Just a moment to reflect, on another Sunday morning.
”From the standpoint of the defenders, the attack commenced at 7:48 a.m. Hawaiian Time.[13] The base was attacked by 353[14] Japanese fighter planes, bombers, and torpedo planes in two waves, launched from six aircraft carriers.[14] All eight U.S. Navy battleships were damaged, with four being sunk. All but one (Arizona) were later raised, and six of the eight battleships were returned to service and went on to fight in the war. The Japanese also sank or damaged three cruisers, three destroyers, an anti-aircraft training ship,[nb 5] and one minelayer. 188 U.S. aircraft were destroyed; 2,403 Americans were killed and 1,178 others were wounded.[16] Important base installations such as the power station, shipyard, maintenance, and fuel and torpedo storage facilities, as well as the submarine piers and headquarters building (also home of the intelligence section) were not attacked. Japanese losses were light: 29 aircraft and five midget submarines lost, and 65 servicemen killed or wounded. One Japanese sailor was captured.
The attack came as a profound shock to the American people and led directly to the American entry into World War II in both the Pacific and European theaters. The following day, December 8, the United States declared war on Japan.[17] Domestic support for non-interventionism, which had been strong,[18] disappeared. Clandestine support of Britain (e.g., the Neutrality Patrol) was replaced by active alliance. Subsequent operations by the U.S. prompted Germany and Italy to declare war on the U.S. on December 11, which was reciprocated by the U.S. the same day.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor ( not the best of sources, but adequate)
By: Creaking Door - 7th December 2014 at 22:04
“Colonial cannon fodder.” Yes, the British had lousy generals, mired in the past.
Everybody had lousy generals; the British generals were no more ‘mired in the past’ than anybody else, really…
…and the ‘colonial cannon fodder’ simply didn’t exist in anything but embarrassingly small numbers before World War One so they were unlikely to have many generals at all, let alone, any ‘mired in the past’.
By: Creaking Door - 7th December 2014 at 21:34
Ok, let’s tighten it up a bit. Built by North American in record time to a British design specification…
I thought the British Purchasing Commission wanted to purchase (more) Curtis P-40 fighters but North American Aviation, instead of building the design of their competitor, not only told the British that they could build something superior, but that they could have it in quantity production as soon as they coud have had the P-40 in production.
Thankfully the British Purchasing Commission took them at their word, and thankfully they were proved right!
By: John Green - 7th December 2014 at 20:40
Yes, about as effective at Lucas, Truscott, Patton, Bradley, MacArthur etc.
By: John Green - 7th December 2014 at 20:37
Ok, let’s tighten it up a bit. Built by North American in record time to a British design specification, Does that suit your taste buds.
By: AVI - 7th December 2014 at 20:19
As I understand it, the allies needed more troops to finally overwhelm the Germans. They wanted US troops to join the confederation of colonial cannon fodder….since UK commanders had already managed to thin the ranks of Canadians and Aussies.
“Colonial cannon fodder.” Yes, the British had lousy generals, mired in the past.
By: Mike J - 7th December 2014 at 19:09
British-designed Mustang? I think Edgar Schmued and his team at NAA might take issue with that claim John Green.
By: John Green - 7th December 2014 at 19:00
Jack,
Yes, you are right. But, sometimes things have to be said or written in order to maintain and re-assert the facts. Hollywood ‘facts’ creep in and they have a habit of becomng fact ‘facts’ unless they are challenged.
By: jack windsor - 7th December 2014 at 18:08
Gentlemen, hush, we were allies we both helped each other, i don’t think either of us could have done it alone. So as I mentioned in my earlier thread ” thankfully the sleeping giant awoke”, and combined we did the business.
jack…
By: John Green - 7th December 2014 at 17:46
“…what was the ratio?. ” We didn’t use that many because most of them weren’t that good. Apart that is from the British designed, British engined, British named, Mustang which the Americans themselves declined to use until they saw in British hands, what an effective machine it could be.
…”the UK didn’t play much of a role in the Pacific..” You rather overlooked the fact that British and British Empire troops were rather busy in South East Asia battling three times as many Jap ground troops as the Americans faced in the whole of the Pacific campaign.
King and Nimitz between them, although the blame lies primarily with King, (he of the Eastern seaboard of America convoy expert) did not want British involvement in any way shape or form in the Pacific. Admiral King intended the Pacific to be an American only campaign. He got his wish, although the Brtish managed successfully to insert the British Pacific Fleet into the proceedings before the end of hostilities.
Finally don’t forget that the Americans were able successfully to force a Japanese surrender because of British nuclear knowhow freely given to the Americans and supported by American cash.
By: J Boyle - 7th December 2014 at 17:23
Didn’t notice you turning down reverse Lend Lease ?!
What was the ratio…100 to 1…500 to 1? Not a very good deal. A few groups of Spitfires, some Lysanders, a few Mosquitos…vs. thousands of Thunderbolts, Mustanmgs/Kittyhawks, Bostons, Mitchels, Fortresses, Liberators, Dakotas, Skymasters, Hellcats, Corsairs, Wildcats, Avengers, Texans, Stearmans, Beech, Stinsons, Hoverflys, etc, etc.
A friend now owns an ex-FAA Grumman.
As in WW1 – belatedly, you had to join the action in order to sit at the European victors top table,
As I understand it, the allies needed more troops to finally overwhelm the Germans. They wanted US troops to join the confederation of colonial cannon fodder….since UK commanders had already managed to thin the ranks of Canadians and Aussies.
I am second to none in my admiration for the American campaign in the Pacific – just wonderful !
Yes, the UK didn’t play much or a role in the Pacific naval war or the bomber campaign against the Japanese home islands….I guess they were too busy in the CBI and SEA areas (trying to get back the old Empire?).
Churchill must have thought December 7, 1941 the best day of his long life. He is quoted as saying that after this day, he knew the war would be won.
I’m not denigrating UK efforts or the sacrifices of its service members. I know that it took all the allies to defeat two very determined foes.
But the old “What to you so long” (along with the “over paid…” thing) schoolboy-level taunt is rather insulting for a forum that prides itself on being a place to discuss history.
By: John Green - 7th December 2014 at 17:07
Well, we had won the first round – B of B. Up until that point Hitler hadn’t been defeated – by anyone !
Didn’t notice you turning down reverse Lend Lease ?
As in WW1 – belatedly, you had to join the action in order to sit at the European victors top table, you remember, how keen your ‘brass’ were to invite us to the Pacific surrender – I don’t think !
Further to Pearl Harbour, if you had used the British designed radars more effectively and listened to Bletchley Park even more effectively, you might have been in a position to give the Japs a very bad fright.
I am second to none in my admiration for the American campaign in the Pacific – just wonderful !
By: J Boyle - 7th December 2014 at 14:47
Better late than never !
Really?
Same comment every year…to which I always reply…”Yes, you didn’t need any help, you already had Hitler on the ropes“. But on the other hand, the UK didn’t turn down lend Lease. 🙂
…or more to the point, the war against Hitler wasn’t a U.S. fight (seen by many as yet another inter-European squabble), after all the UK declared war on Germany, not the other way around.
I’m not sure what good the US entering the European war earlier would have done….probably just caused a bigger que at Dunkirk. I’ll also mention the American volunteers in the RAF and RCAF, some of which had already given their lives and lesser known efforts like the active duty Navy pilot who was the copilot of the US built Catalina which spotted the Bismark.
Besides, we were effectively already a UK ally with the aforementioned Lend Lease, Hollywood propaganda efforts like “Mrs. Miniver” and common appeals like the Piper Cub “Flitfires” for the RAFBF and the British War Relief Society’s “Bundles for Britain” efforts.
By: AVI - 7th December 2014 at 14:13
How about remembering the 8th before the 7th, too; when the first of the British Commonwealth countries entered that fray?
http://vintageaeroplanewriter.blogspot.com.au/2009/12/remember-8th-that-came-before-7th.html
Regards,
Thanks, JDK.
My Dad was a POW from December 1941 until late 1945, shipped to Japan proper on one of those “Hell Ships” for slave labor in a Mitsubishi plant.
He never spoke of his time in captivity, but I’d personally say that it was a fate far worse than being at Pearl. He was one of the fortunate POWs to survive the war, being repatriated
to Vancouver, BC in late 1945/early 1946.
It’s not my intent to denigrate those brave servicemen who lost their lives or were horrifically wounded during the Japanese attack on Pearl. I’m a Canadian Army veteran myself.
By: John Green - 7th December 2014 at 13:42
Better late than never !
By: JDK - 7th December 2014 at 10:39
How about remembering the 8th before the 7th, too; when the first of the British Commonwealth countries entered that fray?
http://vintageaeroplanewriter.blogspot.com.au/2009/12/remember-8th-that-came-before-7th.html
Regards,
Sign In
December 7, 2014 at 10:25 am