Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΜύ permalink

what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

• Message 1.Μύ

  Posted by vipere5th (U10837065) on Monday, 14th January 2008

  i know the japanese were trying to get America in to ww2, but really what was the real point of bomming pearl harbor. like i think it was dumb because they knew that we had betting them in ww1 so why try to make us angry again.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by MB (U177470) on Monday, 14th January 2008

  
  i know the japanese were trying to get America in to ww2, but really what was the real point of bomming pearl harbor. like i think it was dumb because they knew that we had betting them in ww1 so why try to make us angry again.
  Μύ
  
  I presume "betting them in ww1" is meant to be "beaten them in WWI".
  
  The Japanese were actually on our side in WWI - presuming that you are in the UK or USA?
  
  MB

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  The Japanece worked on a sharp knockout punch. It worked against the Russian Navy, and against the German Far East Squadron in W W 1. They hoped that by destroying the U S fleet, it would remove the will to fight, forcing the U S to agree terms. The history channel has just done a programne about their Navy from conception to present day. Well worth looking out for

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  i know the japanese were trying to get America in to ww2, but really what was the real point of bomming pearl harbor. like i think it was dumb because they knew that we had betting them in ww1 so why try to make us angry again.Μύ
  
  Several combining factors, but the main two were:
  
  1) The Japanese were really annoyed that they'd got little out of supporting the Allies during WW1 and were looking for revenge against the US for betraying them during the peace conference. Admiral Mitsubishi's famously remarked "They pulled hats over our faces" (a metaphor for the Japanese delegates not being able to see they were being screwed). But not only did Japan fail to gain any territory from their contribution to defeating Germany, the Washington Treaty of 1923 imposed the obligations to build expensive battleships. Admiral Mitsubishi took all this as a personal insult to his ancient Samurai code and steered a vehemently anti-american when he became Prime Minister in 1938. Note Mitsubishi's family originally founded a company to make tanks and other military vehicles and only converted to civilian cars after the war.
  
  2) Japanese emmigration, primarily to California, but also to Peru and Chile had been going on since the opening of trade with Japan following the Cherry Tree War of 1878. Japan naturally felt loyalty to these settlers and when a Japanese separatist movement in Peru was brutally suppressed by the Peruvian government (May 1939), the Japanese tried to step in. The US however mobilized their fleet and threatened war if Japan didn't back down. This second national humiliation was too much for Mitsubishi and the Secret War Plan Number 3 was founded.
  
  This plan involved the destruction of the US fleet at Pearl Harbour combined with a Japanese insurrection in California and Oregon (where they made up almost 50% of the population) and an ambitious plot by the Japanese secret service to blow up the Panama canal. The Japanese government was taking a risk on the US's inability to respond. Not actually a bad bet. Much of the US fleet was working for the British Royal Navy under the lend-lease program. The remaining Atlantic Fleet was involved in the failed attempt to conquor the African colonies of Pithy France. The entire Pacific Fleet could be sunk at anchor in Pearl Harbour. By the time the Atlantic ships could be brought home, the Panama Canal would be unusable (and hopefully in Japanese hands), which would mean an extra 6 months sailing time. During that time the Japanese intended to invade and seize the whole western seaboard of the US and thereby deny the Pacific to the US navy.
  
  In the event, it turned out to be a complete farce. The San Fransisco Revolt was badly led and completely infiltrated with spies which meant the US army responded rapidly and the rebellion had to be launched early. The Panama Plotters unaware of the change of date were then arrested and/or excluded form the canal zone. Even the attack on Pearl Harbour wasn't successful enough and America's allies Korea and China launched attacks against Japan which dragged away crucial reinforcements from the invasion of the US which was later cancelled.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by Scarboro (U2806863) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  Japan was trying to conquer China. Its army, navy and air force needed lots of oil.
  
  Japan is an island and does not have any oil.
  
  The Western Allies had slapped an embargo on oil to Japan. Within a few years they would be in China, out of gas, fighting a bunch of angry Chinese.
  
  There was lots of oil in Indonesia - controlled by the British and Dutch - both of whose forces were occupied in Europe by Mr Hitler - who was allied to Japan.
  
  So why not just sail down to Indonesia and kick out the British and Dutch, and take all that nice oil.
  
  Oops! The Americans had a strong base in the Phillipines, and an even stronger fleet at Pearl Harbour. They could ambush the Japanese as they sailed south.
  
  So - knock out the American fleet first - then take the oil. Got the plan?
  
  Regards
  
  Brian
  

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by jm33gnr (U10809727) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  Just a query on this seeing as I'm definitely not very knowledgeable as the rest of you..
  
  Is it true to say that the Japanese regarded the US as the potentially stronger, militarily and politically, member of the Allies (even though it hadn't entered the war officially ) and also the fact that it is closer to them made the pre-emptive attack more viable ???
  
  I'm totally expecting to go down in flames over this one, so don't hold back

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message6

• Message 7

  , in reply to message 6.

  Posted by Backtothedarkplace (U2955180) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  Opinions were split. The majority view was that the Americans wouldnt fight as they were not a warrior race, not the first people to make that mistake, and would make a bit of noise then accept the status quo.
  
  Other people who had a better idea of both the strengths of the American industry and people thought that they would have an intial period of success followed by defeat. It was a minority, if more accurate view.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message7

• Message 8

  , in reply to message 7.

  Posted by jm33gnr (U10809727) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  Was that a view taken post WW1 ? Even if it was, did the Japanese have any intelligence regarding the situation in Europe and Africa ( don't know if any Americans were in the desert before they declared war ) with regards to the American pilots fighting with the RAF ?
  
  

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message8

• Message 9

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by tony_19680 (U5835599) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  Given that japan was allied to Germany I would have expected Japan to invade UK, French and dutch holdings in Southeast asia.
  
  Why would the USA attach Japan in South Asia when it wasn't prepared to join in over europe.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message9

• Message 10

  , in reply to message 9.

  Posted by White Camry (U2321601) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  tony_19680,
  
  Since 1898 when the US nicked the Philippines from Spain and made itself a rival of Japan in the western Pacific, both treated each other with kid gloves. They knew their ambitions would eventually lead to blows, especially after 1919 when they became the undisputed top two powers in the Pacific. The US thus PUT most of its naval strength in the Pacific, limiting its presence in the Atlantic to west of Greenland.
  
  Throughout all this they kept a hands-off approach to Europe until matters there drew them in.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message10

• Message 11

  , in reply to message 10.

  Posted by tony_19680 (U5835599) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  Even given that Japan and the USA were rivals I can't see the USA launching a surprise attack on the Japanese navy. I'm not sure Roosevelt would have had the popular mandate to get involved in a war of aggression.
  Japan made it easy for the USA to get involved in both Europe and the Pacific. USA policy was generally isolationalism, wasn't it?
  

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message11

• Message 12

  , in reply to message 11.

  Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  Both navies fought War Games on a clash in the Pacific. The Japanese based theirs on them invading U S held land, then (Like the Russian war) The U S fleet rushing to reclaim it and being beaten. Then the U S getting round the table to talk. This plan had been in place for many years, even before they invaded China. The sharp strike.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message12

• Message 13

  , in reply to message 11.

  Posted by White Camry (U2321601) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  tony_19680,
  
  USA policy was generally isolationalism, wasn't it?Μύ
  
  Much more isolationist regarding Europe than the Pacific.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message13

• Message 14

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by docsdiamonds (U1803003) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  
  That, CloudyJ, is a fine post

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message14

• Message 15

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by wollemi (U2318584) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  #1
  
  Japan had been an ally in WW1, but a small one and followed its own agenda which was to dominate China. They did get some German possessions after the war - in Shandong China and in the Pacific - but were limited by the allies in their aims to control China
  
  The Sino Japanese War in 1937 put this into action again. Then in 1941 they followed the next part of the plan which was to dominate SE ASia and they did not want the US getting in the way

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message15

• Message 16

  , in reply to message 15.

  Posted by Johnlvsall (U5330593) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  While this may be WAY off base. IMO Japan attacked U.S. in December, 1941, as a purely defensive measure. Her leaders were convinced we were going to attack her. She was afraid that if she waited too long, we would destroy her before she got a chance to defend herself. Remember Roosevelt has made some very beligerant statements against Japan during the previous six months.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message16

• Message 17

  , in reply to message 16.

  Posted by Erik Lindsay (U231970) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  cloudyj is essentially correct in his statements as to why the Japanese attacked the US. The one-blow knockout punch had worked at Tsushima and Mahan had advocated something similar to a ''single huge battle'' being decisive in his huge monologue. But there's a bit more behind all this.
  
  The Japanese weren't completely taken in by the idea of the ''single big battle'' working, nor were the ones that looked deeply into the economic situations amongst the US, Britain, France, et al totally offended by the warship ratio settled on at the naval conference. They knew that there was no way they could equal the big three in an arms race and those who thought about it realized that the big ship ratio offered at the conference was probably better than they could reasonably expect to achieve without such a pact. They knew they could withdraw and they also knew that the US and RN navies had to scrap some of their capital ships to come down to the limitation agreements. They figured that they could withdraw later on and then start building more and better (emphasis 'better') ships. They decided early on that quality would defeat quantity and focused on the former.
  
  They attacked Pearl Harbor when they did hoping that one big blow would knock America out of the war, and they did so, realizing that in 1941 they were about as powerful as they were ever going to get with respect to the European allies and the US. The RN was occupied with Germany, the French had been beaten and Holland was occupied. The US army at the time was ranked about as tough as Sweden's so they didn't anticipate any problems with American ground forces. They figured that maybe-- just maybe-- if they struck hard and wiped out the US capital ships, they would have taken out the only faction the Americans had that could be seriously considered a world class fighting force.
  
  As to the response -- they viewed the US population as decadent and fun-loving and figured that the chances were pretty good that they'd just lean back and take it. With their navy gone, they'd leave Japan alone.
  
  It wasn't their last miscalculation.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message17

• Message 18

  , in reply to message 17.

  Posted by Meles meles (U1765136) on Tuesday, 15th January 2008

  No one as mentioned that at Pearl Harbour the Japanese, who clearly understood the importance of naval air power, were dismayed that they failed to cripple any US aircraft carriers... all were fortuitously at sea at the time of the attack. The damaged battleships, cruisers etc. although they provided good propaganda, were not the vessels that were going to win the war... and I'm sure the Japanese naval high command realised this only too well.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message18

• Message 19

  , in reply to message 16.

  Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Wednesday, 16th January 2008

  Now the thread's turned serious, I'll be sensible...
  
  Remember Roosevelt has made some very beligerant statements against Japan during the previous six months.Μύ
  
  Not just statements. The US provided at least one fighter group to the Chinese, The Flying Tigers, with plans for more. Nominally made up of volunteers, they were all US military pilots given special dispensation to join up and the planes were paid for by the US via a holding company. Although they didn't see combat until after Pearl Harbour the unit had been formed almost a year earlier and was in existance in training. It would have been obvious to the Japanese that US "neutrality" was anything but neutral. Incidentally, they were training at a British RAF base in Burma, so the British government were also involved.

  Link to this forum: what was the point of the Japanese attcking pearl harbor?

  Report message19

Back to top