75th Anniversary of Pearl Harbor

[derrickdj1]

2 hours ago, Davis said:

It is sad how much today's society forgets this act of war against us.

Just what provoked Japan, an oil embargo, economic war, even the US?  They did not attack us out of the clear blue but, that is another thread.  It is an interest of mine on how wars really started, nothing against that great generation of Americans.

[jimjimbo]

2 hours ago, JohnJ said:

we are the one country who elects who we seem to be at the time.

Couldn't disagree more....but since this is a Pearl Harbor thread, I will certainly respect that.

[Zen Traveler]

1 hour ago, jimjimbo said:

3 hours ago, JohnJ said:

we are the one country who elects who we seem to be at the time.

Couldn't disagree more....but since this is a Pearl Harbor thread, I will certainly respect that.

Ironically, I agree with Jim and he mistakenly attributed my quote to John.  Of course we aren't what is being conveyed to the world at the present time but we are the ones who elected the folks who are in charge of our Government. 

[Zen Traveler]

1 hour ago, derrickdj1 said:

Just what provoked Japan, an oil embargo, economic war, even the US?  They did not attack us out of the clear blue but, that is another thread.  It is an interest of mine on how wars really started, nothing against that great generation of Americans.

My father was a West Point graduate and he taught me so many valuable things in regard to his experience as an officer and a liaison... One of the most important was put yourself in the other person's shoes to gain their perspective. It doesn't mean you have to agree with them but at least you should understand what motivates them. 

[Mallette]

As to debates about it, I really think this is one moment in history where the record speaks for itself if you study it.  It really doesn't matter if FDR had intel alerting him to the impending attack or not.  He, and anyone else, could have seen it coming with or without intel.  It had to happen as the public wasn't ready for war.  

 

Certainly the British should be thankful the Japanese acted as and when they did.  

 

Interestingly, I recall my first conversation with my mother (who was an adult when it occurred) following 9/11 and I said it was almost as bad as Pearl Harbor.  She said "No, it's worse."  Really hit me just how horrific that was when a "Greatest Generation" member said 9/11 was worse than Pearl Harbor.

 

Dave

[jimjimbo]

35 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

Ironically, I agree with Jim and he mistakenly attributed my quote to John.  Of course we aren't what is being conveyed to the world at the present time but we are the ones who elected the folks who are in charge of our Government. 

That's a website software error....I copied and quoted from your post, and it attributed it to John.

[oldtimer]

30 minutes ago, Mallette said:

As to debates about it, I really think this is one moment in history where the record speaks for itself if you study it.  It really doesn't matter if FDR had intel alerting him to the impending attack or not.  He, and anyone else, could have seen it coming with or without intel.  It had to happen as the public wasn't ready for war.  

 

Certainly the British should be thankful the Japanese acted as and when they did.  

 

Interestingly, I recall my first conversation with my mother (who was an adult when it occurred) following 9/11 and I said it was almost as bad as Pearl Harbor.  She said "No, it's worse."  Really hit me just how horrific that was when a "Greatest Generation" member said 9/11 was worse than Pearl Harbor.

 

Dave

A navy ship reported that they had fired upon and I think they said they hit a Japanese submarine, in the hours before the attack.  The report was dismissed by the man in charge, because there had been false reports before.  So, even without the reports of incoming aircraft, which were also not taken seriously, there was warning ahead of time and we could have been waiting on a military basis regardless of what the public was ready for.

 

As for the Brits, I have long suspected that it wasn't serendipitous at all, since Winston had already been begging FDR to join in, and as you state, it had to happen for reasons of political correctness.

 

The sub that the navy hit was a mini-sub, and was to be a part of the attack.  It has been discovered and it proves the report to have been dead accurate.

[Zen Traveler]

16 hours ago, Mallette said:

Really hit me just how horrific that was when a "Greatest Generation" member said 9/11 was worse than Pearl Harbor.

I have learned quite a bit from you over the years and appreciate you always sharing your life experiences....Realizing yesterday was the 76th anniversary of Pearl Harbor I wanted to see what the discussion was on the Klipsch Forum and am glad we were able to talk about something important. As you know 9/11 left quite an impression on me and I am continually trying to get folks to understand why we were hit and that in the future Military confrontation seems to be a stopgap measure before Nukes are used. It also seems more likely they will come from a rogue source than a recognized state.

 

Otoh, what I thought made the USA unique was our use of Diplomacy. There is no way I can broach the subject here without getting political but my larger point is that I think if we act with our traditional and potential allies along the lines of what drove Saddam out of Kuwait or united with us to go into Afghanistan after 9/11  we can curb terrorism that crosses borders. I also contend our leadership should understand how our Foreign Policy should have changed after 9/11 and what drives terrorism in the name of religion. We live in a secular society whereas the Middle East does not. That's my 2 cents. 

[jimjimbo]

9 minutes ago, Zen Traveler said:

We live in a secular society

Really?  Would you explain your thought process for making that statement?

[Zen Traveler]

11 minutes ago, jimjimbo said:

Really?  Would you explain your thought process for making that statement?

My comment was in comparison to the Middle East whose governments and society is based on one religion. In the United States we are multi-cultural and our government/people should respect understand that some are not. 

 

 

[Zen Traveler]

1 hour ago, Zen Traveler said:

My comment was in comparison to the Middle East whose governments and society is based on one religion

Edited by Moderator:  Off topic and discussed religion which is violation of ToS

 

 

Edited December 8, 2017 by dwilawyer
To delete religious references and not have to.lock thread

[Travis In Austin]

22 hours ago, oldtimer said:

I don't understand statements such as these.  Every year it is all over the news in every format.  Who are these "today's society?"

Perhaps being about 10 miles away from the site has skewed my perception, but I see little forgetfulness.

And every 10 years or so we get a brand new movie about it.  The last one was pretty good I must say.

 

I have yet to meet an adult that had never heard about it.

[Zen Traveler]

3 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

Edited by Moderator:  Off topic and discussed religion which is violation of ToS

 

 

Understood, but given it's no longer there for others to read want to say it was material that didn't show political or religious bias and was only presented to provide historical and informative information. 

[Zen Traveler]

1 hour ago, dwilawyer said:

 

23 hours ago, oldtimer said:

I don't understand statements such as these.  Every year it is all over the news in every format.  Who are these "today's society?"

Perhaps being about 10 miles away from the site has skewed my perception, but I see little forgetfulness.

And every 10 years or so we get a brand new movie about it.  The last one was pretty good I must say.

 

I have yet to meet an adult that had never heard about it.

 

I think the problem lies that not many people think about it today as much as commemorate it. Imo,  it's important to discuss why wars happen and what we should learn from history to prevent it....WWII was a  long time ago and the dynamics have changed considerably. Mr Mallette mentioned 9/11-- to some that was "a long time ago," but the current danger of a real attack is still likely to come from a religiously motivated source and not necessarily perpetrated by someone from the Middle East. 

 

Btw, I think movies about Pearl Harbor are enticing because they are so Epic. Most things about WWII are because technology hadn't improved to show the horrors of war real time like they did to the generation starting with Vietnam and ending with the First Gulf War. I will leave it there as not to get political. 

[Travis In Austin]

3 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

Understood, but given it's no longer there for others to read want to say it was material that didn't show political or religious bias and was only presented to provide historical and informative information. 

Well you are changing the standard.  It doesn't matter whether something shows political bias or not, as determining "bias" would be impossible to enforce.   One man's neutrality is another man's bias. Informative information about the difference is two religious sects doesn't get you there either, it's still "religion." 

 

As to whether it was material, my recollection was there were some comments, historical in nature, and comments on the theory that  FDR let it all happen, and some discussion about 9/11 (with no mention of religion) and then your post about the current potential for war and two opposing sects within one particular religion.  We went from 1944 to 2001 (where Dave was comparing the impact to the nation between the two events) and your post bringing it up to today and possible immediate future causes.  The "today" theme of your post shifted it out of the realm of "historical", and when you throw in the two sects, it put it slightly over.

 

It probably would have been fine if it was on its own, but given the topic it hand it looks more like you were stretching to make modern foreign policy and religion part of the conversation.  

 

Start a thread about the Suez canal or better yet, the Crusades, and you can talk about the historical relevance of religion as the impetus for war all you want.

[Travis In Austin]

4 hours ago, Zen Traveler said:

I think the problem lies that not many people think about it today as much as commemorate it. Imo,  it's important to discuss why wars happen and what we should learn from history to prevent it....WWII was a  long time ago and the dynamics have changed considerably. Mr Mallette mentioned 9/11-- to some that was "a long time ago," but the current danger of a real attack is still likely to come from a religiously motivated source and not necessarily perpetrated by someone from the Middle East. 

 

Btw, I think movies abIfout Pearl Harbor are enticing because they are so Epic. Most things about WWII are because technology hadn't improved to show the horrors of war real time like they did to the generation starting with Vietnam and ending with the First Gulf War. I will leave it there as not to get political. 

5

 

 

What are the root causes of every war?  There is nothing political in that.  What were the root causes of the Revolutionary War.  What were the root causes of WW I (I personally don't believe  it was Ferdinand, that was just the last domino to fall), 

[jimjimbo]

43 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

Start a thread about the Suez canal or better yet, the Crusades, and you can talk about the historical relevance of religion as the impetus for war all you want.

Yes, but be sure you don't reference anything even remotely "current", or else......

[oldtimer]

48 minutes ago, dwilawyer said:

What are the root causes of every war?  There is nothing political in that. 

Except that by definition, the causes are political.  Man is a political animal.

[Travis In Austin]

2 hours ago, jimjimbo said:

Yes, but be sure you don't reference anything even remotely "current", or else......

Why would you need to mention something current in discussing to Crusades or the history of the Suez Canal?  I forgot, to try and drag in current foreign policy and politics.

[oldtimer]

History is an interrelated and long term continuum.