"
Hi, another few points about the second subtitle: ""Would the preparations have been effective?"".  I argue that this subtitle is too long. The subtitle ""Historical analysis"" would be more concise. As well, professional historians do not usually devote time to ""counter factual"" discussions, like ""Would the US forces in Hawaii been able to withstand an amphibious assault by Japanese forces in WW II"", or ""If it had not been rainy in 1415, would the French knights have won at the Battle of Agincourt, rather than being trapped in the mud"".  Historians don't spend time discussing these issues. In 1415, during the battle of Agincourt, it WAS muddy, and so the French knights DID get bogged down in the mud, and so that is the course of the battle. I would like to see a source indicating that reputable historians have discussed ""Would the preparations have been effective.""  

"