Wake Island. Upon completion of the mission on 4 December, TF-8 set course to return to Pearl Harbor. Dawn on 7 December 1941 found TF-8 about 215 miles west of Oahu.

Lexington: On 5 December 1941, TF-12, formed around Lexington, under the command of Rear Admiral John H. Newton, sailed from Pearl to ferry 18 Vought SB2U-3 Vindicators of Marine Scout Bombing Squadron 231 to Midway Island. Dawn on 7 December 1941 found Lexington, heavy cruisers Chicago (CA-29), Portland (CA-33), and Astoria (CA-34), and five destroyers about 500 miles southeast of Midway. The outbreak of hostilities resulted in cancellation of the mission and VMSB-231 was retained on board [they would ultimately fly to Midway from Hickam Field on 21 December].

Saratoga: The Saratoga, having recently completed an overhaul at the Puget Sound Navy Yard, Bremerton, Washington, reached NAS San Diego [North Island] late in the forenoon watch on 7 December. She was to embark her air group, as well as Marine Fighting Squadron (VMF) 221 and a cargo of miscellaneous airplanes to ferry to Pearl Harbor.

Yorktown (CV-5), Ranger (CV-4) and Wasp (CV-7), along with the aircraft escort vessel Long Island (AVG-1), were in the Atlantic Fleet; Hornet (CV-, commissioned in late October 1941, had yet to carry out her shakedown. Yorktown would be the first Atlantic Fleet carrier to be transferred to the Pacific, sailing on 16 December 1941. ..

Here’s how you changed the original article....

Quill wrote wrote:11.  USS Yorktown was assigned to the Atlantic Ocean, for anti-submarine duty, essentially the task of a destroyer escort.

12.  USS Enterprise, was to ferry 12 Grumman F4F-3 Wildcats of Marine Fighting Squadron (VMF) 211 to Wake Island. A whole mighty aircraft carrier to taxi a mere 12- aircraft?!  Upon completion of the mission on 4 December, she was to set course to return to Pearl Harbor. Dawn on 7 December 1941 found TF-8 about 215 miles west of Oahu.  How convenient.

13. USS  Lexington was a part of a task force which sailed from Pearl to ferry 18 Vought SB2U-3 Vindicators of Marine Scout Bombing Squadron 231 to Midway Island.  A few more aircraft, but still incomprehensible.

14.  The USS Saratoga, having recently completed an overhaul at the Puget Sound Navy Yard, Bremerton, Washington, reached NAS San Diego [North Island] late in the forenoon watch on 7 December.  If the Fleet was in Pearl, what was Saratoga doing sailing to San Diego?  Again, it doesn't make sense. ..

You posed a question about why the Saratoga was sailing to San Diego but you omitted that the answer was given in the original article that you used – possibly from somewhere like here...

http://www.axisandallies.org/forums/index.php?topic=31426.5;wap2

As you can see, you deliberately concealed the rest of the article on why the Saratoga was sailing to San Diego and you also misrepresented the situation regarding the Yorktown as well as adding additional data to what was written about the Enterprise. You are also suggesting that the Navy should have used escort carriers, or baby flattops. So go on, tell me how many of those did they have available to carry out these tasks – answer = none.

You are beneath contempt for what you are doing because it is certainly not what a respected historian, academic or a teacher would ever do. You say I lack intelligence but what I don’t do is plagiarize some else’ work or modify it to suit my argument and I certainly have more than enough intelligence in reserve to see you off and expose you for what you are doing.

If there is anything I would like you to take away from this discussion for the future Quill it is don’t plagiarize someone else’s work, don’t modify it to suit your argument and don’t ever use it to try and beat down someone else who just brings fact and truth to the discussion because it will ultimately be your downfall, just as it has been on here.

You’ll learn  
 
Cheers, Irn.

BTW, the article didn't mention the 25, P-36 Army Persuit Aircraft that were on board each of the carriers. Just for clarificaion.

Irn Bru wrote:You are beneath contempt for what you are doing because it is certainly not what a respected historian, academic or a teacher would ever do. You say I lack intelligence but what I don’t do is plagiarize some else’ work or modify it to suit my argument and I certainly have more than enough intelligence in reserve to see you off and expose you for what you are doing.

If there is anything I would like you to take away from this discussion for the future Quill it is don’t plagiarize someone else’s work, don’t modify it to suit your argument and don’t ever use it to try and beat down someone else who just brings fact and truth to the discussion because it will ultimately be your downfall, just as it has been on here.

More of the same Irn?  You didn't read carefully enough to notice I used quotations where necessary.  But, I won't bother to carry on in kind with your silly antagonisms.  Rather, I'd like to discuss your real motive directly.

You do show an inordinate interest in me.  In fact, it appears that you have jumped Didge in order to take the driver's seat in this thread...all in an attempt to turn the thread into a personal assault.  And this is quite obvious given that he is ten times the historian that you are.  (In fact, I don't know what you contribute except trouble; left overs from the past.)

Now, forgive me if I am forthright, but are you not in communication with sassy on a daily basis?  And is that not the same sassy who took an inordinate interest in me as well?  In fact, is that not the same person who personally stalked me, hacked into my State Bar account and researched my PhD university records?

Is that not the same person who was obsessed with playing the 'gotcha' game on me so often?  Is it not she who wrote a 16-page hate thread on the Golden Gate Bridge with reference to me?  And so now you have gone to these immense lengths to prove how hateful I am in your eyes.  And so now here you are, playing the same 'gotcha' game.

So that point is established; sassy put you up to this.  Or, more likely, given the distinct tone, you have been giving out your account and password to sass, and she has been visiting with authorization.  If sassy wants to come over here and play this game, let her have the intestinal fortitude to do it in her own name.  Running around with you like two snakes in the grass is unbecoming and deceitful.  This place was pretty nice until you brought the same shit back.  Give it up.

So Irn, gotcha!  I knew what you were up to...just had to wait until you had revealed yourself sufficiently.

Quill wrote wrote:
More of the same Irn?  You didn't read carefully enough to notice I used quotations where necessary.  But, I won't bother to carry on in kind with your silly antagonisms.  Rather, I'd like to discuss your real motive directly. ..

Quotations marks were not used on every occasion and besides they are meaningless unless you attribute them to whoever made the quote. That is basic and something any respected historian or teacher would do. Plagiarizing stuff from elsewhere and in particular modifying it to suit your argument is a no no Quill and you shouldn't do it under any circumstances. Just learn from what has happened here and stick to the basic rules that all respected historians and teachers observe at all times.

Quill wrote wrote:
You do show an inordinate interest in me.  In fact, it appears that you have jumped Didge in order to take the driver's seat in this thread...all in an attempt to turn the thread into a personal assault.  And this is quite obvious given that he is ten times the historian that you are.  (In fact, I don't know what you contribute except trouble; left overs from the past.) ..

Just a silly attempt to create a quarrel between Didge and I to get you out of the mess you are in over this but I doubt it will work.  
And lets face it Quill, it’s you that is bringing up stuff from the past and you that has this obsession– not me. – See below

Quill wrote wrote:
Now, forgive me if I am forthright, but are you not in communication with sassy on a daily basis?  And is that not the same sassy who took an inordinate interest in me as well?  In fact, is that not the same person who personally stalked me, hacked into my State Bar account and researched my PhD university records? .

Is that not the same person who was obsessed with playing the 'gotcha' game on me so often?  Is it not she who wrote a 16-page hate thread on the Golden Gate Bridge with reference to me?  And so now you have gone to these immense lengths to prove how hateful I am in your eyes.  And so now here you are, playing the same 'gotcha' game.

So that point is established; sassy put you up to this.  Or, more likely, given the distinct tone, you have been giving out your account and password to sass, and she has been visiting with authorization.  If sassy wants to come over here and play this game, let her have the intestinal fortitude to do it in her own name.  Running around with you like two snakes in the grass is unbecoming and deceitful.  This place was pretty nice until you brought the same shit back.  Give it up. ..

It was and it still is but as you can see it's you that is bringing it all up again, not me. Just stop bringing it up all this silly nonsense that an old age pensioner in little olde England was so horrible to you to the extent that you have to to resort to talking so much rubbish.  And remember back on another thread you said you wanted to drop it but you just can't let it go.
And please feel free to ask Ben to check the log to see any IP addresses that have been used against my account. Face it Quill, this is all a diversion to get yourself out of the mess you have got yourself into, isn’t it.  

Quill wrote wrote:
So Irn, gotcha!  I knew what you were up to...just had to wait until you had revealed yourself sufficiently. ..

But you said above that it was me that was playing the 'gotcha' game yet here you are saying it was you that was playing the ‘gotcha’ game all along and not me.  Oh dear

And I take it you didn’t manage to find the data I asked for in the Army Board report then?

@Quill. So moving on....

On November 27, 1941, the following dispatch was sent Admiral Kimmel for action: [98]

THIS DESPATCH IS TO BE CONSIDERED A WAR WARNING*. NEGOTIATIONS WITH JAPAN LOOKING TOWARD STABILIZATION OF CONDITIONS IN THE PACIFIC *HAVE CEASED* AND AN AGGRESSIVE MOVE BY JAPAN IS EXPECTED WITHIN THE NEXT FEW DAYS. THE NUMBER AND EQUIPMENT OF JAPANESE TROOPS AND THE ORGANIZATION OF NAVAL TASK FORCES INDICATES AN AMPHIBIOUS EXPEDITION AGAINST EITHER THE PHILIPPINES THAI OR KRA PENINSULA OR POSSIBLY BORNEO. *EXECUTE AN APPROPRIATE DEFENSIVE DEPLOYMENT PREPARATORY TO CARRYING OUT THE TASKS ASSIGNED IN WPL46*. INFORM DISTRICT AND ARMY AUTHORITIES. A SIMILAR WARNING IS BEING SENT BY WAR DEPARTMENT. SPENAVO [99] INFORM BRITISH.CONTINENTAL DISTRICTS GUAM SAMOA DIRECTED TAKE APPROPRIATE MEASURES AGAINST SABOTAGE."

The following dispatch dated November 28, 1941, referring to the November 27 warning, was supplied to Admiral Kimmel for his information:  

"* * * ARMY HAS SENT FOLLOWING TO COMMANDER WESTERN DEFENSE COMMAND "NEGOTIATIONS WITH JAPAN APPEAR TO BE TERMINATED TO ALL PRACTICAL PURPOSES WITH ONLY THE BAREST POSSIBILITIES THAT THE JAPANESE GOVERNMENT MIGHT COME BACK AND OFFER TO CONTINUE. JAPANESE FUTURE ACTION UNPREDICTABLE BUT HOSTILE ACTION POSSIBLE AT ANY MOMENT. IF HOSTILITIES CANNOT REPEAT NOT BE AVOIDED THE UNITED STATES DESIRES THAT JAPAN COMMIT THE FIRST OVERT ACT. THIS POLICY SHOULD NOT REPEAT NOT BE CONSTRUED AS RESTRICTING YOU TO A COURSE OF ACTION THAT MIGHT JEOPARDIZE YOUR DEFENSE. PRIOR TO HOSTILE JAPANESE ACTION YOU ARE DIRECTED TO UNDERTAKE St-CH RECONNAISSANCE AND OTHER MEASURES AS YOU DEEM NECESSARY BUT THESE MEASURES SHOULD BE CARRIED OUT SO AS NOT REPEAT NOT TO ALARM CIVIL POPULATION- OR DISCLOSE INTENT. REPORT MEASURES TAKEN. A SEPARATE MESSAGE IS BEING SENT TO G TWO NINTH CORPS AREA RE SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES IN UNITED STATES. SHOULD HOSTILITIES OCCUR THEY WILL CARRY OUT THE TASKS ASSIGNED IN RAINBOW FIVE SO FAR AS THEY PERTAIN TO JAPAN. LIMIT DISSEMINATION OF THIS HIGHLY SECRET INFORMATION TO MINIMUM ESSENTIAL OFFICERS." WPL 52 IS NOT APPLICABLE TO PACIFIC AREA AND WILL NOT BE PLACED IN EFFECT IN THAT AREA EXCEPT AS NOW IN FORCE IN SOUTHEAST PACIFIC SUB AREA AND PANAMA NAVAL COASTAL FRONTIER. UNDERTAKE NO OFFENSIVE ACTION UNTIL JAPAN HAS COMMITTED AN OVERT ACT. BE PREPARED TO CARRY OUT TASKS ASSIGNED IN WPL 46 SO FAR AS THEY APPLY TO JAPAN IN CASE HOSTILITIES OCCUR."

Furthermore...

1. On November 28, Admiral Halsey left Pearl Harbor en route to Wake in command of Task Force 8, consisting of the carrier Enterprise, three heavy cruisers and nine destroyers. He carried out morning and afternoon searches to 300 miles for any sign of hostile shipping. [136] The sending of this force to Wake was pursuant to a dispatch dated November 26 to Admiral Kimmel stating, in part_

"in order to keep the planes of the 2nd marine aircraft wing available for expeditionary use OpNav [137] has requested and Army has agreed to station 25 Army pursuit planes at Midway and a similar number at Wake provided you consider this is feasible and desirable. It will be necessary for you to transport these planes and ground crews from Oahu to these stations on an aircraft carrier. [135]"

Admiral Halsey knew of the war warning dispatch and held a lengthy conference with Admiral Kimmel and other officers on November 27. He stated that when he prepared to depart with the task force for Wake Island, he asked Admiral Kimmel how far the latter wanted him to go; that Admiral Kimmel replied "Use your common sense." [139] Admiral Smith said that before Admiral Halsey left in the Enterprise, he asked Admiral Kimmel what he should do in case he met Japanese forces, to which Admiral Kimmel replied he should use his own discretion. Admiral Smith  
stated that Admiral Halsey commented these were the best orders he had received and that if he found even Japanese sampan he would sink it.  
[140]

2. On December 5, Admiral Newton left Pearl Harbor en route to Midway in command of Task Force 2, consisting of the carrier Lexington, three heavy cruisers, and five destroyers. Like Halsey, Newton conducted scouting flights with his planes to cover his advance [141] despite the act, however, that Admiral Newton was leaving Pearl Harbor with some of the most powerful and valuable units of the Pacific fleet he was not even shown the war warning, had no knowledge of it, and indeed had no knowledge of the dispatches of October.  

So that completely debunks your conspiracy theory and tells you who gave the orders for the carriers to transport the fighters to Wake and Midway and the subsequent actions that took place afterwards.

It's the Public Record of the  Joint Congressional Committee.

Source: http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/pha/congress/part_3.html#75a

Irn Bru wrote:So that completely debunks your conspiracy theory and tells you who gave the orders for the carriers to transport the fighters to Wake and Midway and the subsequent actions that took place afterwards.

Welcome back, Irn.

To the contrary, the cover stories were entirely consistent.  The missives you mention are discussed in the film, Tora, Tora, Tora, which also suggests some strange behavior on the part of certain senior officers.  It also documents how the Army frustrated many efforts for ordinary military units to communicate with Pearl directly.

At the time the White House was micro-managing not only the negotiations with the Japanese, but the war preparations in the Pacific.  Gen. George C. Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, would almost certainly have been in on the loop.  His office was (figuratively) just down the hall.  Incidentally, speaking of proximity, you are aware that Churchill spent most of the early year 1941 living on the third floor of the White House aren't you?  He and Roosevelt met on a daily basis.  Doris Goodwin, No Ordinary Time: Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt - The Home Front in World War II.

It is easy to depreciate the theory because we today have little feel for the dilemma Roosevelt was in at the time.  In light of subsequent events, few people even remember the Neutrality Acts, not to mention the sentiment behind them:

US Office of the Historian wrote:In the 1930s, the United States Government enacted a series of laws designed to prevent the United States from being embroiled in a foreign war by clearly stating the terms of U.S. neutrality. Although many Americans had rallied to join President Woodrow Wilson’s crusade to make the world “safe for democracy” in 1917, by the 1930s critics argued that U.S. involvement in the First World War had been driven by bankers and munitions traders with business interests in Europe. These findings fueled a growing “isolationist” movement that argued the United States should steer clear of future wars and remain neutral by avoiding financial deals with countries at war. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/neutrality-acts

Since August 1945 events have moved so swiftly and powerfully that they have overwhelmed the past.  In the 1930's American government was more of a cottage industry and the likes of Roosevelt could not only get away with four terms of office, but he could micro-manage certain Army flights so his wife could get around. Prior to WWII the US had not shouldered the weight of the most powerful nation on earth.   Prior to WWII communism was more of a theoretical debate than a Cold War.  With the change of conditions, came a vast change of perspectives.

Yet, it remains that prior to WWII the entire office of the presidency was more subject to the whim of Congress.  The Neutrality Acts were serious business, necessitating the kind of manipulation we are discussing.  Also remember, the future of Britain was at stake.  Drastic steps were necessary to prevent the kind of worldwide Orwellian nation carving that was taking place.

Finally--and this is perhaps the most important part--both sides were willing to drop it.  In light of Japanese brutality, in light of the war, and in light of the ensuing Cold War, how December 7th came down was the least of anyone's problems.

Today, in the Obama era, we again have a Congress that is trying to dominate the office of the presidency. Congress has tried to shut down the government, every year is a budget fight, and there are continual so-called oversight investigations, showing that there is a struggle for ascendency within Congress. And what do we have? Allegations that the White House in micro-managing world and national affairs. It may well be that when the Office of the Presidency is challenged, that micro-managing is one of the ways that the administration responds

Sorry Quill but yet again failed to address now Irn's points, it is bad enough you go through all mine and ignore my points and now make further assumptions on a President without a shred of evidence, but going off yet again poor assumptions to the actual events.
There is nothing credible in your claims, they need evidence, of which you have yet to show. Again all you have done is gone off events and then made wrong assumptions to why they happened, again whilst also ignoring important historical facts pointed out to you.
Seriously, you have not addressed these at any point and just kept repeating your same assumptions.
I am happy you avoided mine, that made my debate won, even more so when I caught you out on the Wildcats.
So this is now on you needing to respond to Irns points.
Good luck

HMMMMMM. LET ME SEE....???




THEY'RE ALL THE SAME SIZE.

eddie wrote:HMMMMMM. LET ME SEE....???

 


THEY'RE ALL THE SAME SIZE.

  That's about the size of it.

Didge wrote:There is nothing credible in your claims, they need evidence, of which you have yet to show.

Haha...The evidence is right in front of you. The carriers were missing.

The rest is blah, blah, blah..

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:HMMMMMM. LET ME SEE....???

 


THEY'RE ALL THE SAME SIZE.

  That's about the size of it.

Didge wrote:There is nothing credible in your claims, they need evidence, of which you have yet to show.

Haha...The evidence is right in front of you.  The carriers were missing.

The rest is blah, blah, blah..

You are right in your assumptions being blah blah blah.
One carrier even though they were not seen as capital ships and scouting ships before the attack, was meant to be back in Pearl Harbour, not just days late, but weeks through bad weather.
Please, oh pretty please in the poor weather forecasting of the day that Roosevelt could predict how many days of poor weather would stop this carrier from returning on time.??

Please present your evidence that Roosevelt was an Meteorological expert?

So dying to here this next far fetched story?
Maybe you could also explain why with fewer aircraft carriers at the time by a factor of 10 to 4 and why battleships nearly matched, being as the later were seen as capital ships before Pearl harbour, why the US were at such a tactical disadvantage on battleships and aircraft carriers ?

http://historicaltextarchive.com/sections.php?action=read&artid=194



In your own time

Original Quill wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:So that completely debunks your conspiracy theory and tells you who gave the orders for the carriers to transport the fighters to Wake and Midway and the subsequent actions that took place afterwards.

Welcome back, Irn.

To the contrary, the cover stories were entirely consistent.  The missives you mention are discussed in the film, Tora, Tora, Tora, which also suggests some strange behavior on the part of certain senior officers.  It also documents how the Army frustrated many efforts for ordinary military units to communicate with Pearl directly.

At the time the White House was micro-managing not only the negotiations with the Japanese, but the war preparations in the Pacific.  Gen. George C. Marshall, Army Chief of Staff, would almost certainly have been in on the loop.  His office was (figuratively) just down the hall.  Incidentally, speaking of proximity, you are aware that Churchill spent most of the early year 1941 living on the third floor of the White House aren't you?  He and Roosevelt met on a daily basis.  Doris Goodwin, No Ordinary Time: Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt - The Home Front in World War II.

It is easy to depreciate the theory because we today have little feel for the dilemma Roosevelt was in at the time.  In light of subsequent events, few people even remember the Neutrality Acts, not to mention the sentiment behind them:

US Office of the Historian wrote:In the 1930s, the United States Government enacted a series of laws designed to prevent the United States from being embroiled in a foreign war by clearly stating the terms of U.S. neutrality. Although many Americans had rallied to join President Woodrow Wilson’s crusade to make the world “safe for democracy” in 1917, by the 1930s critics argued that U.S. involvement in the First World War had been driven by bankers and munitions traders with business interests in Europe. These findings fueled a growing “isolationist” movement that argued the United States should steer clear of future wars and remain neutral by avoiding financial deals with countries at war. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1921-1936/neutrality-acts

Since August 1945 events have moved so swiftly and powerfully that they have overwhelmed the past.  In the 1930's American government was more of a cottage industry and the likes of Roosevelt could not only get away with four terms of office, but he could micro-manage certain Army flights so his wife could get around. Prior to WWII the US had not shouldered the weight of the most powerful nation on earth.   Prior to WWII communism was more of a theoretical debate than a Cold War.  With the change of conditions, came a vast change of perspectives.

Yet, it remains that prior to WWII the entire office of the presidency was more subject to the whim of Congress.  The Neutrality Acts were serious business, necessitating the kind of manipulation we are discussing.  Also remember, the future of Britain was at stake.  Drastic steps were necessary to prevent the kind of worldwide Orwellian nation carving that was taking place.

Finally--and this is perhaps the most important part--both sides were willing to drop it.  In light of Japanese brutality, in light of the war, and in light of the ensuing Cold War, how December 7th came down was the least of anyone's problems.

Today, in the Obama era, we again have a Congress that is trying to dominate the office of the presidency.  Congress has tried to shut down the government, every year is a budget fight, and there are continual so-called oversight investigations, showing that there is a struggle for ascendency within Congress.  And what do we have?  Allegations that the White House in micro-managing world and national affairs.  It may well be that when the Office of the Presidency is challenged, that micro-managing is one of the ways that the administration responds

Welcome back to what Quill? All you are doing is coming back with the same old nonsense with not a shred of evidence to back it up. The decision to task the carriers with supplying aircraft and support personnel to Wake and Midway was taken by CINCPACFLT, not anyone in Washington.

From the same source already provided...

Admiral Stark testified that the handling of the Pacific Fleet was up to the commander in chief: "* * * it was then up to the Commander in Chief on the spot. I would not have presumed, sitting at a desk in Washington, to tell him what to do with his fleet. There were many factors involved, of which he was the only person who had the knowledge, and once I had started, if I had started, to give him directives, I would have been handling the fleet. That was not my job."

You've been messing around those conspiracy websites again. Lets face it Quill, these sites are always looking for people gullible enough to spin all this nonsense and you just happened along to do just that.

And no, I didn't know that Churchill spent the early years of 1941 living on the 3rd floor of the White House and that's because he didn't.. Churchill was nowhere near America at that time let alone the White House. Sorry Quill but Winston was right here in old blighty.  Read The Second World War, Vol II, The Grand Alliance, page numbers 34 - 36 for details.

Wrong again I'm afraid.

Sorry, you know little about the history of WWII and American involvement. All you've done is parade out all the same lame excuses that the administration hoped would fly back in 1941. They didn't then, and they don't now.

If you had something new you would pitch it. Sorry.

Excuse me, and I mean no offense to anyone, but ... what the fuck is this-here shit?

Oh, and by the way, Bras, the proper name is "Pearl Harbor." None of that funny "u" stuff.

Wow, just looked back a bit and let me say:

Being the only possible virtue of the ignorant, I now see that the argument has been over everything from archers to aircraft and must confess my ignorance and get the hell out of Dodge, as the wise men say.

Seeing as I know next to nothing about either, I will bow out with as much grace as my bad knees can muster.

Carry on, gentlemen. If there's anything worth arguing over it's the arcane implications of military history (at least that's what this noob took out of your debate)

Original Quill wrote:Sorry, you know little about the history of WWII and American involvement.  All you've done is parade out all the same lame excuses that the administration hoped would fly back in 1941.  They didn't then, and they don't now.

If you had something new you would pitch it.  Sorry.

I've pitched plenty and you haven't been able to disprove anything that I've come up with. All you are doing is posting up nonsense gleaned from conspiracy websites with no credible evidence to support any of it.

Where's the data from the Army Board 1944 report that you came up with?

Where's the evidence that Winston Churchill spent the early years of 1941 living in the White House?

That's just a couple of example from a list that grows each time you post.

Your post started with 'sorry' and ended with 'sorry' which for you just about sums it all up.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Wow, just looked back a bit and let me say:

Being the only possible virtue of the ignorant, I now see that the argument has been over everything from archers to aircraft and must confess my ignorance and get the hell out of Dodge, as the wise men say.

Seeing as I know next to nothing about either, I will bow out with as much grace as my bad knees can muster.

Carry on, gentlemen. If there's anything worth arguing over it's the arcane implications of military history (at least that's what this noob took out of your debate)

Oh. I thought it was cock size?

eddie wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Wow, just looked back a bit and let me say:

Being the only possible virtue of the ignorant, I now see that the argument has been over everything from archers to aircraft and must confess my ignorance and get the hell out of Dodge, as the wise men say.

Seeing as I know next to nothing about either, I will bow out with as much grace as my bad knees can muster.

Carry on, gentlemen. If there's anything worth arguing over it's the arcane implications of military history (at least that's what this noob took out of your debate)

Oh. I thought it was cock size?

They say size doesn't matter. Tried painting the ceiling with a 4" brush?

'course it matters.

Irn Bru wrote:

eddie wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Wow, just looked back a bit and let me say:

Being the only possible virtue of the ignorant, I now see that the argument has been over everything from archers to aircraft and must confess my ignorance and get the hell out of Dodge, as the wise men say.

Seeing as I know next to nothing about either, I will bow out with as much grace as my bad knees can muster.

Carry on, gentlemen. If there's anything worth arguing over it's the arcane implications of military history (at least that's what this noob took out of your debate)

Oh. I thought it was cock size?

They say size doesn't matter. Tried painting the ceiling with a 4" brush?

'course it matters.

Hahahahahahaha depends upon the size of hole

Ben_Reilly wrote:Wow, just looked back a bit and let me say:

Being the only possible virtue of the ignorant, I now see that the argument has been over everything from archers to aircraft and must confess my ignorance and get the hell out of Dodge, as the wise men say.

Seeing as I know next to nothing about either, I will bow out with as much grace as my bad knees can muster.

Carry on, gentlemen. If there's anything worth arguing over it's the arcane implications of military history (at least that's what this noob took out of your debate)

I can appreciate your questioning, at least Ben.  Didge and I both have academic training in matters related to history.  So at any time a discussion might turn into a debate about some aspect of history, however it arises.  It’s just a matter of interest.  It has happened before and it may happen again.

Irn?  Irn is a holdover of certain antagonisms of a personal nature, involving a close friend of his.  He will not hesitate to jump into any thread where he sees the opportunity to shit-start the old ‘troubles’.  As he has nothing to contribute in a discussion about history, I try to ignore him…or at least dispose of him as quickly as possible.  

The history is fun; the old 'troubles' are boring and irrelevant.

Original Quill wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Wow, just looked back a bit and let me say:

Being the only possible virtue of the ignorant, I now see that the argument has been over everything from archers to aircraft and must confess my ignorance and get the hell out of Dodge, as the wise men say.

Seeing as I know next to nothing about either, I will bow out with as much grace as my bad knees can muster.

Carry on, gentlemen. If there's anything worth arguing over it's the arcane implications of military history (at least that's what this noob took out of your debate)

I can appreciate your questioning, at least Ben.  Didge and I both have academic training in matters related to history.  So at any time a discussion might turn into a debate about some aspect of history, however it arises.  It’s just a matter of interest.  It has happened before and it may happen again.

Irn?  Irn is a holdover of certain antagonisms of a personal nature, involving a close friend of his.  He will not hesitate to jump into any thread where he sees the opportunity to shit-start the old ‘troubles’.  As he has nothing to contribute in a discussion about history, I try to ignore him…or at least dispose of him as quickly as possible.  

The history is fun; the old 'troubles' are boring and irrelevant.

Good grief you really need a reality check by looking back over what has been going on here.  As for stirring up sh!t; it was LW who first had a crack at it followed closely by you. You then had another stab at it later in the thread before going on to trying to drag nicko and Tommy into it as well as attempting to create an argument between Didge and I. And here you are doing it again with the same old stuff. The academic training appears to have been put to good use by Didge who has contributed only fact and truth but all you have come up with is nothing but fiction trawled from conspiracy websites. I have no problem with anyone putting forth a conspiracy theory; indeed a find it very interesting but when you plagiarise the work you present and also modify it and conceal parts of it just to suit your argument then I actually do have a problem with it. So much for your academic training then.

Check my posts on this thread and you will find I have always focussed on the subject being discussed which shows that your comments are completely false and nothing more than an attempt to divert the discussion into a squabble. Well I suppose that’s what happens when your argument has hit the buffers - so to speak.

And now you are turning into the board snitch by running off crying to Ben complaining that Irn is being nasty and horrible to you – how pathetic.

If you think that  history is fun and the old 'troubles' are boring and irrelevant then do as I have said to you each time you do by not bringing them up at all.

If you want to continue with this discussion then I would suggest that you make a start by responding to my last post – it’s there waiting on you.

eddie wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

eddie wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Wow, just looked back a bit and let me say:

Being the only possible virtue of the ignorant, I now see that the argument has been over everything from archers to aircraft and must confess my ignorance and get the hell out of Dodge, as the wise men say.

Seeing as I know next to nothing about either, I will bow out with as much grace as my bad knees can muster.

Carry on, gentlemen. If there's anything worth arguing over it's the arcane implications of military history (at least that's what this noob took out of your debate)

Oh. I thought it was cock size?

They say size doesn't matter. Tried painting the ceiling with a 4" brush?

'course it matters.

Hahahahahahaha depends upon the size of  hole

Well now that you mention it...

Irn Bru wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I can appreciate your questioning, at least Ben.  Didge and I both have academic training in matters related to history.  So at any time a discussion might turn into a debate about some aspect of history, however it arises.  It’s just a matter of interest.  It has happened before and it may happen again.

Irn?  Irn is a holdover of certain antagonisms of a personal nature, involving a close friend of his.  He will not hesitate to jump into any thread where he sees the opportunity to shit-start the old ‘troubles’.  As he has nothing to contribute in a discussion about history, I try to ignore him…or at least dispose of him as quickly as possible.  

The history is fun; the old 'troubles' are boring and irrelevant.

Good grief you really need a reality check by looking back over what has been going on here.  As for stirring up sh!t; it was LW who first had a crack at it followed closely by you. You then had another stab at it later in the thread before going on to trying to drag nicko and Tommy into it as well as attempting to create an argument between Didge and I. And here you are doing it again with the same old stuff. The academic training appears to have been put to good use by Didge who has contributed only fact and truth but all you have come up with is nothing but fiction trawled from conspiracy websites. I have no problem with anyone putting forth a conspiracy theory; indeed a find it very interesting but when you plagiarise the work you present and also modify it and conceal parts of it just to suit your argument then I actually do have a problem with it. So much for your academic training then.

Check my posts on this thread and you will find I have always focussed on the subject being discussed which shows that your comments are completely false and nothing more than an attempt to divert the discussion into a squabble. Well I suppose that’s what happens when your argument has hit the buffers - so to speak.

And now you are turning into the board snitch by running off crying to Ben complaining that Irn is being nasty and horrible to you – how pathetic.

If you think that  history is fun and the old 'troubles' are boring and irrelevant then do as I have said to you each time you do by not bringing them up at all.

If you want to continue with this discussion then I would suggest that you make a start by responding to my last post – it’s there waiting on you.

Sound familiar?

Original Quill wrote:

Irn Bru wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I can appreciate your questioning, at least Ben.  Didge and I both have academic training in matters related to history.  So at any time a discussion might turn into a debate about some aspect of history, however it arises.  It’s just a matter of interest.  It has happened before and it may happen again.

Irn?  Irn is a holdover of certain antagonisms of a personal nature, involving a close friend of his.  He will not hesitate to jump into any thread where he sees the opportunity to shit-start the old ‘troubles’.  As he has nothing to contribute in a discussion about history, I try to ignore him…or at least dispose of him as quickly as possible.  

The history is fun; the old 'troubles' are boring and irrelevant.

Good grief you really need a reality check by looking back over what has been going on here.  As for stirring up sh!t; it was LW who first had a crack at it followed closely by you. You then had another stab at it later in the thread before going on to trying to drag nicko and Tommy into it as well as attempting to create an argument between Didge and I. And here you are doing it again with the same old stuff. The academic training appears to have been put to good use by Didge who has contributed only fact and truth but all you have come up with is nothing but fiction trawled from conspiracy websites. I have no problem with anyone putting forth a conspiracy theory; indeed a find it very interesting but when you plagiarise the work you present and also modify it and conceal parts of it just to suit your argument then I actually do have a problem with it. So much for your academic training then.

Check my posts on this thread and you will find I have always focussed on the subject being discussed which shows that your comments are completely false and nothing more than an attempt to divert the discussion into a squabble. Well I suppose that’s what happens when your argument has hit the buffers - so to speak.

And now you are turning into the board snitch by running off crying to Ben complaining that Irn is being nasty and horrible to you – how pathetic.

If you think that  history is fun and the old 'troubles' are boring and irrelevant then do as I have said to you each time you do by not bringing them up at all.

If you want to continue with this discussion then I would suggest that you make a start by responding to my last post – it’s there waiting on you.

Sound familiar?

It should do Quill; I tell you often enough not to keep bringing up the sh!t but you just can't stop.

What about a response to the last post I made on the subject of Pearl Harbor? You interested or not?

What have I missed? x

feelthelove wrote: What have I missed? x

Hi lov...we have built a memorial around your thread.  Rousing debate about WWII, and such.

We thought you wouldn't mind.  Memorials are often public places, where people stroll, picnic and nannies give their babes fresh air. So it is a way of paying adulation and respect.

I'd like to see more of ye in the flesh, tho...erm, so to speak.  

Original Quill wrote:

feelthelove wrote: What have I missed? x

Hi lov...we have built a memorial around your thread.  Rousing debate about WWII, and such.

We thought you wouldn't mind.  Memorials are often public places, where people stroll, picnic and nannies give their babes fresh air.  So it is a way of paying adulation and respect.

I'd like to see more of ye in the flesh, tho...erm, so to speak.  

Hello Quill xxx

Good to see you and of course I don't mind, I'm honoured

As for the flesh, I'll do my best x

Original Quill wrote:

xxx