Likely even worse, as Admiral Nimitz remarked in a 1964 interview.But if Kimmel had been running at full wartime patrol/sea status, what'd have been the losses?
Think there.
Likely even worse, as Admiral Nimitz remarked in a 1964 interview.But if Kimmel had been running at full wartime patrol/sea status, what'd have been the losses?
Think there.
Though generally speaking, I picture moreTexasAkatsuki as "the lady" rather than Sara.
Likely even worse, as Admiral Nimitz remarked in a 1964 interview.
I have thought on it, and am still convinced you're working on hindsight/thinking you know better than career officers and being overly harsh on Kimmel . Oh well, I suppose we'll have to disagree.I would ... Well. Let's say this. Nimitz never spoke badly about anyone, if he could at all help it, and was friends with Kimmel.
I suggest you think on what I said, and the likely results.
In essence, my suggestion is Kimmel should have been, as Admiral Hart was, running at war tempo. Meaning the fighter squadrons at Ewa and other Navy fields would have had at least a dawn patrol up, Cats out to sea, destroyers and et al doing distant patrol, etc. ADA manned and ready at 755am, a good hour after first light plus.
"Likely even worse" is... not quite true. And his quote was in response "if Kimmel tried to surge the ships out to sea right before or during the night." MY thought was he started Hart's actions on the same date.
This was also the assessment of Joseph Rochefort, head of the US Navy's Station HYPO, who remarked the attack was cheap at the price.[16]
Sorry but no. The woman depicted in "the quick and the dead" is a frontier lady, not a high court lady.
Yeah, basically Yamato or Fusou.Yamato Nadeshiko, You mean a Woman of Grace and Character who also would butcher like a Hog anyone stupid enough to Attack her home?
Yamato Nadeshiko, You mean a Woman of Grace and Character who also would butcher like a Hog anyone stupid enough to Attack her home?
Smart/wise friend.I smiled when my friend's wife received a fully functional and sharpened naginata as a wedding gift from her traditional Japanese grandparents. My friend understood the symbolism, because he lived and worked in Japan for several years. His family was totally stumped.
2. Which, on a related note, after last night has pretty much destroyed any confidence I had here
Not really a wise idea.Hurrah, a well-fed group of shipgirls!
...Wait, what? Uh... okay, guys, time to organize the (vehicle-mounted liquid-fuelled) torches and pitch-forks (read: Harpoons... hey, harpoons are a type of fork, right? So Harpoon missiles qualify for a self-hurling/pitching fork!). Whoever annoyed Sky is our target.
Who the fuck was dumb and deliberate enough to be an asshole to Sky???I don't use discord and would be sad if you left. Also, in regards to yesterday, s/he has been here long enough to pick up on how you feel so was likely trying to get a rise out of you. Honestly, as banal as this is saying is, don't let them win.
And that's where Naval Intelligence comes in. An knowledgeable observer with a pair of binoculars on Halawa Heights, or in Pearl City, Waipahu, or Ewa can always get a good look into the harbor. Pearl's small enough that when the Navy designates moorings and anchorages, they normally stay set, unless there's a compelling reason for changing them. And Pearl is pretty crowded when the whole fleet's in, especially with all the battleships and carriers are there.
Even if a ship is in dry dock or at the fueling pier instead of their normal mooring, they're still a target. Just look what happened to Pennsylvania, Cassin and Downes.
The guy who was most aware that fighting the US is a stupid idea... finds his best available plan is to enrage the US... instead of very carefully tiptoeing around them while fanning the anti-European-Empires sentiment in the US.
Hence my query about "what is this Japanese military 'intelligence' you speak of?"
EDIT: Look, unless Yamamoto can utterly not into logistics, spreading troops out that need to be resupplied on a bunch of self-contained prisons i.e. islands throughout the Pacific is... not a stroke of brilliance. Now if he'd actually invaded Hawaii and succeeded, that would be a different story.
Wait, I thought that marine recruitment went down while donations went up?EDIT2-To give people an idea of the national mood, in 1944 the Oscar for Best Documentary was given to "With the Marines at Tarawa" which showed some of the assault on Tarawa filmed by combat cameramen, as well as the ghastly aftereffects of the battle, such as dozens of corpses strewn on the beach and floating offshore. Marine recruiting offices reported an increase in volunteers wishing to join when the film was screened in their area.
I disagree fully with you. And no, there's no hindsight needed. I've stated over and over again, I don't blame Kimmel for the actual damage, at the moment of the attack. I do blame him for setting up the attacks' success. And why, by comparing his actions with officers who where at the same time, and effectively in similar situations. Again, look at Hart. QED. No need for hindsight, just look at the Pacific and Asiatic fleets, and compare what happened. It's actually a very good comparison, on what I believe Kimmel's true failure was.I have thought on it, and am still convinced you're working on hindsight/thinking you know better than career officers and being overly harsh on Kimmel . Oh well, I suppose we'll have to disagree.
Edit: It wasn't only Nimitz who thought that way as well-