Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I dunno. In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect and there was war. What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again to no result. What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain without going to war with the USA? If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply make them more boldly offensive?
> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > dunno. > In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > and there was war. > What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > to no result. > What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > without going to war with the USA? > If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > make them more boldly offensive?
FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it.
what you should read Dave, is John Toland's Pulitzer Prize winning book "The Rising Sun" it is a book on the Japanese side of WWII, its a great read too.
> > Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > > late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > > in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > > USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > > embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > > poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > > dunno. > > In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > > Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > > embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > > agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > > war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > > to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > > and there was war. > > What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > > exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > > Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > > Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > > much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > > to no result. > > What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > > withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > > partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > > because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > > Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > > without going to war with the USA? > > If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > > moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > > make them more boldly offensive?
> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it.
> what you should read Dave, is John Toland's Pulitzer Prize winning book "The > Rising Sun" it is a book on the Japanese side of WWII, its a great read too.
> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > dunno. > In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > and there was war. > What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > to no result.
Negotiations were actually going on in Washington as the attack was taking place
> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > without going to war with the USA?
Not without a complete withdrawal from French IndoChina and China.
> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > moderated their behavior
No, the militarists were hell bent on war.
> or would getting access to the oil simply > make them more boldly offensive?
That's exactly what would happen. It would reinforce their conviction that the western powers were too decadent and cowardly to fight.
> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... >> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the >> late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if >> in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the >> USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very >> embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the >> poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I >> dunno. >> In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and >> Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete >> embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both >> agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be >> war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind >> to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect >> and there was war. >> What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in >> exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary >> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in >> Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too >> much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again >> to no result. >> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to >> withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a >> partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" >> because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE >> Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain >> without going to war with the USA? >> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever >> moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply >> make them more boldly offensive?
> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it.
Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming.
> what you should read Dave, is John Toland's Pulitzer Prize winning book > "The Rising Sun" it is a book on the Japanese side of WWII, its a great > read too.
I recommend ' The Reluctant Admiral' by Hiroyuki Agawa. Based on interviews with his subordinates, family and surviving members of the Japanese government it is more than just a bio of the naval leader. It details his political struggles against the militarists in Japan.
He repeatedly warned that war with the west would end in Japanese defeat. He even went so far as to tell the Japanese government that while it was impossible for Japan to achieve the sort of miltary victory that would end with Japanese troops occupying Washington it was very likely that a war would end with US troops occupying Tokyo.
The miltarists hated him for this and hatched several plots to assassinate him. Eventually the navy were forced to order him to sea for his own safety.
> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > dunno. > In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > and there was war. > What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > to no result. > What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > without going to war with the USA? > If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > make them more boldly offensive?
Remember that Konoye would have had to go to FDR. Not very likely, given Japanese ideas about subservience and the ability of the 1941 transportation system to deliver either one to a "neutral" site.
>> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message >> news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... >>> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the >>> late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if >>> in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the >>> USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very >>> embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the >>> poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I >>> dunno. >>> In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and >>> Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete >>> embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both >>> agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be >>> war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind >>> to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect >>> and there was war. >>> What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in >>> exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary >>> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in >>> Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too >>> much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again >>> to no result. >>> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to >>> withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a >>> partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" >>> because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE >>> Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain >>> without going to war with the USA? >>> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever >>> moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply >>> make them more boldly offensive?
>> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it.
> Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two > wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming.
>> what you should read Dave, is John Toland's Pulitzer Prize winning book >> "The Rising Sun" it is a book on the Japanese side of WWII, its a great >> read too.
> I recommend ' The Reluctant Admiral' by Hiroyuki Agawa. Based on > interviews > with his subordinates, family and surviving members of the Japanese > government > it is more than just a bio of the naval leader. It details his political > struggles > against the militarists in Japan.
> He repeatedly warned that war with the west would end in Japanese defeat. > He even went so far as to tell the Japanese government that while it was > impossible for Japan to achieve the sort of miltary victory that would end > with Japanese troops occupying Washington it was very likely that a > war would end with US troops occupying Tokyo.
> The miltarists hated him for this and hatched several plots to > assassinate him. Eventually the navy were forced to order him to sea > for his own safety.
> Keith
The one Japanese POW captured at Pearl Harbor was put on a train and shipped across the country through Chicago to Tennessee, after seeing the huge grain fields and industrial cities he remarked that their leaders had lied to them about the United States and he didn't believe Japan had a chance. He like most Japanese had no concept of the size of the U.S.
> : > :"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > :news:hd2lb4$cg4$1@news.eternal-september.org... > :> > :> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > :> > news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > :>> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > :>> late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > :>> in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > :>> USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > :>> embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > :>> poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > :>> dunno. > :>> In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > :>> Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > :>> embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > :>> agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > :>> war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > :>> to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > :>> and there was war. > :>> What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > :>> exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > :>> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > :>> Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > :>> much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > :>> to no result. > :>> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > :>> withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > :>> partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > :>> because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > :>> Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > :>> without going to war with the USA? > :>> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > :>> moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > :>> make them more boldly offensive? > :> > :> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it. > :> > : > :Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two > :wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming. > :
> Then why did he do everything short of actually having official US > forces open fire on Japanese troops?
In short he didnt.
US policy was not to provide mar materials to a nation that was waging an aggressive war. These days they would call it an ethical foreign policy.
Of course in the case of Germany he DID order the USN to open fire on German naval vessels.
> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > > Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > > late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > > in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > > USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > > embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > > poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > > dunno. > > In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > > Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > > embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > > agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > > war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > > to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > > and there was war. > > What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > > exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > > Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > > Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > > much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > > to no result. > > What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > > withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > > partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > > because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > > Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > > without going to war with the USA? > > If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > > moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > > make them more boldly offensive?
> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it.
That's about the craziest thing I've seen you write in a while.
> what you should read Dave, is John Toland's Pulitzer Prize winning book "The > Rising Sun" it is a book on the Japanese side of WWII, its a great read too.
> : > :"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > :news:hd2lb4$cg4$1@news.eternal-september.org... > :> > :> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > :> news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > :>> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > :>> late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > :>> in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > :>> USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > :>> embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > :>> poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > :>> dunno. > :>> In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > :>> Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > :>> embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > :>> agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > :>> war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > :>> to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > :>> and there was war. > :>> What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > :>> exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > :>> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > :>> Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > :>> much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > :>> to no result. > :>> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > :>> withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > :>> partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > :>> because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > :>> Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > :>> without going to war with the USA? > :>> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > :>> moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > :>> make them more boldly offensive? > :> > :> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it. > :> > : > :Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two > :wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming. > :
> Then why did he do everything short of actually having official US > forces open fire on Japanese troops?
> :In article <dv1bf5t1on4sbilvl2f132spehv0lfd...@4ax.com>, > :fjmcc...@gmail.com says... > :> > :> "Keith Willshaw" <ke...@nospam.kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote: > :> > :> : > :> :"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > :> :news:hd2lb4$cg4$1@news.eternal-september.org... > :> :> > :> :> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > :> :>news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > :> :>> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > :> :>> late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > :> :>> in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > :> :>> USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > :> :>> embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > :> :>> poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > :> :>> dunno. > :> :>> In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > :> :>> Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > :> :>> embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > :> :>> agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > :> :>> war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > :> :>> to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > :> :>> and there was war. > :> :>> What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > :> :>> exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > :> :>> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > :> :>> Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > :> :>> much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > :> :>> to no result. > :> :>> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > :> :>> withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > :> :>> partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > :> :>> because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > :> :>> Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > :> :>> without going to war with the USA? > :> :>> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > :> :>> moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > :> :>> make them more boldly offensive? > :> :> > :> :> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it. > :> :> > :> : > :> :Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two > :> :wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming. > :> : > :> > :> Then why did he do everything short of actually having official US > :> forces open fire on Japanese troops? > : > :Such as ? > :
> Take a history course. It'll be covered. I don't have time to teach > you one (and you can't afford my hourly rate).
> -- > "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the > truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." > -- Thomas Jefferson
I wouldn't waste my time on Gingrich's novel but did he bring up the point that the US fired the first shot as the Ward sank the minisub? Evil white people messing with the Greater East Asia Co Prosperity Sphere.....I can see the revisionists in Japan now rewriting the school text books.
> : > :"Fred J. McCall" <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote in message > :news:dv1bf5t1on4sbilvl2f132spehv0lfd2e0@4ax.com... > :> "Keith Willshaw" <ke...@nospam.kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote: > :> > :> : > :> :"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > :> :news:hd2lb4$cg4$1@news.eternal-september.org... > :> :> > :> :> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > :> :> > :> > news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > :> :>> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of > the > :> :>> late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering > if > :> :>> in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > :> :>> USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > :> :>> embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed > the > :> :>> poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > :> :>> dunno. > :> :>> In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > :> :>> Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a > complete > :> :>> embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > :> :>> agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will > be > :> :>> war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some > kind > :> :>> to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into > effect > :> :>> and there was war. > :> :>> What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > :> :>> exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked > Secretary > :> :>> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps > in > :> :>> Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > :> :>> much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over > again > :> :>> to no result. > :> :>> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > :> :>> withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > :> :>> partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > :> :>> because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > :> :>> Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply > certain > :> :>> without going to war with the USA? > :> :>> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese > ever > :> :>> moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > :> :>> make them more boldly offensive? > :> :> > :> :> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it. > :> :> > :> : > :> :Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two > :> :wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming. > :> : > :> > :> Then why did he do everything short of actually having official US > :> forces open fire on Japanese troops? > :> > : > :In short he didnt. > :
> Wrong.
> : > :US policy was not to provide mar materials to a nation that was > :waging an aggressive war. These days they would call it an > :ethical foreign policy. > :
> You're either a neutral and sell to all comers or you are not.
Sorry but that is not the legal definition of neutrality
> Providing everything (including men) to China while shutting down > existing trade with Japan pretty much was an act of war.
Sorry but that does not constitute a casus belli.
> When you > start taking sides, don't be too surprised if the other guy thinks > you're part of the enemy.
Trouble is we know from Japanese accounts that they had already decided the USA was the enemy.
> : > :Of course in the case of Germany he DID order the USN to open > :fire on German naval vessels. > :
> Yep. FDR wanted into BOTH wars.
Yet in June 1941 the Secretary of State handed a peace proposal to Japan that included the following points
1) Affirmation by both Governments that their national policies were directed toward the foundation of a lasting peace and the inauguration of a new era of reciprocal confidence and cooperation between the two peoples.
2) A suggested formula that the "Government of Japan maintains that the purpose of the Tripartite Pact was, and is, defensive and is designed to contribute to the prevention of an unprovoked extension of the European war" and that the "Government of the United States maintains that its attitude toward the European hostilities is and will continue to be determined solely and exclusively by considerations of protection and self-defense".
3) A suggestion by the United States to China that China and Japan enter into negotiations, provided that Japan first communicate to and discuss with the United States the general terms which Japan contemplated proposing to China.
4) Mutual assurances by the United States and Japan that each would supply the other with such commodities as were required and were available and that steps would be taken to resume normal trade relations between the two countries.
5) Provision for cooperation between the two countries toward obtaining non-discriminatory access by peaceful means to supplies of natural resources needed
6) . A mutual affirmation that the basic policy of each country was one of peace throughout the Pacific area and a mutual disclaimer of territorial designs there.
7). A provision that Japan declare its willingness to negotiate with the United States, at such time as the latter might desire, with a view to concluding a treaty for the neutralization of the Philippine Islands, when Philippine independence should have been achieved.
Pretty warlike huh.
The response of the Japanese government was to invade French Indo China. The US then imposed an oil embargo on Japan.
As late as Dec 6 1941 FDR sent a personal message to Emperor Hirohito asking him to use his influence with his government to prevent any military action that would bring about war. Dammed warmongering at its worst I suppose.
> : > :I wouldn't waste my time on Gingrich's novel but did he bring up the > :point that the US fired the first shot as the Ward sank the minisub? > :Evil white people messing with the Greater East Asia Co Prosperity > :Sphere.....I can see the revisionists in Japan now rewriting the > :school text books. > :
> How the hell would I know?
How indeed !
> My knowledge of history goes back to what > I was taught in high school, back in a time when they actually taught > the details of such things.
Just in case you missed the point theWard was in US territorial waters at the time.
> In article <hd2lb4$cg...@news.eternal-september.org>, raymond- > oh...@hotmail.com says...
>> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message >> news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... >> > Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the >> > late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if >> > in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the >> > USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very >> > embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the >> > poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I >> > dunno. >> > In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and >> > Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete >> > embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both >> > agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be >> > war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind >> > to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect >> > and there was war. >> > What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in >> > exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary >> > Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in >> > Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too >> > much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again >> > to no result. >> > What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to >> > withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a >> > partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" >> > because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE >> > Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain >> > without going to war with the USA? >> > If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever >> > moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply >> > make them more boldly offensive?
>> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it.
> That's about the craziest thing I've seen you write in a while.
FDR badly wanted into the war. he had no doubt we would win. even a two front war.
> >> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > >> news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > >> > Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > >> > late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > >> > in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > >> > USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > >> > embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > >> > poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > >> > dunno. > >> > In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > >> > Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > >> > embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > >> > agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > >> > war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > >> > to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > >> > and there was war. > >> > What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > >> > exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > >> > Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > >> > Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > >> > much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > >> > to no result. > >> > What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > >> > withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > >> > partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > >> > because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > >> > Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > >> > without going to war with the USA? > >> > If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > >> > moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > >> > make them more boldly offensive?
> >> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it.
> > That's about the craziest thing I've seen you write in a while.
> FDR badly wanted into the war. he had no doubt we would win. > even a two front war.
You have some sort of cite for that silly claim Ray ?
> :In article <dv1bf5t1on4sbilvl2f132spehv0lfd...@4ax.com>, > :fjmcc...@gmail.com says... > :> > :> "Keith Willshaw" <ke...@nospam.kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote: > :> > :> : > :> :"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > :> :news:hd2lb4$cg4$1@news.eternal-september.org... > :> :> > :> :> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > :> :> news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > :> :>> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > :> :>> late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > :> :>> in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > :> :>> USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > :> :>> embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > :> :>> poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > :> :>> dunno. > :> :>> In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > :> :>> Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > :> :>> embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > :> :>> agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > :> :>> war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > :> :>> to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > :> :>> and there was war. > :> :>> What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > :> :>> exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > :> :>> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > :> :>> Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > :> :>> much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > :> :>> to no result. > :> :>> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > :> :>> withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > :> :>> partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > :> :>> because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > :> :>> Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > :> :>> without going to war with the USA? > :> :>> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > :> :>> moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > :> :>> make them more boldly offensive? > :> :> > :> :> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it. > :> :> > :> : > :> :Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two > :> :wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming. > :> : > :> > :> Then why did he do everything short of actually having official US > :> forces open fire on Japanese troops? > : > :Such as ? > :
> Take a history course. It'll be covered. I don't have time to teach > you one (and you can't afford my hourly rate).
So you don't have any actual points just a silly claim..
> > : > > :I wouldn't waste my time on Gingrich's novel but did he bring up the > > :point that the US fired the first shot as the Ward sank the minisub? > > :Evil white people messing with the Greater East Asia Co Prosperity > > :Sphere.....I can see the revisionists in Japan now rewriting the > > :school text books. > > :
> > How the hell would I know?
> How indeed !
> > My knowledge of history goes back to what > > I was taught in high school, back in a time when they actually taught > > the details of such things.
> Just in case you missed the point theWard was in US territorial waters > at the time.
> :In article <hmvbf513gsrpqa2qn980t1melqpep6a...@4ax.com>, > :fjmcc...@gmail.com says... > :> > :> tankfixer <paul.carr...@gmail.com> wrote: > :> > :> :In article <dv1bf5t1on4sbilvl2f132spehv0lfd...@4ax.com>, > :> :fjmcc...@gmail.com says... > :> :> > :> :> "Keith Willshaw" <ke...@nospam.kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote: > :> :> > :> :> : > :> :> :"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > :> :> :news:hd2lb4$cg4$1@news.eternal-september.org... > :> :> :> > :> :> :> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message > :> :> :> news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > :> :> :>> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > :> :> :>> late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > :> :> :>> in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > :> :> :>> USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > :> :> :>> embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > :> :> :>> poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > :> :> :>> dunno. > :> :> :>> In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > :> :> :>> Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > :> :> :>> embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > :> :> :>> agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > :> :> :>> war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > :> :> :>> to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > :> :> :>> and there was war. > :> :> :>> What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > :> :> :>> exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > :> :> :>> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > :> :> :>> Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > :> :> :>> much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > :> :> :>> to no result. > :> :> :>> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > :> :> :>> withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > :> :> :>> partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > :> :> :>> because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > :> :> :>> Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > :> :> :>> without going to war with the USA? > :> :> :>> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > :> :> :>> moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > :> :> :>> make them more boldly offensive? > :> :> :> > :> :> :> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it. > :> :> :> > :> :> : > :> :> :Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two > :> :> :wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming. > :> :> : > :> :> > :> :> Then why did he do everything short of actually having official US > :> :> forces open fire on Japanese troops? > :> : > :> :Such as ? > :> : > :> > :> Take a history course. It'll be covered. I don't have time to teach > :> you one (and you can't afford my hourly rate). > : > :So you don't have any actual points just a silly claim.. > :
> How about:
> 1) Giving China weapons essentially gratis (or as close as Congress > would let him get away with) while embargoing Japan?
> 2) Giving special dispensations to ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY PILOTS so that > they could temporarily leave service and go join the Chinese?
How does either of those get the US into the war directly ?
> Just a couple of things you'd already know if you hadn't slept through > history in school.
> Now go take a course and educate yourself, you stupid twat.
Stop making lcaims that FDR wanted the US in either the Pacific or European wars and people might start to take you seriously.
> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > dunno. > In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > and there was war. > What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > exchange for something?
Roosevelt was looking for any excuse available to go to war with the Nazis and Fascists, so he wouldn't have any lifted aby embargos on people supplying oil to Germany.
Any since the only thing the Japanese Navy even knew about science anything, engineering anything, or military anything was the Emperor, so that's the people in the US were already well along the way post Port-o-Call Economics and doing nuclear research, rocket research, missile research, computer research, dsp reasearch, microbe reasearch, laser and maser research, microwave research. Post Coal Economics, Post Submarine Engines, Post Diesel Logistics, Jeep Development, Bazooka Development, Anti-Mine Warfare, and Post WWI everything in general.
> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > to no result. > What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > without going to war with the USA? > If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > make them more boldly offensive?
>> >> "Frogwatch" <dboh...@mindspring.com> wrote in message >> >> news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... >> >> > Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the >> >> > late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering >> >> > if >> >> > in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the >> >> > USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very >> >> > embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed >> >> > the >> >> > poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I >> >> > dunno. >> >> > In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and >> >> > Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a >> >> > complete >> >> > embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both >> >> > agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will >> >> > be >> >> > war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some >> >> > kind >> >> > to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect >> >> > and there was war. >> >> > What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in >> >> > exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary >> >> > Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps >> >> > in >> >> > Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too >> >> > much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over >> >> > again >> >> > to no result. >> >> > What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to >> >> > withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a >> >> > partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" >> >> > because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE >> >> > Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply >> >> > certain >> >> > without going to war with the USA? >> >> > If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese >> >> > ever >> >> > moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply >> >> > make them more boldly offensive?
>> >> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it.
>> > That's about the craziest thing I've seen you write in a while.
>> FDR badly wanted into the war. he had no doubt we would win. >> even a two front war.
> You have some sort of cite for that silly claim Ray ?
as Fred mentioned, read some U.S. history of the inter-war depression era. it was the thrust of our foreign policy . from escorting convoys and engaging u-boats in combat with losses on both side to thr AVG. War was the way out of depression because war is a unrestrained spending project and the republicans couldn't thwart it.
and FDR understood that. you spend to end economic hard times, not save
> :On Nov 7, 5:14 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote::> tankfixer <paul.carr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> :> > :> :In article <dv1bf5t1on4sbilvl2f132spehv0lfd...@4ax.com>, > :> :fjmcc...@gmail.com says... > :> :> > :> :> "Keith Willshaw" <ke...@nospam.kwillshaw.demon.co.uk> wrote: > :> :> > :> :> : > :> :> :"Ray O'Hara" <raymond-oh...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > :> :> :news:hd2lb4$cg4$1@news.eternal-september.org... > :> :> :> > :> :> :> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it. > :> :> :> > :> :> : > :> :> :Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two > :> :> :wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming. > :> :> : > :> :> > :> :> Then why did he do everything short of actually having official US > :> :> forces open fire on Japanese troops? > :> : > :> :Such as ? > :> : > :> > :> Take a history course. It'll be covered. I don't have time to teach > :> you one (and you can't afford my hourly rate). > :> > : > :I wouldn't waste my time on Gingrich's novel but did he bring up the > :point that the US fired the first shot as the Ward sank the minisub? > :Evil white people messing with the Greater East Asia Co Prosperity > :Sphere.....I can see the revisionists in Japan now rewriting the > :school text books. > :
> How the hell would I know? My knowledge of history goes back to what > I was taught in high school, back in a time when they actually taught > the details of such things.
> -- > "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar > territory." > --G. Behn
You got details in high school? I would guess you can't describe the provisions of the Lend Lease Act without going to a source.
> :>news:b53a34cd-d1f9-4b98-82b3-84fe32400edd@g23g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > :>> Am still reading Gingritch's "Pearl Harbor" concerning events of the > :>> late 1930s and early 40s that led up to the attack and am wondering if > :>> in mid-1941 the war could have been avoided between Japan and the > :>> USA. In this book, some senior Japanese officials were very > :>> embarassed over the behavior of the Jap army in Nanking and blamed the > :>> poor restraint of the Army claiming the Navy was better behaved. I > :>> dunno. > :>> In the book, there is a conversation between US ambassador Grew and > :>> Japanese Foreign Minister Teijiro about Roosevelt declaring a complete > :>> embargo on Japan over Japan's occupation of Indochina. They both > :>> agree that unless one side or the other backs down a bit there will be > :>> war. The Foreign Minister suggests some "give and take" of some kind > :>> to avoid war. Obviously, in real life, the embargo went into effect > :>> and there was war. > :>> What if, Roosevelt had agreed to partially lift the embargo in > :>> exchange for something? Prince Konoye had secretely asked Secretary > :>> Hull for a private meeting with Roosevelt to discuss such, perhaps in > :>> Anchorage or Hawaii. However, the admin thought this would be too > :>> much like Munich with Chamberlain giving up stuff over and over again > :>> to no result. > :>> What if such a meeting had taken place and Japan had agreed to > :>> withdraw from Southern ports in Indochina in exchange for only a > :>> partial oil embargo. Could war have been prevented? I think "No" > :>> because Japan saw no other way out other than getting the oil of SE > :>> Asia. IS there some way they could have made their oil supply certain > :>> without going to war with the USA? > :>> If there had been no war betwen USA and Japan, would the Japanese ever > :>> moderated their behavior or would getting access to the oil simply > :>> make them more boldly offensive? > :> > :> FDR wanted war and wasn't about to do anything that prevented it. > :> > : > :Not with Japan he didnt. No sensible leader wants to fight two > :wars at the same time and he knew war with Germany was coming. > :
> Then why did he do everything short of actually having official US > forces open fire on Japanese troops?
You mean like the Japanese fired on Americans? Obviously you're unfamiliar with the incidents in the international settlement in Shanghai, including the Panay incident.
Duwop wrote: > On Nov 7, 9:13 pm, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> 2) Giving special dispensations to ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY PILOTS so that >> they could temporarily leave service and go join the Chinese?
> When did that unit first see combat? (Hint: it was not until after > Pearl Harbor)
The bloke flying the plane that spotted the Bismarck was a US military pilot on active service...
-- William Black
"Any number under six"
The answer given by Englishman Richard Peeke when asked by the Duke of Medina Sidonia how many Spanish sword and buckler men he could beat single handed with a quarterstaff.
|
