It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

America Bombed Her own Ships?....Pearl Harbour Revisited

page: 5
27
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 02:08 AM
link   
You attack but you do not retort? Attack my grammer and education, nice. You keep avoiding the question I asked which was the point of the post. Just because you have a conspiracy does not make it a good one. WHY would the president sink half his navy then go to war? I have been around some military logicians in my time, explain how that makes one bit of sense. It would have to be the most idiotic conspiracy ever concieved.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by pyramid head]




posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by pyramid head
 


Look at it from 2 perspectives.
The historical perspective shows that the attack was not very damaging (in terms of material) to the US Navy. No carriers were lost. All major sea battles in the pacific were fought from a distance. Battleships (what we lost at PH) were relegated to a secondary role.

From the perspective of the time, Roosevelt knew that the attack would be devastating but he also knew that the industrial might of the US would replace what we lost at PH.
You have to understand, by 1944 US industry was producing a "baby" carrier every week!
The Japanese admiral Yamamoto had said that, with the destruction of the Pacific Fleet, he would be able to run wild for the next 6 mos. to a year. After that he made no promises.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by The Baby Seal Club]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 03:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by seagull
The United States bombed it's own ships? What pray is your evidence of this? Or that they allowed Japan, for some unfathomable reason, or reasons; to do so?

Really? Do you realize that the Pearl Harbour attack is one of the most looked at events of the Second World War? I personally own half a dozen works that research the event, from both sides of the Pacific. How many govt. officials would have had to be in the know? Military officers of impeccable character would have had to have known. Long time officers had careers destroyed that day, they would have had to have been in the "know"...

I think maybe you need to go back and take a longer look at this...

True there was some evidence that the Japanese were up to something...that much was known... Intelligence officers "knew" something was coming down the road at them...they didn't know where, or when. Suspicions? Oh, yes...lots of them. Hawaii, the Philippines, even California and Panama.

Remember, America was just beginning to shrug off a bout with isolationism and still recovering from the Great Depression. The mindset of the military and their civilian overseers was still very much peace at almost any price... Japan had been at war in China for several years already, and were vastly more ready for war than were their American counterparts...

On one side, you've got a country still reeling from the Great Depression though recovering; with a military that is still a generation behind the best the world has to offer militarily (though blind to that in regard to Japan). On the other, you've got a nation rabidly imperialistic who is fighting a war in mainland Asia against China, and preparing to head south into Indochina and Micronesia, with Australia ripe for the plucking (in their eyes), as well.

With this in mind, Japan knows that to do this, all they need do is delay the US Navy long enough to conquer the areas wanted, then sit back behind "the ribbon defense" of atolls and island fortresses.

How to do it, though?

The Brits, oddly enough, showed how to do it, in 1940 with an attack on Taranto against several Italian battleships. They used two aircraft carriers and succeeded in sinking and damaging four modern Italian battleships.

Yamamoto, commander of the Imperial Japanese Navy, saw this and had a brainstorm...

Six aircraft carriers, several hundred aircraft... viola, no US navy...

When the smoke had cleared, the US battleline had been savaged. It's Pacific airforce virtually eradicated...and many sailors and airmen, soldiers and marines killed...

Had the powers that be in Washington known before hand of an attack on Pearl Harbour, would they not have been better served by warning the commanders on the scene in time to defend themselves? The war would still have started... An unsuccessful attack is still causus belli, every bit as much as a successful one...

They knew, yet they didn't know... Too many trees kept them from seeing the forest, if you will...

Oddly how history parallels, isn't it? Much the same thing occured in the runup to the Trade Center attack.

Too much information, not enough skilled readers to interpret the info...



You re right but Still you can t take away the fact that some people in america wanted to go at war and were ready to do anything for this. Lost an entire fleet on purpose is indeed a stupid idea at first but when you know that you will be able to produce more ships than ever because you will make war beleive some people will do anything for this.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by Ray Amuro]

[edit on 17-11-2009 by Ray Amuro]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by KRISKALI777
 



I do tend to agree, that we allowed ourselves to be brought into both World Wars, That is a proven historical fact. I am still up in the air about the Gulf of Tonkin, being that we were still there.

However the Mexican war is also shown to be one were the American Government allowed to be dragged into a war but this time it was by Southern Democrats, who wanted to expand Slave states.

The Spanish American War was stupidity, not a false flag as you would say. The USS Maine, blow up because of the way the shells and powder were stored, not because of Spanish or American interference. Stupidity started that war..

9-11 was not a false flag, it was a terrorist attack that the Feds knew was going to happen. To the extent of what they knew, is still in the air. I feel they knew how and the who, but not the when.


You re so naive I feel sorry for you... but you re right for the spanish american war though
...



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 04:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by poedxsoldiervet
reply to post by seagull
 



It is of my opinion that the US Government wanted a war with Japan, maybe not Germany but they wanted one with Japan. Hitler made a mistake by declaring war against us, if he had not and allowed the Japs to face us WWII, would have ended with Hitler owning Europe and large amounts of Africa, and the Middle East. The US would have ended up owning Australia, Japan, and Much of the pacific.




Well you know when you see Pine Gate , I think that America even before the war owned Australia...Not directly of course.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 04:14 AM
link   
reply to post by KRISKALI777
 


My understanding of a False Flag attack is that a government would in effect have to attack its own forces under the guise of another flag , in which case none of the events listed meet the correct definition . The sinking of the Lusitiania proved to be a shock because of the emergence of total war . Sure the sinking was milked for propaganda . Not even those who dream up wild 9-11 conspiracy theories have suggested that the Lusitiania was sunk by anything other then a torpedo from a German U-boat .

At most the sinking Athenia was an over zealous act by a U-Boat commander . Simply going by memory the U-boat log in question was modified and Goebbels invented some half arsed(SP?) story to try and blame the British for the incident . Only a few naive Americans brought into the German version of events hmm .....

The attack on Pearl Harbour was no near where near as bad as it could have been . Nagumo followed his orders to the letter which meant no third strike . The consequences of this was that the tank farm and ship yard or yards were left in tact , had they been destroyed the US Pacific would have been forced back to the West Coast . If the Japanese had any decent strategists they would have followed up the attack on Pearl Harbour with an invasion of Hawaii. All the Pearl Harbour conspiracy's I have seen rely on hindsight rather then historical fact . As for what would have happened had the fleet gone out to meet the Japanese task force to many factors are at work to reach a definite conclusion but I would say that the odds were stack in favour of the Japanese.

The Tonkin incident is the most contentious of all the events listed because there is still enough people around to be debate what happened afterwards who have memory's of that time . Aside from records that the NSA has recently made public the best insight comes from McNamara himself in the outstanding documentary entitled The Fog of War: Eleven Lessons from the Life of Robert S. McNamara .



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 


I'm not an expert on WW1, but I always thought the reason given for our entry into WW1 was the Zimmermann Telegraph. Or was that also a "conspiracy"?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 05:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Baby Seal Club
I'm not an expert on WW1, but I always thought the reason given for our entry into WW1 was the Zimmermann Telegraph. Or was that also a "conspiracy"?


Yeah the Zimmermann Telegram marked the US formal entry into World War One . The sinking of the Lusitania edged the US a bit closer towards getting involved with conflict in Europe . I think it an unintentional but useful way of getting the frog until a warmer pot of water before he reached the boiling one . As for the Zimmermann Telegram to be honest with you unlike the other incidents listed I haven't done enough research on the matter to comment on the authenticity of the Telegram .



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 03:07 PM
link   
Oh God here we go again.

Idiots are hiding everywhere... what was that noise?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   
I thought that there was undisputable proof that the Japanese attacked us.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   
reply to post by KRISKALI777
 


OF COURSE YOU ARE QUITE RIGHT.

This ref documents quotes of our "leaders" since 1900 . . .

www.freerepublic.com...

They will stop at nothing to arrange their satanic global tyrannical government. Nothing.

The fact that many such are born in America does not make them heart-felt authentic "Americans" by a long stretch.

Ike's favorite General . . . I don't remember more particulars . . . once remarked something to the effect that ALL WARS were bloodthirsty manipulations feeding our best to greedy geo-political war machines for evil purposes. His exact words were not quite that extreme but they were plenty telling.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by nicnic100
 


The points are . . . .

1. Our government and even military leaders had days of warning.

2. Our government ordered the enticing ships to stay in Pearl Harbor though some military leaders had suggested dispersing them.

Our leaders were complicit in the unnecessary deaths of our best folks.

And Pearl Harbor Survivors are still clueless. I talked to one about it at the memorial there. He was either ignorant or in wholesale denial.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 06:38 PM
link   
Man, I used to work with the most diehard X Marine you could ever find and he happened to also be a military historian. He would be the first to tell you that FDR allowed the Japanese to bomb Pearl harbor. It's very well established.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by BO XIAN
 


Your whole argument is historically bunk because FDR wanted to get involved in a war against Nazi Germany not Japan . After Pearl Harbour FDR was very concerned that Congress wouldn't also declare war on Germany such was the power of isolationist movement . Had Hitler not bungled by declaring war on the USA then the US involvement in the European theatre was far from assured .



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:55 PM
link   
reply to post by The Baby Seal Club
 


Its not the fact of what we lost in the bombing that makes it stupid, it is the notion that a man of considerable intelligence that FDR was, would risk a large part of his navy to go to war with a naval power. There is no logic involved in a descision such as that, no military advisor would advise such a misguided strategy. We did not win a battle in the pacific for 2 years after that. One can not underestimate the value and damage of a good military strike, look at how midway changed the war. Yamamoto was a great military stratigist, and he made a great military strike, simple as that.



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 


I don't personally KNOW what FDR personally WANTED. I doubt you do.

HE FOLLOWED ORDERS LIKE EVERYONE ELSE kowtowing to the globalist puppet masters.

The whole war was all a piece designed and implemented from the halls of the globalist puppet masters. They were rearranging the entire global geo-political puzzle pieces more toward the eventualy global government that's scheduled to be more formally implemented in Dec in Copenhagen.

However, if the myopic perspective leaves you sleeping better, be my guest.



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   
reply to post by KRISKALI777
 


Pardon me for being factious with that first quote of mine. Won't happen again...

The second one was refering to the intelligence networks in the American military. They were, or had, broken the Japanese naval code, but had to translate that from the original Japanese into English... That is what I was referring to...

Hope I've cleared up our little misunderstanding?



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by seagull
 


I love you seagull


Please dont delete this post for the addition of some love into the debate; I know it OFF TOPIC, I promise it'll never happen again



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by BO XIAN
I don't personally KNOW what FDR personally WANTED. I doubt you do.


Well if you read a history book or two rather then relying on ease to debunk conspiracy theory's you would know what course of action FDR wanted . The only conspiracy at work here is the one that perpetuates ignorance so people can avoid taking responsibility for there actions . All the while people go around blaming bankers and puppet masters for wrong doings they don't have to take responsibility for there actions .



posted on Nov, 18 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 


1. Sounds like you are convinced that everything in history books is 100% accurate! Amazing.

2. I've studied globalism since 1965--when I had responsibility for managing the ALDERDICE COLLECTION as acting Director of the SPECIAL COLLECTIONS DEPT of the Univ Library. How long have you REALLY studied it.

3. FDR was NOT in charge. He did as he was told.

4. It did not matter what personal preferences FDR had. ALL the puppet masters and their stooges were subservient to THE CAUSE.

5. The decision had been made to have a global war and to involve the USA in all of it. That happened more or less as they planned for it to.

6. They are skilled at adjusting plans somewhat on the fly as long as they contribute to the main general long term goal.

7. I don't plan to go on endlessly spoon feeding anyone either.



new topics

top topics



 
27
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join