Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Admiral Kimmel's Family Seek Reputation Restoral

Discussion in 'WWII Today' started by GRW, Jan 3, 2017.

  1. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    He does seem to have been a scapegoat.
    "Admiral Husband Kimmel was publicly disgraced after the Japanese attack on December 7, 1941, which killed 2,403 people and destroyed or damaged 19 ships, including eight battleships.

    The four-star admiral was accused of dereliction of duty for failing to prepare for the onslaught, allowing Japanese torpedoes and fighter planes to decimate the pride of the US Pacific Fleet and propelling the US into the Second World War.

    Stripped of his command, humiliated Kimmel was summoned back to America from the base on the island of Oahu, Hawaii, knocked down to a two-star rear admiral, then pressured to retire early, making him a convenient scapegoat and a target of public loathing.

    However, critics say the punishments were unjustified and that evidence shows Kimmel had been badly let down by President Franklin Roosevelt and military leaders in Washington.

    Now, at the end of Obama’s eight years in office, there is growing hope among family members that the Hawaiian-born president will posthumously restore Admiral Kimmel’s four-star status.

    Vice president Joe Biden has called the treatment of Kimmel “the greatest injustice in US military history”, but previous presidents have preferred to give the issue a wide berth."
    http://www.express.co.uk/news/history/748841/Family-of-disgraced-WWII-Pearl-Harbor-admiral-calls-on-Obama-to-restore-his-reputation
     
  2. KodiakBeer

    KodiakBeer Member

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    Messages:
    6,329
    Likes Received:
    1,712
    Location:
    The Arid Zone
    Waiting for some of the naval/pacific guys to weigh in. It's a complicated issue. On one hand, they had warnings and then stand downs for months from DC, yet even if they were currently stood down, Admirals have tremendous power and latitude. He could have maintained a higher state of readiness if he had chosen to do so. Aircraft loaded and pilots on standby, AA crews on all vessels the same. I'm not suggesting every gun and aircraft should be manned, but given the general state of affairs there could have been a higher state of readiness. I doubt that would have made much difference, but even if 50 aircraft were ready and in the air as the attack unfolded, and 25% of the gunners on the vessels on duty the losses would certainly have been less.

    The situation with General Short is the same.

    Washington was a confused mess and heads should have rolled there, but that doesn't absolve Kimmel and Short.

    Not claiming much expertise in this area of the war, but given the general diplomatic and military situation you'd think those in charge would maintain a higher state of readiness, if just to get their forces on a war footing for that possible eventuality.
     
  3. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    First off: The retirement at **** level was awarded to officers who had done an especially outstanding job when they were temporarily assigned that rank to fill positions such as CINCUS, so they could give orders to all the other admirals running around. Kimmel doesn't meet that requirement.

    Secondly: Kimmel allowed the US Fleet to become predictable. Out on weekdays, in on weekends. Takao Yoshikawa noted this and sent it along to the IGHQ. This gave Yamamoto Isoruku the chance to "guarantee a big bag" for his planned raid. This tipped opinion in his favor. If Kimmel had been doing his job he would not have allowed the predictability. So we can say that he inadvertently helped the Japanese sink eight battleships.

    For further reading: http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/pha/dorn/dorn_0.html
     
  4. belasar

    belasar Court Jester

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,515
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    While sympathetic towards Kimmel, less so for Short, bottom line he was in charge at the time of the disaster. He could have used the results of US wargames and the Taranto attack to inform his disposition's. He did not, and as the guru Opanana pointed out he made one of the worst mistake a commander could make, predictability.

    Short made far greater mistakes in my opinion, treating his Radar as a toy despite the evidence of the Battle of Britain and being overly concerned with sabotage. Defense of the Hawaiian Islands was his primary job.

    After such defeats any commander would be recalled.
     
  5. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    The fact that they had a former Eagle Squadron Commander on loan from the Navy to help them get their Air Information Center up and running, yet failed to do so, is also a point against Short. He was a jodhpurs general in an aviation age.
     
    RichTO90 likes this.
  6. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    And if anyone claims they were "denied their day in court to clear their names" I would invite them to review the very last exhibit in the Congressional Hearings, a letter to Kimmel and Short asking them to hold off on asking for a court martial until after the war, when it would be safe to discuss "ways and means". Neither man asked for such. Kimmel decided to go to the court of public opinion, no oaths sworn there. Short took a more expedient route and died.
     
  7. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,562
    Likes Received:
    1,036
    Especially given that from the last AWS exercise on 12 November up to the day of the attack, no effort was made by Short, the Army Air Forces, or the Signal Corps to develop, improve, or even maintain it.
     
  8. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    "Plenty of time to do that after the war starts." (Not a real quote, just a reflection of attitudes.)

    Meanwhile, the Honolulu papers are screaming WAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! at the tops of their largest fonts.
     
  9. White Flight

    White Flight Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2007
    Messages:
    452
    Likes Received:
    35
    Adding to the tally of mismanaged readiness and safeguards was ignoring the smoking gun more than an hour before the Mitsubishis started there bomb run. Not only did the USS Ward _(DD-139) sink a Japanese Ko-hyoteki class two-man midget submarine I-16-tou at 06:37, the minesweeper USS Condor (AMc-14) spotted another midget submarine periscope southwest of the Pearl Harbor entrance buoy and alerted the destroyer Ward.
     
  10. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    You can't fault Kimmel too much there. Com14th failed to recognize the importance of a report that Ward had "fired on and dropped depth charges on a submarine operating in the restricted area." The "fired on" meant visual contact, not just a sonar track. When Kimmel heard about this he immediately went to his HQ, leaving Short standing in his front yard wearing his golf togs. The ready destroyer sortied and the next DD in line of response was going from one boiler to four when the airplanes arrived. The Navy reacted properly there.
     
  11. RichTO90

    RichTO90 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2015
    Messages:
    2,562
    Likes Received:
    1,036
    Yep, the Navy response as the fecal matter began to impact the atmospheric impeller device was remarkable. What happened to the tail-end Charlie's of the Japanese torpedo bomber line approaching Battleship Row is the best evidence for what even ten minutes additional warning would have resulted in.
     
  12. USMCPrice

    USMCPrice Idiot at Large

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    5,168
    Likes Received:
    2,140
    Location:
    God's Country
    I do think Washington failed to provide them all the intelligence they deserved, but that doesn't negate their own failings. The big question in my mind is how Dugout Doug managed to dodge a similar fate as his failings were even greater.
     
    Phantom of the Ruhr likes this.
  13. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    What intell did they not get that would have changed things?
     
  14. belasar

    belasar Court Jester

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,515
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    Probably three reasons for MacArthur's retention.

    He had a higher national profile than Kimmel and Short who were largely unknown in the country.

    He was still engaged in battle where as the dust had settled at Pearl.

    He was expected to lose no matter what, but Kimmel wasn't expected to lose much of the Pacific fleet in the first hour of the war at their moorings.

    Not saying it was fair, just is.
     
  15. the_diego

    the_diego Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2016
    Messages:
    399
    Likes Received:
    81
    i think the japanese at Savo island gave more clear warnings of impending destruction than just a couple of midget submarines. i'm not one to judge the actions and even habits of a peacetime navy, even with war eminent.
     
  16. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    I've put in over a week of study on the topic. Starting in 1965.
     
  17. GRW

    GRW Pillboxologist WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2003
    Messages:
    20,815
    Likes Received:
    3,042
    Location:
    Stirling, Scotland
    Some great points here. :cool:
     
  18. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    GRW and Otto like this.
  19. Otto

    Otto Spambot Nemesis Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2000
    Messages:
    9,781
    Likes Received:
    1,818
    Location:
    DFW, Texas
    Whenever anything Pearl harbor in mentioned, I know we will have a high level nuance and detail brought to bear. Great stuff.
     
  20. AMOH

    AMOH New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2016
    Messages:
    8
    Likes Received:
    2
    Hi all,

    There seems to be a great deal of knowledge about the PH situation on this forum, but I'd take issue with analysis thus far of several issues, for example: the pre-attack level of readiness at PH, Kimmel's access to intelligence, his alleged adherence to a rigid schedule, and the reasons Kimmel and Short have not been posthumously retired at the rank's they held at the time of the attack.

    The Sunday Express piece cited was based on my new book, A MATTER OF HONOR - which is a carefully documented account of the attack spread over some 500 pages, with more than a hundred pages of sources notes and new documents to account for its conclusions.

    I'd really love to see some of the expert readers here having a look at the book. You're the readers for whom we labored for so many months.

    If having read the book, you have questions on specifics, I'd be happy to try to answer them.

    Robbyn
     

Share This Page