Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Kindly, the fact that land-based carriers could not cover the entire ocean from 1942 to 1943 nearly took down Britain in the war because of submarine warfare. Most were killed near the shore, because they were safe in the middle of the ocean for a long time.Escort carriers weren’t used in any numbers until mid-1943 by which time the U-Boats threat had already been emasculated. More merchant losses happened in 1942 than in 1943. If they were so necessary, the RN wouldn’t have spent months rebuilding their Avgas systems to its own standards. That pissed off the USN which was shorting its own needs to provide CVEs to the RN. Land-based aircraft covered most of the Atlantic and got most of the aircraft U-Boat kills. Escort carrier aircraft were valuable because they forced U-Boats to submerge and lose contact with the convoys. Most U-Boats were killed near shore, not in mid-Atlantic by land-based aircraft.
Now you are branching out to Hiroshima and the soviets when you have yet to convince anyone about Pearl Harbor, so as to support calling FDR a traitorAnd some people prefer simplistic myths to complicated facts. When it comes to history, the simple answer is often not the correct or complete answer. Take, for example, the simple story that FDR and the War Department had no idea the Japanese would attack Pearl Harbor. The Hoover-Ladd memos alone destroy this myth, as do the accounts of Dutch Admiral Ranneft and Colonel Ketchum, the discovery of the transcript of the Briggs interview, the discovery of the OP-20-G file on message 7001 (proving that the Winds execute message was intercepted on December 4, just as Captain Safford reported), etc., etc., etc.
Or, take the simple explanation that nuking Japan caused Japan to surrender. It's a simple, feel-good story, but it's fiction. Japanese records show that the atomic bomb had very little influence on the emperor, his advisers, and the Supreme Council for the Direction of the War (aka Supreme War Council) on their decision to surrender. In fact, the Supreme War Council did not even think that confirmation of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima was sufficient reason to convene the council. But, when news of the Soviet invasion reached Tokyo, the Supreme War Council met almost immediately.
Historian Gregg Herken, a professor emeritus of U.S. diplomatic history at the University of California:
The notion that the atomic bombs caused the Japanese surrender on Aug. 15, 1945, has been, for many Americans and virtually all U.S. history textbooks, the default understanding of how and why the war ended. But minutes of the meetings of the Japanese government reveal a more complex story. The latest and best scholarship on the surrender, based on Japanese records, concludes that the Soviet Union’s unexpected entry into the war against Japan on Aug. 8 was probably an even greater shock to Tokyo than the atomic bombing of Hiroshima two days earlier. Until then, the Japanese had been hoping that the Russians — who had previously signed a nonaggression pact with Japan — might be intermediaries in negotiating an end to the war. As historian Tsuyoshi Hasegawa writes in his book Racing the Enemy, “Indeed, the Soviet attack, not the Hiroshima bomb, convinced political leaders to end the war.” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...e5-b673-1df005a0fb28_story.html?noredirect=on)
To follow up on Herken's use of Tsuyoshi Hasegawe's Racing the Enemy: Stalin, Truman, and the Surrender of Japan, it is one of the most highly acclaimed books on Japan's surrender ever written, and Hasegawe spends dozens of pages documenting the fact that it was the Soviet invasion, not the nukes, that (1) enabled the moderates to convene a meeting with the emperor and the Supreme War council where the emperor could order a surrender and (2) persuaded the hardliners to accept the emperor's order to surrender.
Indeed, at the Big Six meeting on August 9 when Hirohito broke the deadlock and ordered a surrender, he said nothing about Hiroshima or the atomic bomb in his remarks to the meeting--not one word (Noriko Kawamura, Emperor Hirohito and the Pacific War, Kindle Edition, locs. 3287-3314; see also Robert Butow, Japan's Decision to Surrender, p. 175).
The moderates needed no convincing. They had already decided many weeks earlier that Japan needed to surrender, which is why Emperor Hirohito himself ordered that the Soviets be approached about negotiating a surrender with the Americans weeks before Hiroshima--and we know that Truman knew all about this approach.
You mean the kind of "monsters" who would throw over one hundred thousand innocent Americans into concentration camps? The kind of "monsters" who would send a shipload of Jews who had escaped the Nazis back to their certain death? The kind of "monsters" who would oversee a program of injecting innocent Americans with syphilis in sick experimentation?...
Do you really belief our leadership were that sort of monsters?
Interning the Japanese probably saved lives following Pearl HarborYou mean the kind of "monsters" who would throw over one hundred thousand innocent Americans into concentration camps? The kind of "monsters" who would send a shipload of Jews who had escaped the Nazis back to their certain death? The kind of "monsters" who would oversee a program of injecting innocent Americans with syphilis in sick experimentation?
Not very familiar with the democrats, are you?
That may, or may not be true. What is unquestionably true is it was a gross violation of the COTUS.Interning the Japanese probably saved lives following Pearl Harbor
Because there was that much hate toward them in 1942
Which also transferred to Koreans and Chinese who could be mistaken for Japanese
Thats not why we did it
but internment did have that unintended consequence
Interning the Japanese probably saved lives following Pearl Harbor
Because there was that much hate toward them in 1942
Which also transferred to Koreans and Chinese who could be mistaken for Japanese
Thats not why we did it
but internment did have that unintended consequence
The Axis never had a chance. All three nations put together couldn't match the economic output of the USSR, let alone the British Commonwealth or the USA. Any one of the three could defeat the Axis, the three combined made it a curb-stomp.The Axis could have won WWII if it had smarter leaders
We are very fortunate that Hitler and Tojo carried fatal flaws that eventually spelled their demise
God does indeed watch over fools
The Axis never had a chance. All three nations put together couldn't match the economic output of the USSR, let alone the British Commonwealth or the USA. Any one of the three could defeat the Axis, the three combined made it a curb-stomp.
You need to study your historyThe Axis never had a chance. All three nations put together couldn't match the economic output of the USSR, let alone the British Commonwealth or the USA. Any one of the three could defeat the Axis, the three combined made it a curb-stomp.
I dont deny that FDR wanted to enter the war against Germany and a majority of the American public didnt
He would have had to be extremely stupid not to
What we know now about the Nazis leaves no doubt about that
And the Imperial Japanese were no better
It was never a question of if we would go to war but rather when
Imagine the Germans and Japanese meeting somewhere between India and Egypt, with America all alone and sitting in the sights of both
So we prodded the Japanese with demands that they not overrun china and stop acting like barbarians
If that makes FDR a traitor so be it
And thank God he was
They were lucky that the Germam army had such a horrible logistics system that it couldn't feed or supply itself with ammo, fuel and vehicles. The German army in WWII was largely horse drawn like the German Army in WWI and earlier wars was. The Germans were lucky that paranoid Stalin had just shot most of his senior officers and hobbled the rest with political commissars who had no military training or knowledge but could override the commander's orders. It didn't help that Stalin was killing off his generals who were defeated AND their families.You need to study your history
The soviets were lucky that they didnt lose the war in 1941
A war that the NAZIs never should have started without defeating England first
The Germans had many advantages over France and the Brits at the start of the war that that they did not take advantage of and thus squandered their chance to winThey were lucky that the Germam army had such a horrible logistics system that it couldn't feed or supply itself with ammo, fuel and vehicles. The German army in WWII was largely horse drawn like the German Army in WWI and earlier wars was. The Germans were lucky that paranoid Stalin had just shot most of his senior officers and hobbled the rest with political commissars who had no military training or knowledge but could override the commander's orders. It didn't help that Stalin was killing off his generals who were defeated AND their families.
They say without evidenceI posted links to many web pages that say otherwise. If they aren't good enough for you, nothing ever will be.
No you deal with fact BOYThe websites I gave links to tell the story. Names, dates, documents, etc. etc. etc. So do me a favor and just piss off.
Wrong DUMBASSWhat you "know" about the Nazis is bullshit history written by the victors. The problem is, that "history" is the only history that this or the majority of other forums will allow to be spoken.
