Darwin, 1942: Remembering Australia's 'Pearl Harbor'

Darwin, 1942: Remembering Australia's 'Pearl Harbor'

www.bbc.co.uk

It's 70 years since Japanese bombers swooped on Darwin, in northern Australia, sinking Allied ships in the harbour and killing hundreds of people. For years the attack was rarely mentioned, but now the story is finally being told.

If 7 December 1941 is "a date that will live in infamy" for the United States, then 19 February 1942 is surely one that will join it in the annals of shame for Australia.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.smh.com.au
www.sbs.com.au
www.netherlandsnavy.nl

That was the day, just 10 weeks after the attack on Pearl Harbor, when the same carrier-based Japanese force turned its attention to the small northern town of Darwin, with equally calamitous results.

But the world remembers one and barely recalls the other.

The seven-volume Official History of the Australian Army in World War II devotes only two pages to the attack on Darwin.

Yet in truth, Darwin was Australia's Pearl Harbor - a morning attack carried out on an unsuspecting population that ended with the deaths of hundreds of people and the sinking of numerous Allied ships.

But it's only now that the story of Darwin has been given the same kind of historical attention that's long been focused on the attack on Hawaii.

This is a fascinating part of Australian history. 70 years ago the Japanese, only 3 months after having bombed Pearl Harbour, sneaked down towards the Northern coast of Australia and managed to do it again....

By the time the Japanese left, eight ships had been sunk - including the American destroyer, the USS Peary - 22 aircraft destroyed, dozens of buildings crushed and more than 240 people killed.

It was the worst wartime loss of life on Australian soil in the country's history.

....yet it has been all but forgotten about in the years since. It is great to see this important piece of Australian history finally come to light amongst the international community.

www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

I agree, it is nice to see the recognition it deserves. We had a lot of similar incidents, with bombings on Townsville and Broome. I also watched a documentary where it was interviewing a Japanese pilot. he stated that he was ordered to bomb Sydney and they got pretty good hits until he ran out of ammo and was ordered to kamikaze. Needless to say, they were ordered to fall back.

Don't remember it. Don't think about it. Don't mention it.

Darwin was Australia's Pearl Harbor, in the same sense that Bali was Australia's 9/11. Both incidents were artificially engineered by the usual suspects, in order to steer the Australian population in the desired direction; just as 9/11 and Pearl Harbor were with America.

If you remember it, if you bring it up, if you think about it...you're continuing to put it to the use that the cabal wanted; to create the desired level of fear within the population, so that said population would be willing to continue to submit to reduction of liberty, and war.

I know most of you are too mired in emotionalism to want to figure the logic behind this out; but in reality, the single most effective way you can honour any relatives you've had in any conflict within the last 100 years, is by forgetting about said conflicts entirely. Remembering past wars does not prevent future ones; it actually does the opposite.

Originally posted by petrus4

I know most of you are too mired in emotionalism to want to figure the logic behind this out; but in reality, the single most effective way you can honour any relatives you've had in any conflict within the last 100 years, is by forgetting about said conflicts entirely. Remembering past wars does not prevent future ones; it actually does the opposite.

Wow, thats a brilliant excuse - not heard that before! Shame the main element missing from your statement is logic, isn't it?

What an odious character you are, pouring scorn on the memories of the dead with your paranoid delusions. Have some respect for those that died that day and those here right now who wish to remember their countrymen.

Actually the 70 year anniversary was yesterday.
But anyway, the bombings are an important part of the Pacific Theatre which is largely unknown to other countries, which includes the Battle for Australia.
Lest we forget.

I think it's important to support the history of all of the world. Things like this get lost all the time, I guess history books are written by the most important, and most victorious...

That being said.

Darwin and Pearl Harbor are hardly similar... besides being surprise attacks by the Japanese Empire.

Darwin involved a fleet of repair ships, merchants ships and a few destroyers...

Pearl Harbor involved nearly the entire American Pacific Fleet and was one of the largest American bases in the world at the time.

Darwin was poorly defended, strategically abandoned and nearly unknown to many.

Pearl Harbor was one the most important, well defended and most strategic facilities in the American arsenal.

The attack on Pearl Harbor caused over 2,500 deaths and more than 1,000 injuries. The attack on Darwin killed ~250 people. At Darwin, a few small destroyers and a mediocre force of merchant vessels was sunk. At Pearl, some of the U.S Navy's most important and impressive vessels were damaged or destroyed. Not to mention the location of both. Hawaii is more than 4,000 miles from the Japanese mainland, while the Japanese had already occupied the Soloman Islands and Borneo, just a few hundred miles from Darwin.

I'm not saying I don't believe its not important, I'm just trying to put it in perspective.

reply to post by isthisreallife


Your right they are hardly similiar,
Pearl Harbour was a military port,
Darwin was largely a civilian port full of innocent people,

Also, the number of 250 people killed is not the correct number. Some historians count the death toll as high up as 1,500. The reason being is 1. The government covered this up, and 2. Aboriginal people were not included in the death toll.

Thirdly, the Bombings of Darwin were very important. It was the moment when Australia realized that Britain would not help us, and consequently, was the final straw for the British Empire in Australian affairs.
The bombings caused Australia to look towards America for help which began a treaty called ANZUS.
But the bombings were unimportant right???

reply to post by Jace26


I've never seen a source--from a reliable study--saying that as much as 1,500 have been killed. Ever. The most I've ever heard is 400-500 and that's being pessimistic.

As for the importance, i never questioned that. I said that it was important. It was a major battle during World War II, just in retrospect of world affairs, Darwin isn't even in the same ballpark as Pearl.

Originally posted by isthisreallife
reply to post by Jace26

 

I've never seen a source--from a reliable study--saying that as much as 1,500 have been killed. Ever. The most I've ever heard is 400-500 and that's being pessimistic.

As for the importance, i never questioned that. I said that it was important. It was a major battle during World War II, just in retrospect of world affairs, Darwin isn't even in the same ballpark as Pearl.

Then you obviously haven't researched the Battle for Australia nearly enough. But yes, some historians have put the death toll even higher than 1,500. But the amount of people killed isn't necessarily important, whats important about this event is that it fundamentally changed Australia's values and its identity forever.

While you didn't say it wasn't important you did downplay the importance of it.
It is comparable to the events of Pearl Harbour because of the similarities,etc, both had military complexes, both had navy ships in port, both were attacked by the same Japanese force, both were attacked in a surprise attack, both were extremely underprepared. The only difference being one had far more casualties than the other.

Actually, saying the "Bombing of Darwin" was a major battle of WW2, shows yet again how uninformed you actually are. The bombing of Darwin wasn't a battle neither was it strategically important. It an important event that changed Australia's direction from being apart of the British Empire to becoming more independent.

Originally posted by isthisreallife
I think it's important to support the history of all of the world. Things like this get lost all the time, I guess history books are written by the most important, and most victorious...

That being said.

Darwin and Pearl Harbor are hardly similar... besides being surprise attacks by the Japanese Empire.

Darwin involved a fleet of repair ships, merchants ships and a few destroyers...

Pearl Harbor involved nearly the entire American Pacific Fleet and was one of the largest American bases in the world at the time.

Darwin was poorly defended, strategically abandoned and nearly unknown to many.

Pearl Harbor was one the most important, well defended and most strategic facilities in the American arsenal.

The attack on Pearl Harbor caused over 2,500 deaths and more than 1,000 injuries. The attack on Darwin killed ~250 people. At Darwin, a few small destroyers and a mediocre force of merchant vessels was sunk. At Pearl, some of the U.S Navy's most important and impressive vessels were damaged or destroyed. Not to mention the location of both. Hawaii is more than 4,000 miles from the Japanese mainland, while the Japanese had already occupied the Soloman Islands and Borneo, just a few hundred miles from Darwin.

I'm not saying I don't believe its not important, I'm just trying to put it in perspective.

You have only read what the US history books tell you, and we all know, the Americans aren't exactly the sharpest tools in the shed when it comes to history.

When you say this:

"I guess history books are written by the most important, and most victorious..."

Are you implying that the USA is the most important country? Believe me, the USA, hasn't really done anything important besides the limited op's in the Pacific. They entered at the end of both world wars, to give off the illusion that they helped, when in all seriousness, the enemies were practically defeated, by the other allied forces (France, Britain, Australia, and many more).

Darwin was clearly known to Japan, who were adamant in invading Australia. The reason as to why they didn't was because of the defeat they had against Australian forces in New Guinea.

www.ozatwar.com...

Furthermore, there was not only 1 bombing on Darwin, but 64. Does this indicate to you that Darwin was important? It was obviously important to the Japanese

www.ozatwar.com...

Underlying again, the ignorance of Americans.

reply to post by Kryties

....yet it has been all but forgotten about in the years since. It is great to see this important piece of Australian history finally come to light amongst the international community.

It is great to see this important piece of Australian history finally come to light amongst the AUSTRALIAN community.

Immediately after the attack, the top Government official in Darwin basically denied the attack took place, saying that 'everything is normal'. Even after that was demonstrated to be a lie, the Australian Government purposely and officially downplayed damage and casualties for fear of the effect on public morale.

Even after the war, Australians didn't learn of the facts, because Australian history is not (or at least was not in the 50's, 60's, and 70's) taught in schools. I am an American in Oz, and I know more about Australian history than my wife who is Australian and went to school here. She was never taught ANY Australian history in school. None. She can recite every King of England since the Norman Conquest, but she couldn't name the first Australian Prime Minister (well she can now, but only since learning it after I challenged her).

reply to post by petrus4


Hi there ATS Readers,

Hmmm, I see your point to some degree on not mentioning the war.. but in my opinion it is flawed a bit.

It is when people forget, or do not realize the vast amount of destruction, grief, etc a war brings with it; that it is much easier to start another one.

There is a reason why they did/do not allow caskets of returning dead military people on TV newscasts. It would REMIND people war has a tragic cost..

Some have complained in the past that some WAR MOVIES are too graphic.. like "Saving Private Ryan", or "Band of Brothers" mini series... and yes they were REPULSIVE in many ways when viewed.

It is my "warped" view that movies like these 2 mentioned are not graphic enough! You are missing the smells of war and death, and not feeling the "grime and filth" of death and destruction. Nor is one being mentally affected by the constant threat of immediate premature death by un natural causes.

If people REALLY knew what war was like before it started... I think some wars could be avoided.. at least that is my fantasy... about it all..

Although remembering wars as if they were "glorious", and or adventurous... is not the right way to remember them. They should be looked back on as complete failure of mans abilities to settle differences peacefully.

Pravdaseeker

reply to post by ComeFindMe

If one really investigates why wars are fought and by that I don't just mean the surface propaganda that is psy-oped into us as a run up to all large wars of the 20th century, then you can really see the futility and the waste of life that has been ritually sacrificed in the name of patriotism. And to follow on with that very thought, the quiet removal of the dead and the acceptance of massive loss of life always noting the bravery and sacrifice that these poor souls offered , does too meekly accept the fact that it was all part of some War Hawks play thing.

Some overgrown little boys , who massacre for amusement, who don't give a flying fart about the sacrifice and suffering endured by these young men.

So the pattern continues , we send our youth to be slaughtered and they send them back in boxes and they know dame well that if anyone dare say it was a total waste of life , then they shall be demonised for not honouring the dead, perfect end run by the Hawks if you ask me.

reply to post by Pinkorchid


I respectfully disagree.

Humans, beyond any mention of psyops or msm or brainwashing, have evolved through learning from mistakes - information passed on to us by our predecessors by written or spoken language.

Without this, we would make the same mistakes. The retention of knowledge, of experience, of loss is vital in our preparations to avoid maknig the same mistakes.

War will always exist in humanity, that doesn't mean to say we should resign ourselves to ignoring it in the hope it will one day ignore us.

reply to post by pravdaseeker


I'm not too sure what you're saying here.

On one hand you are saying that they don't show caskets of dead soldiers on tv, which by the way isn't true, I can recall several times over the years of news showing returned soldier's caskets.

Then you talk about graphic, realistic shows like saving private Ryan and band of brothers.

Your two points contradict each other...

reply to post by Chadwickus

On one hand you are saying that they don't show caskets of dead soldiers on tv, which by the way isn't true, I can recall several times over the years of news showing returned soldier's caskets.

It was banned during the Bush Administration. President Obama restored it.

reply to post by Chadwickus


Dear ATS Readers,

Hello Chadwickus, and upon re reading my post, I see where you could have gotten the confusion. Thus a representation of making a post when in a hurry..lol.. My apologies.

My remark on not showing caskets on Tv, was that here in the USA.. they dont show them.. or didnt for a long time. That was so people were not reminded of the costs of war... You also do not, or did not see the large number of maimed soldiers.. in the news.. and a lot of brain truama injuries.. its like they dont exist.

Kinda like you dont see the vast tent cities of homeless people living in USA under highway overpasses, etc.. Out of sight, out of mind.. Therefore EASIER to get people to agree to go to war. Or think that the ongoing war is NOT THAT BAD... it becomes more acceptable. You do not see "banners in windows" with stars on them like in WW2..

Concerning the references to the two graphic movies... it was perhaps an inadequate example of how people REALLY need to know what war is like..not to enter into it.. thinking that we wont lose anybody.. we havent had really bad death waves from battles since Viet Nam.. cant happen nowdays.. WRONG!

In the beginning of the Civil War, many couldnt wait to go to war, thinking it was all going to be one big adventure..fun for everyone.. if they would have known what really awaited...people left Washington DC with picnic baskets to watch the first battle of Bull Run... so many useful idiots minds were awakened that day, but the die was cast... the war would be a bloody long one.

So it is in that sense that I felt people need to watch these things sometimes to REMIND them of just how terrible war is, and the obvious tragic results, and where really nobody wins except those that finance the wars.

The one remark is why they dont show caskets on Tv, or didnt, and the other is WHY people need to watch movies like I mentioned to be reminded of how bad it is, and something to be avoided at all costs.

I hope I didnt reconfuse you lol...

Darwin did play an important part, and probably would have been where the Japanese invaded Oz, were it not for the combined successes of the ANZAC boys on the trails, Port Moresby defense, and the battle of the Coral Sea, all three bloodying the Nippon noses enough to make them back off on Oz.

Funny, the other night on ATS live Radio show, I got to ask Stan Deyo a question on OZ, and the coming mess the elite have engineered for us..

He said Oz would be invaded twice in the coming war... first by fleeing Indonesians from the Chinese horde, then next by the Chinese themselves. He also said that Oz had already decided to re establish the Brisbane line if it were to happen... Oz would lose territory at first, but get it back but would be costly..

Whether or not Oz regained ALL territory he said was yet to be decided... hmm.. Anyhow little anecdote on the Oz topic.. recently on ATS LIVE RADIO...

Have a good day, and lets hope Darwin doesnt play into aggressive military history again in the future..a la Stan Deyo insights and gut feeling, sources, whatever he felt caused him to say that stuff.. kinda creepy..but the whole world is getting kinda creepy eh??

Pravdaseeker

reply to post by pravdaseeker


Interesting post, did he say when this (war) and invasion would happen?

Originally posted by Jace26
reply to post by pravdaseeker

 

Interesting post, did he say when this (war) and invasion would happen?

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say...

No.