dark light

A day that will live in infamy…

I don’t think anyone here really needs to be reminded, but 70 years ago today, in one of the seminal moments of 20th century history, the Imperial Japanese Navy struck the US Navy in its anchorage at Pearl Harbour.

I’ve linked to the BBC report because of the US senator they’ve chosen as a talking head, Daniel Inouye.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-16063511

Remembering…

Adrian

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

8,395

Send private message

By: kev35 - 8th December 2011 at 12:03

James.

I would respectfully suggest that highlighting Tsuji actually reinforces the immense sacrifice of the Indian Forces. In the first eight days of the Pacific War, almost 500 men from numerous Indian Regiments including the 17th Dogra’s, Baluchi’s, Rajput’s and Gurkhas were killed in action against the Japanese or were murdered when captured. Everyone on the Allied side was encountering and fighting against a phenomenon never before experienced. The fanatacism of the attack and the ferocity of the defence can only place those Allied units in action in a very positive light.

You are right to highlight the Japanese attacks elsewhere in the Far East and Pacific. Whilst no doubt some politicians, and in the fullness of time the British people were grateful for America’s involvement (a gratitude which may have been paid for financially but can never be repaid emotionally) those caught up in Japan’s Pacific and Far East conquests felt terribly let down, both by the military and the Government.

Regards,

kev35

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

12,419

Send private message

By: Creaking Door - 8th December 2011 at 10:46

I suppose it depends if you read books about submarines or aircraft…..or both! 😀

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

7,646

Send private message

By: JDK - 8th December 2011 at 10:40

there is a fair bit of confusion

I’m certainly confused! I’ll add I have no more knowledge than what I read on that link, and then the other accounts in your post certainly threw me! 😀

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

12,419

Send private message

By: Creaking Door - 8th December 2011 at 10:35

Interesting, I hadn’t realised (or remembered) that a PBY-5 had also been credited as being involved in that sinking.

It may have been a different midget submarine; there is a fair bit of confusion as to exactly where each of them operated during their attacks. All five have now been located and I believe one has been returned to Japan for preservation.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

7,646

Send private message

By: JDK - 8th December 2011 at 10:18

Kev, it was (only) an attribution to a credit to the British Indian Army’s achievements in the face of overwhelming enemy forces.

I don’t think it’s appropriate to drag the spotlight onto the appalling antics of a fanatic. I would appreciate it if that discussion could be brought up elsewhere, rather than diverting a note of credit to one of those colonial forces who fought well for the British Empire.

I will refrain from further comment.

As to the submarine, yes. See the post by Clifford Boise here: http://www.warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=43610

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

12,419

Send private message

By: Creaking Door - 8th December 2011 at 10:15

As to Pearl itself, wasn’t a Japanese mini submarine attacked and destroyed shortly before the air attack?

Yes, a US Navy destroyer, with a young and completely inexperienced skipper, very efficiently destroyed a two-man Japanese submarine in the entrance to Pearl Harbor (a few hours?) before the air-attack started. Even though the destroyer crew were sure of their target and engaged it with 3-inch gunfire and depth-charges the significance of the engagement was ‘dissipated’ through the chain of command. I suppose it is easy to criticise with the benefit of hindsight but at the time few could have predicted what was to come next.

In fact the Japanese launched five two-man midget submarines, from larger parent submarines, to take part in the attack on Pearl Harbor. Although it seems ill-advised now to jeopardise the surprise of the air attack in what were effectively suicide missions there is some evidence that one of the US Navy battleships was struck by torpedoes fired from one of these submarines.

None of the midget submarines returned to their recovery points and all except one crew member perished; the surviving crew member spending the entire war as a POW.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

8,395

Send private message

By: kev35 - 8th December 2011 at 09:49

Ah yes, Colonel Masanobu Tsuji. The following is taken from Wiki and attributed to Max Hastings…..

In Retribution: The Battle for Japan, 1944-45, Max Hastings wrote, “Col Masanobu Tsuji [was] a fanatic repeatedly wounded in action and repeatedly transferred by generals exasperated by his insubordination. Tsuji once burned down a geisha house to highlight his disgust at the moral frailty of the officers inside it. His excesses were responsible for some of the worst Japanese blunders on Guadalcanal. He was directly responsible for brutalities to prisoners and civilians in every part of the Japanese empire in which he served. In northern Burma, he dined on the liver of a dead Allied pilot, castigating as cowards those who refused to share his meal: ‘The more we eat, the brighter will burn the fire of our hatred for the enemy.'”[5]

He received many decorations from his grateful Nation but I’m not certain whether any were awarded for his prowess in eating the liver of a downed pilot. Despite the atrocities he committed or was personally responsible for, he was not tried for War Crimes, one of the many thousands of the guilty who escaped prosecution. Yet far from the traditions of Bushido in which it was a disgrace to surrender, Tsuji went into hiding for several years until it became clear he would not be tried. He wrote a book called Senko Sanzenri (if anyone knows of a copy please let me know) and a statue has been erected in his honour(?) in Japan. He disappeared in Laos sometime between 1961 and 1968 and is believed to have been a victim of the Laotian Civil War.

There has to be something fundamentally wrong with a mindset which erects statues to those who commit atrocity and even indulge in recreational cannibalism.

As to Pearl itself, wasn’t a Japanese mini submarine attacked and destroyed shortly before the air attack?

Regards,

kev35

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

751

Send private message

By: brewerjerry - 8th December 2011 at 02:40

Hi
Awesome film, always remember the F-14’s shooting down the zero’s, the original ‘ what if ‘ .
fox one….splash one… ( or something similar )
cheers
jerry

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080736/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oyjNInIH4Hw

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

4,649

Send private message

By: Rocketeer - 7th December 2011 at 19:31

Raise a glass to those brave service personnel.

When I was a boy, I watched that film about the modern carrier going back in time and the conundrum of do you interfere with the attack or not…..loved that film

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

10,735

Send private message

By: J Boyle - 7th December 2011 at 17:49

I would image Churchill slept better that night, knowing the UK was no longer alone.

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

751

Send private message

By: brewerjerry - 7th December 2011 at 15:00

Fascinating stuff, James, and in this age of instant communication makes it seem almost impossible that the US was still taken by surprise five hours later.

Adrian

Hi
There are some theories they knew.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmmsUStZhvs

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pearl_Harbor_advance-knowledge_conspiracy_theory

Possibly it was like the blitz on coventry, it was known previously about it but what could be done, if you haven’t got the ability to deal with it, and without giving away the fact you know it will happen.

cheers
Jerry

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

9,672

Send private message

By: pagen01 - 7th December 2011 at 11:50

Amazing piece there James, I was unaware of that action, this in particular is a fascinating technicality,
“Another reason this battle isn’t recognised as a starting point of this war (Pacific) is that while the attacks in Malaya occurred before the attacks on Pearl Harbour, because of the international date line, they occurred on the 8th of December 1941, while Pearl Harbor was attacked scant hours later, but on the 7th of December.”

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

3,057

Send private message

By: adrian_gray - 7th December 2011 at 10:56

Fascinating stuff, James, and in this age of instant communication makes it seem almost impossible that the US was still taken by surprise five hours later.

Adrian

Member for:

19 years 1 month

Posts:

7,646

Send private message

By: JDK - 7th December 2011 at 10:49

Indeed. And thankfully those carriers were at sea.

Let us also remember ‘the 8th that came before the 7th’, and the brave men of the Commonwealth; British, Australian, New Zealanders and Indians among them who, with inadequate equipment and support, did a remarkable job in facing the Japanese onslaught:
http://vintageaeroplanewriter.blogspot.com/2009/12/remember-8th-that-came-before-7th.html

“I think Don Dowey said he lit a cigarette when he took off and he was still smoking it when he came back. That’s how close it was.”

“Emerton quickly received some bullets from this attacker before his gunners could respond. He was able to avoid more damage by abruptly turning his bomber into the path of his opponent, forcing the Japanese pilot to overshoot … Emerton seized the initiative and turned to chase the enemy fighter. Firing with his two nose guns, the aggressive bomber pilot startled his former pursuer into breaking off the attack on the other Hudson.”

‘The British Indian Army Dogra regiment were effective:

“The enemy pillboxes, which were well prepared, reacted violently with such heavy force that our men lying on the beach, half in and half out of the water could not raise their heads.”
Colonel Masanobu Tsuji’

Regards,

Sign in to post a reply