From: dpipes@spica.srg (Dave Pipes x4552)
Subject: Re: Relativity of Pearl Harbor
Organization: just me
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 92 18:11:26 GMT
Followup-To: soc.history

In article <76518@ut-emx.uucp> zing@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Leon Z. Lee) writes:
>In article <11362@optilink.UUCP> cramer@optilink.UUCP (Clayton Cramer) writes:
>
>Gentlemen...in this course of this debate in which I witnessed in these
>few days, there is one aspect of argument which is indisputable..
>which is that fact the objective pursuit of history is absolute.
>
<claim about propaganda about PH deleted>
>
>If one takes the attempt to analyze historical events.....one will inevitably
>come to the following conclusions:
>
>[1] It is precisely because of Japan's contact with the West that Imperial
>Naval factions insisted that a formal declaration of war be presented before
>any attack should commence against the US.  The Japanese Representatives Nomura
>and Kurusu was instructured by the Japanese Government to deliver the
>Declarationof War one hour before the attack was to commence.
>
>However, due to the manual deciphering system that the Japanese possessed,
>it was not possible to decode the 14-part encrypted message before their
>appointment with the US Sec. of State.  When the message was finally delivered,
>the attack upon Pearl Harbor has commenced for 1 hour.  Thus, the impression
>of a sneak-attack was engrained into the American psyche.

This is interesting.  A one hour warning is not a sneak attack, but somehow
becomes an honorable, straightforward declaration?  Even when not delivered?
"I have decided to challenge you to a duel ten seconds from now...!BANG!"
I think that the declaration was merely pro forma, and in fact your statements
imply that the initial decision was not to make one at all.
>
>[2] Militarily-speaking....the attack on Pearl Harbor was a tremendous
>military achievement !  The coordination, innonvations, and distance of
>the attack was truly commendable.  The mere odds against the Japanese
>launching a successful attack from the Kurile Islands .....over a distance
>of 2500 miles...not to mention that the entire fleet had to refuel in the
>middle of the Pacific and yet had to aviod detection...is a feat that
>few countries had matched.

Here, the argument that Japan conducted unequaled military feats, and desrves
respect for them.
>
>[3] The Japanese attack was not as great as the inepted posture demonstrated
>by the US Military command at Pearl Harbor.  We Americans offered one
>thing that the Japanese can never hope to obtain....that is total and
>complete surprise in their attack.
>
<good evidence (mostly) of American unpreparedness deleted>
>
>The situation placed before you is not a henious sneak-attack by those
>so-called "nips" from across the sea.  Far from it....this episode in 
>American history demonstrated the total inept command structure of the
>US military in preventing this attack.

This argument implies that the Japanese attack is the fault of the US; that,
given better preparedness, or management, or communications, it would not
have occured.
>
>Recall that the US recently moved it Pacific Fleet from San Diego
>to the Hawaiian Islands in order to respond to the changing political
>events of the Far East.  Yet, the attack on Pearl Harbor displayed without
>a doubt the lacks nature of American preparation.

So you feel there was no sneak attack, the Japanese were better militarily 
than any of their enemies, and that the US unpreparedness caused them to
attack Pearl Harbor.  I submit that you have used exactly the same rhetorical
tricks you dislike to create a piece of propaganda, based probably on the
imagined guilt of the victors.  This is the furthest thing from objective
analysis that I can imagine.
>
>[4] Chinese Premier Chou En-Lai was once asked about his opinions on the
>French Revolution...he replied "It's too early to tell".  As
>a student of history, I can state quite confidently that the final 
>judgement and guilt of Pearl Harbor have yet to be passed.

*My* reading of this conclusion is that your confidence is misplaced.  You,
sir, are an apologist for a society which disappeared over 45 years ago.

Japan decided to attack the US and did so, in an unexpected way at a critical
point.  This is one of the oldest military strategies, that of surprising the
enemy at a weak point at the onset of hostilities.  Diplomatic niceties and
levels of preparedness merely cloud the issue.  The intent was what any 
attacker would have had, to cause the most damage possible.  The US reaction
was that of any defender; use all means to organize a response, with
propaganda used as a tool.
>
>Such are my mere opinions.....
>______________________________________________________________________________
>  Leon Z. Lee  
>  Network Administrator                    Internet: zing@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu
>  Residence Hall Computer Labs
>  University of Texas at Austin
>___ Note: Let the consequences of my words be solely bestowed upon me ________

Why would they be anywhere else? :-)

			David Pipes
robear@digex.com
Xref: sparky soc.history:6831 talk.politics.misc:36721 ca.politics:6184 rec.arts.books:13514 misc.legal:15251