Discussion in 'Pearl Harbor' started by DogFather, Aug 25, 2009.
They must have been atheists.
Who were atheists, the Japs or the Darwinese?
Logistics are slippery, not boring. Defining the art of the possible within the context of operational strategy is what separates the professionals from the also-rans. Logistics, being a murky and specialized subject that hinges on all sorts of doctrines and capabilities unknown outside a small secretive circle, tends to act as a flash point for opposing viewpoints in strategy as one side underestimates the value of some risky strategy that strains logistic resources, and the other loosely cites logistic difficulties to fob off every dropped opportunity of the entire war.
A lack of resources certainly hinders any effort. For example, the 1944 US Navy’s logistic manual for ship fuel consumption charts only recently became available. No such resource will ever be produced for say, the Japanese Navy. Without such material, the process of defining exact capabilities becomes too nebulous.
I know when FTP-218 was put online, I digitized it. "Resources" simply require going out and finding the material.
Its interesting that the arguments above questioning the credibility of Stinnett sound virtually the same as the ones raised by Glantz when questioning the validity of "Icebreaker". It seems both of these authors try to pass their messages through the "one source states" or "several soldiers claim" funnel which immediately get shut down by true historians that point to documents which discredit such foolish arguments. Misquoting and/or misrepresenting quotes and facts seems to be the "bread and butter" for these individuals; who with easy reading coupled with easily explained problems tend to sway the more gullible of readers...
The "authors", if I may use that term, of these books count on the reluctance of the reader to do fact checking. So they can blithely tell lies without worry because they assume they won't get challenged. And when they do get challenged it's too last, some poor schmuck has a copy of the book and thinks he's in receipt of a divine revelation.
The "talk radio" version of history.
Nice to see criticizm of Glantz. I am always skeptical of information that only one person is privvy to.
The "revelation of the Great Secret" or "Great Discovery". Snake oil merchants used it in the 1880s. Probably on the ancestors of the "authors" in question.
The use of the Urimm and Thummim to translate historical documents has been in question for the last 170 years and is the basis for most of my skepticism.
Actually the other way around, the reference is to Glantz' "Stumbling Colossus" which deconstructs the writings, or depending on your point of view, ravings, of "Viktor Suvorov", who claims Stalin manipulated Hitler into starting WWII and was planning a pre-empting invasion of Germany in 1941.
Uh.....no. Please read the post in the context of the thread and refrain from correcting my intentions or interpetations, in the future, unless your post is the one I am interpetting
"Serious students of this topic know that FDR was trying to avoid war with Japan".
That sir, is a ridiculous statement.
can we move on now?
I second that motion.
Do we have a third?
The ayes are above the no's. Let's head for the bar....
You just proved my point. Have a nice life.
Moving on... You certainly have not provided anything to dispute the evidence linking FDR's implementation with the McCollum memo and his probable pre-knowledge of Pearl Harbor. I'm done with this thread. I cannot convince you, and you cannot convince me otherwise. Since you simply have to have the last word in, I'll let your upcoming display of arrogant sarcasm be the last shot over the bow.
Roll Tide....I'll buy the first round fella's
"Roll Tide....I'll buy the first round fella's" (Quote by rebel1222)
Well, he can't be all that bad if he's buying rounds now.
THAT'S A JOKE....HA....HA....HA
No but seriously, any ice cold draught for me please....
You do seem to have this turned around. You are the one with the rather extrodinary claim so the burden of proof is on you. So far all of your arguments have been at least countered if not proven fallacious.
If you'll ready back thru, you'll see where I provided the page, doc numbers of the evidence from the investigation transcripts. FDR's implementation of the McCullom memo was clearly demonstrated and is in the record.