Exactly 70 years ago today, give or take 5-6 hours, the first 'shots' are fired in the Pacific War:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor)
QuoteHowever, Ward sank another midget submarine at 06:37, the first American shots fired in World War II.
Thread of infamy.
You suck, Mongers. I wanted to get my war on.
Mongers is back. :weep:
Quote from: The Brain on December 06, 2011, 04:40:36 PM
Thread of infamy.
He's a day early. Thread is a sneak attack.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on December 06, 2011, 04:57:06 PM
Quote from: The Brain on December 06, 2011, 04:40:36 PM
Thread of infamy.
He's a day early. Thread is a sneak attack.
So I am, for some reason I thought the islands were on the other side of the international date line; looking it up I've confused this with the fact that as far as Japan was concerned it happened on the 8th. :blush:
edit:
So if the Islands are +10 GMT then I'm early by 18 1/2 hours. <_<
I saw one of those midget subs at the Nimitz Birthplace / Museum of the War in the Pacific in Fredricksburg, Texas back in 2000. Man... I would never, ever want to be in one of those. Even with a crew of three, that's just too cozy.
Japs were good at origami. They could fit 'em in easy.
Quote from: AnchorClanker on December 06, 2011, 05:06:12 PM
I saw one of those midget subs at the Nimitz Birthplace / Museum of the War in the Pacific in Fredricksburg, Texas back in 2000. Man... I would never, ever want to be in one of those. Even with a crew of three, that's just too cozy.
Yeah there's one of the really small german midget subs in the Imperial war museum, it looks like little more than what a deranged plumber and his mate might knock up on a Sunday afternoon as a joke.
Keep in mind that the WWII era Nip was a tiny little wanker. IIRC the height cutoff for a tanker was 5'4".
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 06, 2011, 05:16:40 PM
Keep in mind that the WWII era Nip was a tiny little wanker. IIRC the height cutoff for a tanker was 5'4".
Oh, I know. The living spaces on their surface ships was also spartan beyond belief. Tough dudes.
If you're ever passing through Texas, Fredricksburg is atcually worth a stop. Museum + Beer Gardens, lovely little town.
A date which will live in Infamy! Great speech by President Roosevelt.
This makes me want to play Silent Hunter IV again with the amazing radio mod I found on the interwebs. Thing had like thousands of hours of newsreel archives plus period music.
Quote from: KRonn on December 06, 2011, 06:25:07 PM
A date which will live in Infamy! Great speech by President Roosevelt.
yeah, except of course, can you really be shockered that a country under oil embargo from you attacks you?
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 03:10:14 AM
Quote from: KRonn on December 06, 2011, 06:25:07 PM
A date which will live in Infamy! Great speech by President Roosevelt.
yeah, except of course, can you really be shockered that a country under oil embargo from you attacks you?
We took offense that they declared war after they attacked.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 08, 2011, 06:32:36 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 03:10:14 AM
Quote from: KRonn on December 06, 2011, 06:25:07 PM
A date which will live in Infamy! Great speech by President Roosevelt.
yeah, except of course, can you really be shockered that a country under oil embargo from you attacks you?
We took offense that they declared war after they attacked.
"-in a fair fight I would have won!
"-then I would have been a fool to fight fairly"
or something like that.
The Japs were fascist scumbags, and I respect those who died fighting them. But the whole "omg teh scandal" angle is blown out of proportion. It was necessarily blown out of proportion back then to mobilize the nation, but nowadays there is no need for it.
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:10:05 AM
"-in a fair fight I would have won!
"-then I would have been a fool to fight fairly"
or something like that.
The Japs were fascist scumbags, and I respect those who died fighting them. But the whole "omg teh scandal" angle is blown out of proportion. It was necessarily blown out of proportion back then to mobilize the nation, but nowadays there is no need for it.
:huh: We won.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 08, 2011, 07:13:43 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:10:05 AM
"-in a fair fight I would have won!
"-then I would have been a fool to fight fairly"
or something like that.
The Japs were fascist scumbags, and I respect those who died fighting them. But the whole "omg teh scandal" angle is blown out of proportion. It was necessarily blown out of proportion back then to mobilize the nation, but nowadays there is no need for it.
:huh: We won.
that quote was to point out the ridicoulity of expecting a formal DoW from Japan prior to the initial strike. Or from anyone. War is not a sport.
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:16:22 AM
that quote was to point out the ridicoulity of expecting a formal DoW from Japan prior to the initial strike. Or from anyone. War is not a sport.
Geneva Convention, also ridiculous?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 08, 2011, 07:18:45 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:16:22 AM
that quote was to point out the ridicoulity of expecting a formal DoW from Japan prior to the initial strike. Or from anyone. War is not a sport.
Geneva Convention, also ridiculous?
Look, I am viewing this from the point that a war between nations is a very lethal (haha) affair for your entire nation. It was since WW1 at least. If a leadership commits to it, it is OBLIGED to it's people to wage it in the most effective way possible, to minize it's own people's suffering.
So, giving proper warning to the future enemy so it can prepare it's defenses, drastically raising friendly casualities in the initial operations compared to a surprise attack, is borderline treason (starting the war can also be considered that, but let's assume it is fully justified from that country's point of view).
Other Geneva Convention stuff like mutual well-treating of PoWs and stuff is benefical for your own people so it's okay.
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 03:10:14 AM
Quote from: KRonn on December 06, 2011, 06:25:07 PM
A date which will live in Infamy! Great speech by President Roosevelt.
yeah, except of course, can you really be shockered that a country under oil embargo from you attacks you?
Part of the reason for the embargo was Japan's war on China. I don't think the US was the only one doing similar. And if the US didn't respond to Japanese aggression then the US would be criticized for not doing so.
Tamas Pearl Harbors Microsoft with every burned copy of Windows 7.
Quote from: KRonn on December 08, 2011, 08:00:13 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 03:10:14 AM
Quote from: KRonn on December 06, 2011, 06:25:07 PM
A date which will live in Infamy! Great speech by President Roosevelt.
yeah, except of course, can you really be shockered that a country under oil embargo from you attacks you?
Part of the reason for the embargo was Japan's war on China. I don't think the US was the only one doing similar. And if the US didn't respond to Japanese aggression then the US would be criticized for not doing so.
They were perfectly right to do so. But that doesn't change the fact that a Japanese call on their raise was well in the list of possibilities.
I think they did know that of course. But they had to have Japan clearly strike first to get the public on the side of their (correct and rational) leaning toward war.
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 08:02:38 AM
They were perfectly right to do so. But that doesn't change the fact that a Japanese call on their raise was well in the list of possibilities.
I think they did know that of course. But they had to have Japan clearly strike first to get the public on the side of their (correct and rational) leaning toward war.
Yes, the US govt and military had realized the strong possibility of war with Japan for quite a while before Pearl Harbor and had been taking measures to strengthen the US military position in the Pacific and Philippines.
Quote from: KRonn on December 08, 2011, 08:12:38 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 08:02:38 AM
They were perfectly right to do so. But that doesn't change the fact that a Japanese call on their raise was well in the list of possibilities.
I think they did know that of course. But they had to have Japan clearly strike first to get the public on the side of their (correct and rational) leaning toward war.
Yes, the US govt and military had realized the strong possibility of war with Japan for quite a while before Pearl Harbor and had been taking measures to strengthen the US military position in the Pacific and Philippines.
Yes, hence my point that we shouldn't stick to the "omg shocking sneak attack!" rhetoric THAT much nowadays, when it is no longer a propaganda necessity.
The Japanese were bent on conquest and subjugation, sneak attack or not, so they brought a lot of problem onto themselves. It was an attack that started a war, and that is a big deal whether sneak attack or not, to be remembered. But sure, it can easily be argued that Japan did what was best from the military point of view. However it was a strategic blunder which galvanized the US in a way that couldn't have harmed Japan's war effort more. At the time the idea of the sneak attack really angered people, even though there was the possibility of war. The attack also didn't do nearly the damage to the Pacific fleet that it could have repair docks and other facilities been destroyed. Not to mention the US carriers not being there, a factor that would loom large in the next few months, culminating with the US huge victory at Midway.
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 08:17:36 AM
Quote from: KRonn on December 08, 2011, 08:12:38 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 08:02:38 AM
They were perfectly right to do so. But that doesn't change the fact that a Japanese call on their raise was well in the list of possibilities.
I think they did know that of course. But they had to have Japan clearly strike first to get the public on the side of their (correct and rational) leaning toward war.
Yes, the US govt and military had realized the strong possibility of war with Japan for quite a while before Pearl Harbor and had been taking measures to strengthen the US military position in the Pacific and Philippines.
Yes, hence my point that we shouldn't stick to the "omg shocking sneak attack!" rhetoric THAT much nowadays, when it is no longer a propaganda necessity.
I don't think it was propaganda that led to the outrage. It was the perception that we are peacably sitting around at our naval base and Japan throws a haymaker for no reason and without warning. Sure there was an oil embargo, but I doubt most Americans knew that, most of the ones that did probably didn't care, and the only reason there was an oil embargo was because the Japanese were intent on murdering and raping their way through Asia.
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:29:40 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 08, 2011, 07:18:45 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:16:22 AM
that quote was to point out the ridicoulity of expecting a formal DoW from Japan prior to the initial strike. Or from anyone. War is not a sport.
Geneva Convention, also ridiculous?
Look, I am viewing this from the point that a war between nations is a very lethal (haha) affair for your entire nation. It was since WW1 at least. If a leadership commits to it, it is OBLIGED to it's people to wage it in the most effective way possible, to minize it's own people's suffering.
So, giving proper warning to the future enemy so it can prepare it's defenses, drastically raising friendly casualities in the initial operations compared to a surprise attack, is borderline treason (starting the war can also be considered that, but let's assume it is fully justified from that country's point of view).
Other Geneva Convention stuff like mutual well-treating of PoWs and stuff is benefical for your own people so it's okay.
Okay, so you're good with the Soviets curb stomping Hungary in '56 due to it being a past and future enemy?
I of course do not approve the russian actions in '56 since it screwed my country over big time. But from a Russian point of view, letting Hungary go equaled losing their empire, since neither Poles, nor East Germans were to remain silent if Hungary was free to leave, and I guess the czechs and ROMAnians would had left as well.
That is why I don't like the "USA didnt help us, bastards!" rhetoric regardint hat revolution. Of course they didn't help. The Russians could not possibly back down on the issue, there was just no way.
The problem with the Geneva conventions and other war crimes laws is that they are counter to way normal laws work. At least in a country where the laws are designed to protect people rather then exploit them. The cost-benefit ratio for following the law in a normal civil society encourages me to follow the law. If I rob a bank I may get a windfall of money but I face severe risk of imprisonment or even death. It's not worth the risk. In war, the positions are reversed. Committing a war crime may very well save your life. If I'm a soldier and I have to capture a hostile town tomorrow I have a much higher chance of survival if have the town blasted to rubble or hit with nerve gas. I may face a possible court marshal, disgrace or even imprisonment but those aren't as bad as getting shot and killed. If just use conventional artillery to destroy the town there's a good chance I won't even be called to answer for it. At least if I'm on the winning side.
Quote from: Razgovory on December 08, 2011, 11:01:37 AM
The problem with the Geneva conventions and other war crimes laws is that they are counter to way normal laws work. At least in a country where the laws are designed to protect people rather then exploit them. The cost-benefit ratio for following the law in a normal civil society encourages me to follow the law. If I rob a bank I may get a windfall of money but I face severe risk of imprisonment or even death. It's not worth the risk. In war, the positions are reversed. Committing a war crime may very well save your life. If I'm a soldier and I have to capture a hostile town tomorrow I have a much higher chance of survival if have the town blasted to rubble or hit with nerve gas. I may face a possible court marshal, disgrace or even imprisonment but those aren't as bad as getting shot and killed. If just use conventional artillery to destroy the town there's a good chance I won't even be called to answer for it. At least if I'm on the winning side.
Agreed. Laws should have an enforcement mechanism. In the absence of an entity like a government, which has authority and monopoly on violence, the only ways to enforce laws is to retaliate, tit-for-tat. Otherwise following the law just handicaps you for no benefit. However, if you engage in tit-for-tat, you're branded a war criminal just as bad as the side who started the escalation.
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:29:40 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 08, 2011, 07:18:45 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:16:22 AM
that quote was to point out the ridicoulity of expecting a formal DoW from Japan prior to the initial strike. Or from anyone. War is not a sport.
Geneva Convention, also ridiculous?
Look, I am viewing this from the point that a war between nations is a very lethal (haha) affair for your entire nation. It was since WW1 at least. If a leadership commits to it, it is OBLIGED to it's people to wage it in the most effective way possible, to minize it's own people's suffering.
So, giving proper warning to the future enemy so it can prepare it's defenses, drastically raising friendly casualities in the initial operations compared to a surprise attack, is borderline treason (starting the war can also be considered that, but let's assume it is fully justified from that country's point of view).
Other Geneva Convention stuff like mutual well-treating of PoWs and stuff is benefical for your own people so it's okay.
From what I understand, the Japanese intention was to deliver the DoW immediately *before* the attack (though not soon enough before to allow the US to prepare) - but their embassy screwed it up and delivered in *after*.
Not that this would make any big difference I suppose.
Quote from: Malthus on December 08, 2011, 11:54:40 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:29:40 AM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on December 08, 2011, 07:18:45 AM
Quote from: Tamas on December 08, 2011, 07:16:22 AM
that quote was to point out the ridicoulity of expecting a formal DoW from Japan prior to the initial strike. Or from anyone. War is not a sport.
Geneva Convention, also ridiculous?
Look, I am viewing this from the point that a war between nations is a very lethal (haha) affair for your entire nation. It was since WW1 at least. If a leadership commits to it, it is OBLIGED to it's people to wage it in the most effective way possible, to minize it's own people's suffering.
So, giving proper warning to the future enemy so it can prepare it's defenses, drastically raising friendly casualities in the initial operations compared to a surprise attack, is borderline treason (starting the war can also be considered that, but let's assume it is fully justified from that country's point of view).
Other Geneva Convention stuff like mutual well-treating of PoWs and stuff is benefical for your own people so it's okay.
From what I understand, the Japanese intention was to deliver the DoW immediately *before* the attack (though not soon enough before to allow the US to prepare) - but their embassy screwed it up and delivered in *after*.
Not that this would make any big difference I suppose.
No, Japanese-Americans were still going to be herded into concentration camps.
Quote from: The Brain on December 08, 2011, 11:56:12 AM
No, Japanese-Americans were still going to be herded into concentration camps.
"Concentration camp" sounds so nasty.
How about "special funtime Hello Kitty anime camp"?
Quote from: Malthus on December 08, 2011, 11:58:51 AM
Quote from: The Brain on December 08, 2011, 11:56:12 AM
No, Japanese-Americans were still going to be herded into concentration camps.
"Concentration camp" sounds so nasty.
How about "special funtime Hello Kitty anime camp"?
The horror. The horror.
Quote from: The Brain on December 08, 2011, 12:02:02 PM
Quote from: Malthus on December 08, 2011, 11:58:51 AM
Quote from: The Brain on December 08, 2011, 11:56:12 AM
No, Japanese-Americans were still going to be herded into concentration camps.
"Concentration camp" sounds so nasty.
How about "special funtime Hello Kitty anime camp"?
The horror. The horror.
Well, at least it is better than "Camp Hentai'.
And coincidentally I'm watching Pearl Harbor now on tv.
Quote from: hotshot on December 09, 2011, 10:05:35 AM
And coincidentally I'm watching Pearl Harbor now on tv.
who the fuck are you?
One of the New Exodites perhaps.