British Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s fervent hope for years was that Japan would attack the United States. This would permit the United States (not legally, but politically) to fully enter World War II in Europe, as its president wanted to do, as opposed to merely providing weaponry and assisting in targeting of submarines as it had been doing. Of course, Germany’s declaration of war, which followed Pearl Harbor and the immediate U.S. declaration of war on Japan, helped as well, but it was Pearl Harbor that radically converted the American people from opposition to support for war.
President Franklin Delano Roosevelt had tried lying to the American people about U.S. ships including the Greer and the Kerny, which had been helping British planes track German submarines, but which Roosevelt pretended had been innocently attacked. Roosevelt also lied that he had in his possession a secret Nazi map planning the conquest of South America, as well as a secret Nazi plan for replacing all religions with Nazism. And yet, the people of the United States didn’t buy the idea of going into another war until Pearl Harbor, by which point Roosevelt had already instituted the draft, activated the National Guard, created a huge Navy in two oceans, traded old destroyers to England in exchange for the lease of its bases in the Caribbean and Bermuda, and — just 11 days before the “unexpected” attack — he had secretly ordered the creation of a list of every Japanese and Japanese-American person in the United States.

On April 28, 1941, Churchill wrote a secret directive to his war cabinet:
“It may be taken as almost certain that the entry of Japan into the war would be followed by the immediate entry of the United States on our side.”
On May 11, 1941, Robert Menzies, the prime minister of Australia, met with Roosevelt and found him “a little jealous” of Churchill’s place in the center of the war. While Roosevelt’s cabinet all wanted the United States to enter the war, Menzies found that Roosevelt,
” . . . trained under Woodrow Wilson in the last war, waits for an incident, which would in one blow get the USA into war and get R. out of his foolish election pledges that ‘I will keep you out of war.’”
On August 18, 1941, Churchill met with his cabinet at 10 Downing Street. The meeting had some similarity to the July 23, 2002, meeting at the same address, the minutes of which became known as the Downing Street Minutes. Both meetings revealed secret U.S. intentions to go to war. In the 1941 meeting, Churchill told his cabinet, according to the minutes: “The President had said he would wage war but not declare it.” In addition, “Everything was to be done to force an incident.”
Japan was certainly not averse to attacking others and had been busy creating an Asian empire. And the United States and Japan were certainly not living in harmonious friendship. But what could bring the Japanese to attack?
When President Franklin Roosevelt visited Pearl Harbor on July 28, 1934, seven years before the Japanese attack, the Japanese military expressed apprehension. General Kunishiga Tanaka wrote in the Japan Advertiser, objecting to the build-up of the American fleet and the creation of additional bases in Alaska and the Aleutian Islands:
“Such insolent behavior makes us most suspicious. It makes us think a major disturbance is purposely being encouraged in the Pacific. This is greatly regretted.”
Whether it was actually regretted or not is a separate question from whether this was a typical and predictable response to military expansionism, even when done in the name of “defense.” The great unembedded (as we would today call him) journalist George Seldes was suspicious as well. In October 1934 he wrote in Harper’s Magazine: “It is an axiom that nations do not arm for war but for a war.” Seldes asked an official at the Navy League:
“Do you accept the naval axiom that you prepare to fight a specific navy?”
The man replied “Yes.”
“Do you contemplate a fight with the British navy?”
“Absolutely, no.”
“Do you contemplate war with Japan?”
“Yes.”
In 1935 the most decorated U.S. Marine in history at the time, Brigadier General Smedley D. Butler, published to enormous success a short book called War Is a Racket. He saw perfectly well what was coming and warned the nation:
“At each session of Congress the question of further naval appropriations comes up. The swivel-chair admirals don’t shout that ‘We need lots of battleships to war on this nation or that nation.’ Oh, no. First of all, they let it be known that America is menaced by a great naval power. Almost any day, these admirals will tell you, the great fleet of this supposed enemy will strike suddenly and annihilate our 125,000,000 people. Just like that. Then they begin to cry for a larger navy. For what? To fight the enemy? Oh my, no. Oh, no. For defense purposes only. Then, incidentally, they announce maneuvers in the Pacific. For defense. Uh, huh.
“The Pacific is a great big ocean. We have a tremendous coastline in the Pacific. Will the maneuvers be off the coast, two or three hundred miles? Oh, no. The maneuvers will be two thousand, yes, perhaps even thirty-five hundred miles, off the coast.
“The Japanese, a proud people, of course will be pleased beyond expression to see the United States fleet so close to Nippon’s shores. Even as pleased as would be the residents of California were they to dimly discern, through the morning mist, the Japanese fleet playing at war games off Los Angeles.”
In March 1935, Roosevelt bestowed Wake Island on the U.S. Navy and gave Pan Am Airways a permit to build runways on Wake Island, Midway Island, and Guam. Japanese military commanders announced that they were disturbed and viewed these runways as a threat. So did peace activists in the United States. By the next month, Roosevelt had planned war games and maneuvers near the Aleutian Islands and Midway Island. By the following month, peace activists were marching in New York advocating friendship with Japan. Norman Thomas wrote in 1935:
“The Man from Mars who saw how men suffered in the last war and how frantically they are preparing for the next war, which they know will be worse, would come to the conclusion that he was looking at the denizens of a lunatic asylum.”

The U.S. Navy spent the next few years working up plans for war with Japan, the March 8, 1939, version of which described “an offensive war of long duration” that would destroy the military and disrupt the economic life of Japan. In January 1941, eleven months before the attack, the Japan Advertiser expressed its outrage over Pearl Harbor in an editorial, and the U.S. ambassador to Japan wrote in his diary:
“There is a lot of talk around town to the effect that the Japanese, in case of a break with the United States, are planning to go all out in a surprise mass attack on Pearl Harbor. Of course I informed my government.”
On February 5, 1941, Rear Admiral Richmond Kelly Turner wrote to Secretary of War Henry Stimson to warn of the possibility of a surprise attack at Pearl Harbor.
As early as 1932 the United States had been talking with China about providing airplanes, pilots, and training for its war with Japan. In November 1940, Roosevelt loaned China one hundred million dollars for war with Japan, and after consulting with the British, U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Henry Morgenthau made plans to send the Chinese bombers with U.S. crews to use in bombing Tokyo and other Japanese cities. On December 21, 1940, two weeks shy of a year before the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, China’s Minister of Finance T.V. Soong and Colonel Claire Chennault, a retired U.S. Army flier who was working for the Chinese and had been urging them to use American pilots to bomb Tokyo since at least 1937, met in Henry Morgenthau’s dining room to plan the firebombing of Japan. Morgenthau said he could get men released from duty in the U.S. Army Air Corps if the Chinese could pay them $1,000 per month. Soong agreed.
On May 24, 1941, the New York Times reported on U.S. training of the Chinese air force, and the provision of “numerous fighting and bombing planes” to China by the United States. “Bombing of Japanese Cities is Expected” read the subheadline. By July, the Joint Army-Navy Board had approved a plan called JB 355 to firebomb Japan. A front corporation would buy American planes to be flown by American volunteers trained by Chennault and paid by another front group. Roosevelt approved, and his China expert Lauchlin Currie, in the words of Nicholson Baker, “wired Madame Chaing Kai-Shek and Claire Chennault a letter that fairly begged for interception by Japanese spies.” Whether or not that was the entire point, this was the letter:
“I am very happy to be able to report today the President directed that sixty-six bombers be made available to China this year with twenty-four to be delivered immediately. He also approved a Chinese pilot training program here. Details through normal channels. Warm regards.”
Our ambassador had said “in case of a break with the United States” the Japanese would bomb Pearl Harbor. I wonder if this qualified!
The 1st American Volunteer Group (AVG) of the Chinese Air Force, also known as the Flying Tigers, moved ahead with recruitment and training immediately, were provided to China prior to Pearl Harbor, and first saw combat on December 20, 1941, twelve days (local time) after the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor.
On May 31, 1941, at the Keep America Out of War Congress, William Henry Chamberlin gave a dire warning: “A total economic boycott of Japan, the stoppage of oil shipments for instance, would push Japan into the arms of the Axis. Economic war would be a prelude to naval and military war.” The worst thing about peace advocates is how many times they turn out to be right.
On July 24, 1941, President Roosevelt remarked, “If we cut the oil off , [the Japanese] probably would have gone down to the Dutch East Indies a year ago, and you would have had a war. It was very essential from our own selfish point of view of defense to prevent a war from starting in the South Pacific. So our foreign policy was trying to stop a war from breaking out there.”
Reporters noticed that Roosevelt said “was” rather than “is.” The next day, Roosevelt issued an executive order freezing Japanese assets. The United States and Britain cut off oil and scrap metal to Japan. Radhabinod Pal, an Indian jurist who served on the war crimes tribunal after the war, called the embargoes a “clear and potent threat to Japan’s very existence,” and concluded the United States had provoked Japan.
On August 7th four months before the attack the Japan Times Advertiser wrote: “First there was the creation of a superbase at Singapore, heavily reinforced by British and Empire troops. From this hub a great wheel was built up and linked with American bases to form a great ring sweeping in a great area southwards and westwards from the Philippines through Malaya and Burma, with the link broken only in the Thailand peninsula. Now it is proposed to include the narrows in the encirclement, which proceeds to Rangoon.”
By September the Japanese press was outraged that the United States had begun shipping oil right past Japan to reach Russia. Japan, its newspapers said, was dying a slow death from “economic war.”
What might the United States have been hoping to gain by shipping oil past a nation in desperate need of it?
In late October, U.S. spy Edgar Mower was doing work for Colonel William Donovan who spied for Roosevelt. Mower spoke with a man in Manila named Ernest Johnson, a member of the Maritime Commission, who said he expected “The Japs will take Manila before I can get out.” When Mower expressed surprise, Johnson replied “Didn’t you know the Jap fleet has moved eastward, presumably to attack our fleet at Pearl Harbor?”
On November 3, 1941, our ambassador tried again to get something through his government’s thick skull, sending a lengthy telegram to the State Department warning that the economic sanctions might force Japan to commit “national hara-kiri.” He wrote: “An armed conflict with the United States may come with dangerous and dramatic suddenness.”
Why do I keep recalling the headline of the memo given to President George W. Bush prior to the September 11, 2001, attacks? “Bin Laden Determined To Strike in U.S.”
Apparently nobody in Washington wanted to hear it in 1941 either. On November 15th, Army Chief of Staff George Marshall briefed the media on something we do not remember as “the Marshall Plan.” In fact we don’t remember it at all. “We are preparing an offensive war against Japan,” Marshall said, asking the journalists to keep it a secret, which as far as I know they dutifully did.
Ten days later Secretary of War Henry Stimson wrote in his diary that he’d met in the Oval Office with Marshall, President Roosevelt, Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox, Admiral Harold Stark, and Secretary of State Cordell Hull. Roosevelt had told them the Japanese were likely to attack soon, possibly next Monday. It has been well documented that the United States had broken the Japanese’ codes and that Roosevelt had access to them. It was through intercept of a so-called Purple code message that Roosevelt had discovered Germany’s plans to invade Russia. It was Hull who leaked a Japanese intercept to the press, resulting in the November 30, 1941, headline “Japanese May Strike Over Weekend.”
That next Monday would have been December 1st, six days before the attack actually came. “The question,” Stimson wrote, “was how we should maneuver them into the position of firing the first shot without allowing too much danger to ourselves. It was a difficult proposition.” Was it? One obvious answer was to keep the fleet in Pearl Harbor and keep the sailors stationed there in the dark while fretting about them from comfortable offices in Washington, D.C. In fact, that was the solution our suit-and-tied heroes went with.
The day after the attack, Congress voted for war. Congresswoman Jeannette Rankin (R., Mont.), the first woman ever elected to Congress, and who had voted against World War I, stood alone in opposing World War II (just as Congresswoman Barbara Lee [D., Calif.] would stand alone against attacking Afghanistan 60 years later). One year after the vote, on December 8, 1942, Rankin put extended remarks into the Congressional Record explaining her opposition. She cited the work of a British propagandist who had argued in 1938 for using Japan to bring the United States into the war. She cited Henry Luce’s reference in Life magazine on July 20, 1942, to “the Chinese for whom the U.S. had delivered the ultimatum that brought on Pearl Harbor.” She introduced evidence that at the Atlantic Conference on August 12, 1941, Roosevelt had assured Churchill that the United States would bring economic pressure to bear on Japan. “I cited,” Rankin later wrote, ” the State Department Bulletin of December 20, 1941, which revealed that on September 3 a communication had been sent to Japan demanding that it accept the principle of ‘nondisturbance of the status quo in the Pacific,’ which amounted to demanding guarantees of the inviolateness of the white empires in the Orient.”
Rankin found that the Economic Defense Board had gotten economic sanctions under way less than a week after the Atlantic Conference. On December 2, 1941, the New York Times had reported, in fact, that Japan had been “cut off from about 75 percent of her normal trade by the Allied blockade.” Rankin also cited the statement of Lieutenant Clarence E. Dickinson, U.S.N., in the Saturday Evening Post of October 10, 1942, that on November 28, 1941, nine days before the attack, Vice Admiral William F. Halsey, Jr., (he of the catchy slogan “Kill Japs! Kill Japs!” ) had given instructions to him and others to “shoot down anything we saw in the sky and to bomb anything we saw on the sea.”
General George Marshall admitted as much to Congress in 1945: that the codes had been broken, that the United States had initiated Anglo-Dutch-American agreements for unified action against Japan and put them into effect before Pearl Harbor, and that the United States had provided officers of its military to China for combat duty before Pearl Harbor. It is hardly a secret that it takes two war powers to wage a war (unlike when one war power attacks an unarmed state) or that this case was no exception to that rule. An October 1940 memorandum by Lieutenant Commander Arthur H. McCollum was acted on by President Roosevelt and his chief subordinates. It called for eight actions that McCollum predicted would lead the Japanese to attack, including arranging for the use of British bases in Singapore and for the use of Dutch bases in what is now Indonesia, aiding the Chinese government, sending a division of long-range heavy cruisers to the Philippines or Singapore, sending two divisions of submarines to “the Orient,” keeping the main strength of the fleet in Hawaii, insisting that the Dutch refuse the Japanese oil, and embargoing all trade with Japan in collaboration with the British Empire.
The day after McCollum’s memo, the State Department told Americans to evacuate far eastern nations, and Roosevelt ordered the fleet kept in Hawaii over the strenuous objection of Admiral James O. Richardson who quoted the President as saying “Sooner or later the Japanese would commit an overt act against the United States and the nation would be willing to enter the war.” The message that Admiral Harold Stark sent to Admiral Husband Kimmel on November 28, 1941, read, “IF HOSTILITIES CANNOT REPEAT CANNOT BE AVOIDED THE UNITED STATES DESIRES THAT JAPAN COMMIT THE FIRST OVERT ACT.” Joseph Rochefort, cofounder of the Navy’s communication intelligence section, who was instrumental in failing to communicate to Pearl Harbor what was coming, would later comment: “It was a pretty cheap price to pay for unifying the country.”
The night after the attack, President Roosevelt had CBS News’s Edward R. Murrow and Roosevelt’s Coordinator of Information William Donovan over for dinner at the White House, and all the President wanted to know was whether the American people would now accept war. Donovan and Murrow assured him the people would indeed accept war now. Donovan later told his assistant that Roosevelt’s surprise was not that of others around him, and that he, Roosevelt, welcomed the attack. Murrow was unable to sleep that night and was plagued for the rest of his life by what he called “the biggest story of my life” which he never told, but which he did not need to. The next day, the President spoke of a day of infamy, the United States Congress declared the last Constitutional war in the history of the republic, and the President of the Federal Council of Churches, Dr. George A. Buttrick, became a member of the Fellowship of Reconciliation committing to resist the war.
Why does it matter? Because the legend of Pearl Harbor, re-used on 9-11, is responsible not for the destructive pro-war policies of the 1920s and the 1930s that brought World War II into being, but responsible for the permanent war mentality of the past 70 years, as well as for how World War II was escalated, prolonged, and completed.
“Disturbed in 1942,” wrote Lawrence S. Wittner, “by rumors of Nazi extermination plans, Jessie Wallace Hughan worried that such a policy, which appeared ‘natural, from their pathological point of view,’ might be carried out if World War II continued. ‘It seems that the only way to save thousands and perhaps millions of European Jews from destruction,’ she wrote, ‘would be for our government to broadcast the promise’ of an ‘armistice on condition that the European minorities are not molested any further. . . . It would be very terrible if six months from now we should find that this threat has literally come to pass without our making even a gesture to prevent it.’ When her predictions were fulfilled only too well by 1943, she wrote to the State Department and the New York Times, decrying the fact that ‘two million [Jews] have already died’ and that ‘two million more will be killed by the end of the war.’ Once again she pleaded for the cessation of hostilities, arguing that German military defeats would in turn exact reprisals upon the Jewish scapegoat. ‘Victory will not save them,’ she insisted, ‘for dead men cannot be liberated.’”
Hitler killed millions of Germans, but the allies killed as many or more, Germans ordered into battle by Hitler or Germans in the wrong place when allied bombs fell. And, as Hughan pointed out at the time, the war drove the genocide, just as the vengeful settlement of the previous war a quarter century before had fueled the hostility, the scapegoating, and the rise of Hitlerism. Out of the resistance to war by U.S. conscientious objectors would come, finally, the development of civil resistance to racial segregation in U.S. prisons that later spread to the nation outside the prisons as activists sought to duplicate their victories on a larger scale. But also out of that very worst thing our species has ever done to itself, World War II, would come the permanent military industrial complex. We would extend the power to vote to more and more Americans while, in the cruelest of jokes, transforming voting into an ever more meaningless enterprise. We would paint a fresh coat of glossy pretense on our democracy while hollowing it out from the inside, replacing it with a war machine the likes of which the planet had never seen and may not be able to survive.



40 Comments

Gee, I guess we should not have helped Britain, built or maintained any bases in the Pacific, lets the Japanese rule all of the Pacific west of Hawaii as they (murderously) saw fit and let the Nazis finish off their quest to exterminate the entire Jewish people.
Yeah, that woulda been great for everybody.
Excellent post. It was also later revealed that FDR know when that attack would take place as the Japanese code had already been broken.
Indeed. Even FDR himself had said thank god for WWII as it got the country out of the depression. And with all the government contracts give to nearly every company during the war, none wanted them to be cancelled after the war.
So came the so called cold war and Korea and Vietnam and many others. The government gravy train most never be stopped.
Or, another way of looking at:
- Germany, which started murdering Jews and others in Poland, the Ukraine, and other captured territories before Pearl Harbor, would have eventually grown tired of the pastime and stopped of their volition.
- If we hadn’t embargoed Japan and held on to our Pacific bases, Japan would have just invaded The Phillipines (which they did, anyway), Australia (which they tried to do), the rest of the SE Asian subcontinent from the edge of India through Malaysia.
And everything would have been wonderful. Because, you know, war is always bad, you can only have a war if you fight back, and therefore the U.S. has never fought a just war (not even the Revolutionary War). We should have let the Confederacy break away and maintain slavery (into the modern day!).
Should be “of their own volition”.
Edit feature would be, you know, really nice to have.
Without knowing any of the details, my grandparents told me over 25 years ago that FDR had “set up” the whole thing so we could intervene in Europe and fight the Nazis.
Having read several books over the years (starting when I was in high school) about British intelligence operations in the US before Pearl Harbor, Enigma, the Pacific naval war (with an emphasis on accounts from the Japanese perspective), it was obvious to me long ago that moving the Pacific Fleet from California to Hawaii was a deliberate provocation. Cutting off the oil and scrap metal was the last straw, as the Japanese war machine would have soon ground to a halt.
Therefore the timetable to invade SE Asia to secure resources was moved up before Japan ran out of oil.
Make no doubt however, that Japan had been preparing to fight the US for as long as the US had been preparing to fight Japan – the war would have happened eventually unless the US would have been willing to accept Japan ruling the entire Pacific.
I do agree however that Pearl Harbor, like 9/11, was such a psychological national shock that it made us paranoid of another surprise attack – which led to the Cold War as we just could not believe that the USSR as the only other remaining major military power would not have designs on us (besides communism scared the crap out of the bankers & oligarchs of the day so they had every incentive to promulgate this view).
Your last paragraph is so ignorant of the civilian deaths in Poland and the USSR at the hands of the Nazis as to beg the use of a fairly harsh descriptor.
How about some enlightening details instead?
Some of the documents used by Stinnett in researching Day of Deceit were re-classified after his book came out.
US Government obviously wants to hide things…
The ultimate tragedy of war, any war, is the price paid by all non-combatants in all involved countries.
That being acknowledged, when taking into consideration the vast accumulation of historical records, eye witness reports, and ‘missing’ eastern European populations in all countries Germany invaded, it would not be hyperbole to suggest that the price paid by the German population was a mere down payment on the total price they should have paid.
And what would have been an equitable price?
Allowing the Red Army to devastate all of Germany in the same manner that Germany wantonly destroyed all ‘sub-human’ life they encountered and slaughtered in Russia and eastern Europe.
Thanks and recommended
A sign of a good book, and his book is a good book.
What about War Plan Red, and the court-martial of Gen. Billy Mitchell?
http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2009/2009_10-19/2009_10-19/2009-11/pdf/24-33_3611.pdf
This has an earlier history of even larger scope.
Thanx. History is the antidote for American Exceptionalism.
What a putrid piece of recycled fascist propaganda.
You are simply recycling bits and pieces from the Roosevelt Haters of the 1930′s and ’40′s. The conspiracy theory has already been widely discredited. Pearl Harbor was a surprise–they thought the Japanese were focused on South East Asia.
“FDR KNEW” – was not shown to be true
The US military did break the code – a post war hearing was held on the when and what was learned before 12/7 and how far up the chain of command the new info went. Nothing showed that FDR “knew” all that much.
As to rich and corporate greed in the 30′s, FDR had to deal with not only Japan demanding dominance and economic serfdom of nearby countries – and the Western areas in their area of the world, he had to deal with Obama like calls for “group loyalty” – Obama demands blacks call those against him racist (esp if named Clinton), and back then there were rallies funded by the Rich of northern EU and Brit descent that demanded “Aryan” loyalty – indeed German loyalty (25% of the nation in 30′s were in families with German background) – indeed George Bush’s granddad ran a bank that help fund the Nazi movement – he and Ford and others were the Koch brothers of their day.
reviewer of the book:
“In 1999, Robert B. Stinnett, since 1986 a retired long-time employee of the Oakland Tribune, authored his book, Day of Deceit, based upon years of extensive personal research.
Attempting to personally blame Roosevelt for the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor is not new. Others have made similar assertions over the years. But Stinnett claims that through personally reviewing hundreds of thousands of documents, many obtained through use of the Freedom of Information Act, he found indisputable “proof” that Roosevelt actually knew of, and deliberately provoked, the Japanese attack.
A number of reviewers of Stinnett’s book, perhaps impressed by 65 pages of some 595 footnotes (many quite lengthy) and accepting them carte blanche as valid, praised the book. But, as one would say, the devil is in the details.
Stinnett’s conclusions rest on four major allegations. First, that Navy Lieutenant Commander McCollum drafted a memorandum dated October 7, 1940 for his boss, Navy Captain Anderson, entitled “Estimate of the Situation in the Pacific and Recommendations for Action by the United States.” In it McCollum set forth eight steps which could be interpreted as provocative to Japan. Stinnett asserts that the President read or knew of this memorandum, and immediately adopted and carried out those eight steps “…to provoke Japan through a series of actions into an overt act: the Pearl Harbor attack.”
Stinnett’s own research proves otherwise. There were no forwarding endorsements on McCollum’s October 7, 1940 memorandum. Stinnett found only a response to McCollum from a Captain Dudley Knox, commenting on its contents. Even though Stinnett admits that “no specific record has been found by the author indicating whether he (Captain Anderson, the addressee) or Roosevelt actually ever saw it,” Stinnett goes on to claim that “a series of secret presidential routing logs plus collateral intelligence information in Navy files offer conclusive evidence that they (Roosevelt and Captain Anderson) did see it.”
However, if one tries to find the “secret presidential routing logs” cited by Stinnett in his lengthy footnote 8, no secret presidential routing logs are even mentioned, let alone cited. When asked about this, Stinnett replied that the logs he had referenced in footnote 8 (apparently by mistake) “are fully described” in footnote 37 on page 314. But this footnote deals with radio intercepts, not McCollum’s memorandum.
It is clear after delving into Stinnett’s footnotes that there is no “conclusive evidence,” in fact no evidence whatsoever, that Roosevelt saw or even knew of McCollum’s memorandum. Stinnett has proved just the opposite of his own oft repeated allegation that Roosevelt adopted McCollum’s eight point program. Through Stinnett’s own exhaustive research, we now know that there is not one scintilla of documentary evidence that President Roosevelt saw, knew of, or adopted McCollum’s proposals.
Stinnett’s second major allegation is that Roosevelt prevented Admiral Kimmel from conducting a training exercise that would have uncovered the oncoming Japanese Fleet. Stinnett provides no relevant documents to support his allegation. Stinnett does quote Admiral Turner (at the time of Pearl Harbor, Director of Navy Plans in Washington, D.C.), testifying before Congress after the war, as proof that the Navy had been ordered out of the area where Nagumo’s task force was headed:
“We were prepared to divert traffic when we believed that war was imminent. We sent
the traffic down via Torres Strait, so that the track of the Japanese task force would be
clear of any traffic.”
What is bothersome is that Turner never made this statement. What Stinnett has done is cobble together phrases of Admiral Turner’s testimony from different sentences to arrive at the above quoted statement. The reading of Turner’s actual testimony leaves a different meaning
But the mort serious flaw facing Stinnett is that Admiral Kimmel himself, for years fighting to restore his dignity and reversing the belief of many that he was negligent in permitting his Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor to be so surprised, never once stated, suggested or hinted in the hundreds of pages of his testimony before various investigative bodies, in his own book, or in any of his speeches, that he was prevented from finding the Japanese task force. In fact, he did not believe that the Japanese were about to attack Pearl.
Kimmel’s own testimony totally disproves Stinnett’s second allegation:
“In short, all indications of the movements of Japanese military and naval forces which came to
my attention confirmed the information in the dispatch of 27 November – that the Japanese were
on the move against Thailand or the Kra Peninsula in southeast Asia.”
“In brief, in the week immediately prior to Pearl Harbor, I had no evidence that the
Japanese carriers were enroute to Oahu.”
Conducting and then concluding a standard annual war game north of Hawaii by some ships of the Pacific Fleet some two weeks before December 7th, is hardly evidence, as Stinnett claims, of Kimmel being prevented from discovering the Japanese attack force.
The remaining two major allegations, one being that the Japanese task force actually sent radio messages while on the way to Pearl, the other that many Japanese secret messages about the planned attack on Pearl Harbor were not only intercepted but were deciphered and translated before the attack, have already been discredited by experts in cryptology and radio communications, as well as by noted historians of Pearl Harbor, such as Gordon W. Prange and John Prados.
An analysis of much of the research done by Stinnett and his quotes raise serious questions about the accuracy and relevance of many of his claims. Any serious student of Pearl Harbor needs to look carefully at Stinnett’s research before concluding that he has really uncovered any thing new.
Richard E. Young, RADM, USNR (Ret) ”
details?
We don’t need o stinkin details.
We have our gut. And our gut says …
/s
Oh boy David, you really did it this time.
Expect a backlash.
The embargo of oil was an economic deceleration of war. Of course the Japanese were no saints under their emperor tyrant. But once again, American exceptionalism means if they do it so can we.
Also, America set the precedent for nuclear weapon use. As clearly noted, any country may “end” a war with nuclear weapons if it wishes “to save lives”.
As in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, civilians can be targeted with nuclear weapons.
America has set this precedent, and it is one that we must live with.
That of course is our real fear. What if another country does as we have done and “ends” wars with nuclear weapons, even on civilians (war crime). The real concern is that other countries will do as we do.
Reality is the antidote for American Exceptionalism.
Heck of a read Mr. Swanson.
The comments too are interesting, whether one agrees with one side or the other, there’s just NO way to dispute that Pearl Harbor and WW2 led us FULLY down the road to the MIC, which as posited above in places, was actually developing in WW1 when American businessmen (Bush/Kennedy/Carnegie) were DOING business with Germany, as they did AFTER WW1 which led to the military build up of Germany yet a second time in less than 50 years.
My amateur understanding has always been the US knew of Japan’s foray’s into SE Asia/China, but many US Military people and analysts were greatly concerned they could not find the Japanese carriers . . . which concern was proven just considering the outcome at Pearl.
That’s a BIG giveaway, if carriers are missing from a theatre of operations in them times. Pearl was a sitting duck. N of course, a FEW of our carriers were sent out of Pearl, conveniently, before the attack . . . hard to fathom SOMEONE in charge didn’t know of the imminent attack, given all the other evidence offered from history.
Bravo Mr. Swanson, for a look back at how history came forward once again to benefit the industrialists and bankers/financeers . . . .
We do tend to ignore the fact that the British (along with the French and the Belgians) had invaded and conquered the African continent.
Which was “OK” because they spoke our language (well, not the French) and if they worked at terrorizing, subjugating, and killing off the the indigenous black or brown populations, it was a Good Thing, because we needed the gold and minerals . Oh and the Kenyan coffee.
And the Brits were occupying the Indian sub-continent. Again, ok, because they were teaching the natives English. And civilizing them.
And, then there was the middle East. The Brits were pillaging Iran – oil, you know. The Germans were trying to get a foothold in other oil-rich areas, but it was uphill work. The Brits were apparently much better at subjugating the native populations. Well, who wouldn’t want to send their sons to Eton.
And, who remembers that in South America there were (are?) entire indigenous populations that were subjugated by the Spanish and Portuguese? And are still being exterminated with the help of the US.
And, Afghanistan. Graveyard of Empires. A sort of buffer-zone in which all the European Great Powers played the Great Game. Which of course, completely excluded the indigenous peoples, who made do with the crumbs and had an occasional bout of fun by picking off the occupying British soldiers in the Khyber Pass.
The Japanese, another island nation with no room to expand and no natural resources to speak of, took a look at the Brits, and thought – “Hmmmm. There’s China, with a ginormous land mass and a fair amount of natural resources. If Britain can do it in Africa and India and the Middle East ….. ”
But, of course, they didn’t speak English and had yellow skin and slanty eyes, and most certainly weren’t Christian. So they are not allowed to invade foreign lands, subjugate the indigenous population, rape and pillage an extract natural resources.
Most of us are pretty nice people. But we are all – American, Brits, Germans, Japanese, Chinese – coerced into sending our young people off to be slaughtered when the elite think there are profits to be made. Whether it is controlling oil in Iran, gold and minerals and oil in Africa, copper in Peru, water in the Himalayas, uranium in Australia, the rich and powerful want more profits and the rest of us get killed. And to do this, we get sold a pack of lies about how we (and our allies of the moment) are the “good guys.”
In the spirit of the season, I say to that, “Bah, humbug.”
Shorter swanson: the Axis rawked, the Allies sucked.
Take this over to Stormfront where it belongs.
Would you care to list and offer rebuttals to some of the most putrid, recycled and/or fascist examples of propaganda in the article?
Over 5 million Poles dead: that the kind of “detail” you had in mind?
Why not take your simplistic and inaccurate take to stormfront where it belongs.
Sorry about the pesky details. And sorry about reality.
The whole thing is a putrid restatement of fascist propaganda that you can find by looking through the Japanese and German press of the time–or at Pat Buchanan’s ravings in our time. If you want a history lesson, read some books on the rape of Nanking or the Nazi holocaust or the Japanese invasion of Manchuria or its genocidal occupation of Korea, none of which this oaf Swanson mentions.
I’m kinda torn, even if these weren’t debunked conspiracy theories (which they are), it still gave us an excuse to kick nazi ass.
What would be the OPs solution to the nazi problem? Make a treaty with them? That worked great after that whole Sudetenland thing.
Are you the reincarnation of Neville Chamberlain?
A pissed off descendant of a leader of the German Bundt (spelling)?
Did you know that “David Swanson” is an anagram for “Orly Taitz?”
well, see Poles are not Germans because they’re Poles
Sorry if that wasn’t clear
Here are some #s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
This seems very constricting to limit a long book to 4 little bits and deal with them so technically. Part of the evidence that FDR acted on the advice of that memo was that, well, he took the steps advised in the memo. Sorry to be brief – in a rush.
In Appreciation: the content free name-calling strawmanning comments on this site are MUCH less than on other sites. And the comments with content in them, whether agreeing or disputing points in the OP are more numerous. Thanks.
Yes, we can all agree that the rape of Nanjing, the holocaust, the Japanese invasion of Manchuria and its occupation of Korea, were abhorrent. And, you might want to read my post below, for a list of the invasions, occupations, rapes and genocides carried out by the British and the other European powers. Case of what’s sauce for the goose, and all that.
I did not list the invasions, occupations and genocides entered into by the US. Too long. But, the US was certainly complicit, if not actively, at least acquiescent, in these endeavors. And did not start wars over what the Europeans did to indigenous peoples in Africa, India, the Middle East or South America, not to mention Australia and New Zealand.
Of course, not. Might have cut into the profits of the financiers and corporate elite.
But, you have still not refuted any of the points in David Swanson’s piece. Unless, of course, you consider “oaf” to be a refutation.
And, why so infuriated about the debunking of some of our most sacred myths on American (or, more precisely, United States of American) exceptionalism. We all have to grow up at some point. We acknowledge our shortcomings, then move on.
Like when, as teenagers, we discover that our parents aren’t the god-like creatures we thought they were when we were children. It’s a shock, but we come to accept the fact that they are human, we love them, and we move on to a new, and better, stage in our relationship with them.
You wouildn’t know reality if it bit you in the ankle. And yeah, the reaality of the likes of you and swanson stinking up the left is sorry, indeed.
David I am a bit perplexed by your response to ironymeter.
I would hate to think that a German life has any more or less value than any other life.
And I would find it intolerable if you only valued German lives.
What’s the story?
Those Pearl Harbor Conspiracists were a crazy bunch in the 30s for sure
doremus35: I’m sure he didn’t mean that, but I really have no idea what the hell he did mean.
David, you asked for details about “the civilian deaths in Poland and the USSR at the hands of the Nazis”. I gave you one and see no need to provide more since your link shows that you’re clearly aware of the horrific losses from many nationalities. So exactly what IS your point? That the Allies killed as many or more Germans as Hitler did? That’s not a condemnation of the Allies, that’s a condemnation of Hitler for killing so many of his own.
That’s why I’m here. In fact, this is the only site where I regularly read the comments as well as the articles because it’s the only one with a decent signal-to-noise ratio in the comments.
Thanks, David. Very interesting stuff, and stuff that I’ve been puzzled about for much of my life.
For Roosevelt to sacrifice his battleships but save his aircraft carriers was either extremely clever or extremely good luck. It was certainly a ploy that was against the conventional wisdom of them time, and I’ve long known that Billy Mitchell was kicked out of the military for showing that bombers could sink battleships. But just now I came across this gem in the Wikipedia entry on “Bill Mitchell”:
FWIW, the Japanese justification for the “sneak attack” on Pearl Harbor was the same as Israel’s justification for the Six-Day War: a naval blockade is an act of war.
I thought Roosevelt wanted a blockade and had Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox ask (not order) it, but the Pacific Commander-in-Chief refused because it would be an act of war?