We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor • Hacker News Board

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#71

Post by snakke » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:17 PM UTC

jabl wrote: post #31

Well, in retrospect it's easy to say that air power is the future and battleships are obsolete. But with the information available at the time, I don't think it really was that clear back in 1932. Back then, no capital ship had been sunk let alone been severely damaged(?) by aircraft. Aircraft, and in particular naval aircraft, at the time were flimsy biplanes, with monoplanes slowly entering the scene. Sinking a bat…

Your hunch is correct. There is a quote from a british naval officer that roughly says that -if they were right [on aircraft carriers being the next best thing and battleships being obsolete] they'd win the war. If they were wrong, they'd lose the empire.-

The exact quote escapes my google-fu sadly. I'm quite postive I've seen it in either one of Indy Neidell and his team's WW2 week-by-week episode[0] or one of the many excellent Drachinifel's videos about all things naval history[1].

[0] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCP1AejCL4DA7jYkZAELRhHQ [1] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC4mftUX7apmV1vsVXZh7RTw

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#72

Post by enriquto » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:17 PM UTC

kevmo wrote: post #38

GuardianCaveman wrote: post #30

My uncle flew Cobra helicopters in Vietnam and the us developed a new anti air system and he was supposed to fly against it to demo its effectiveness. I don’t recall the story well but he flew nap of the earth and in a certain manner he knew would counter the aa system and embarrassed the hell out of the bluefor test team and engineers who said he cheated. A friend in the army did an excercise at Bragg where Special…

Check out the most expensive War Games in history -- the USA got annihilated, and there were a lot of hurt feelings. The Lt. Gen. quit in the middle of the games, because he kept winning and they kept changing the rules to force a USA victory. Red, commanded by retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper, adopted an asymmetric strategy, in particular, using old methods to evade Blue's sophisticated elec…

This story is absolutely bonkers. If the wikipedia page is true, this paints a very ridiculous state of US high brass. I refuse to believe that a major military nation may engage in such petty stupidity. Thus my conclusion is that the whole summary of the events is carefully crafted to misled future enemies of their true capabilities.

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#73

Post by kilroy123 » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:30 PM UTC

monocasa wrote: post #42

Marazan wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Millennium Challenge was a farce but _the Millennium Challenge was completely right_. The point of the millenium challenge was to see if modern advances in C3 could allow a numerically inferior force to the one used in Desert Storm could invade Iraq successfully. What they discovered was against a tenacious and unconventional enemy willing to use elite troops in daring and near suicidal ways then America would ta…

I was under the impression that the Millennium Challenge's red team was playing as Iran, not Iraq. A "tenacious and unconventional enemy willing to use elite troops in daring and near suicidal ways" particularly known for their use of speedboats blended with more traditional military material is the Revolutionary Guard's MO.

Same here. That's why I think a war would Iran would be suicide and we would suffer a humiliating "defeat". Or at least many people would die.

Unless our strategies radically change.

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#74

Post by NoNameProvided » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:32 PM UTC

fighterpilot wrote: post #67

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> because any general smart enough to be effective would have been eliminated as a potential threat to his regime. Saved our asses in the European theater, in WWII. Hitler was an insecure micromanager. His generals represented generations of military expertise. They were really good. There's a number of places where Germany could have won the war, but were short-circuited by der dumkopf fuhrer

I'm not sure about that. His generals really screwed up the Eastern theatre in the late 1940s. Hitler knew they needed to secure the oil in the Caucasus but the generals were myopically focused on an Eastern advance and on securing useless symbolic military wins that contributed nothing towards the oil effort. It's because they weren't capable of understanding the dire economic need for oil and were too zoned in on t…

> and in some cases these generals sabotaged the oil effort.

This sounds interesting, do you have any sources about this?

> His generals really screwed up the Eastern theatre in the late 1940s.

My limited understanding of the eastern front is that: a, Hitler ordered the initial attack despite the warning of his generals b, forbid any (even tactical) retreat when the tides turned which eventually led to the destruction of multiple army groups.

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#75

Post by mixmastamyk » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:35 PM UTC

elihu wrote: post #50

The article makes a good case that Pearl Harbor was vulnerable to surprise attacks and the Navy had good reasons to be aware of that at the time. However, that being the case, what should they have done differently to be less vulnerable? Clearly they needed some kind of early warning system, and they actually installed a radar installation which was brand new technology at the time. (Unfortunately, they didn't heed t…

Well, it doesn’t get any simpler than taking threats seriously. Beyond that a night shift and early morning patrol into the blind spots couldn’t have hurt.

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#76

Post by shakezula » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:35 PM UTC

Lammy wrote: post #65

IMO the use of aircraft isn't even the most interesting part of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Having an aircraft carrier isn't very useful if you can't load it with enough fuel to get to a target and back: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underway_replenishment

To add to this: One of the reasons they originally targeted Pearl Harbor was to take out our oil and fuel reserves there, but at the last minute they changed targets and went for our ships instead.

From what I've read, if they had taken out our reserves there, our entire foothold in the pacific would have been lost for a year plus while we rebuilt, and we would've had to move our carrier forces back to the pacific coast, which would've been devastating at the time. The entire pacific theatre effort from the U.S. would've been crippled before it could've started.

War is really just a game of logistics.

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#77

Post by kevmo » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:35 PM UTC

enriquto wrote: post #72

kevmo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out the most expensive War Games in history -- the USA got annihilated, and there were a lot of hurt feelings. The Lt. Gen. quit in the middle of the games, because he kept winning and they kept changing the rules to force a USA victory. Red, commanded by retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper, adopted an asymmetric strategy, in particular, using old methods to evade Blue's sophisticated elec…

This story is absolutely bonkers. If the wikipedia page is true, this paints a very ridiculous state of US high brass. I refuse to believe that a major military nation may engage in such petty stupidity. Thus my conclusion is that the whole summary of the events is carefully crafted to misled future enemies of their true capabilities.

Powerful countries have done dumb stuff all throughout history. It's one reason why empires don't last.

Burying your head in the sand only makes you part of the problem.

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#78

Post by newsclues » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:36 PM UTC

enriquto wrote: post #72

kevmo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out the most expensive War Games in history -- the USA got annihilated, and there were a lot of hurt feelings. The Lt. Gen. quit in the middle of the games, because he kept winning and they kept changing the rules to force a USA victory. Red, commanded by retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper, adopted an asymmetric strategy, in particular, using old methods to evade Blue's sophisticated elec…

This story is absolutely bonkers. If the wikipedia page is true, this paints a very ridiculous state of US high brass. I refuse to believe that a major military nation may engage in such petty stupidity. Thus my conclusion is that the whole summary of the events is carefully crafted to misled future enemies of their true capabilities.

Never underestimate the incompetence of senior leadership.

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#79

Post by saberdancer » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:36 PM UTC

GuardianCaveman wrote: post #30

My uncle flew Cobra helicopters in Vietnam and the us developed a new anti air system and he was supposed to fly against it to demo its effectiveness. I don’t recall the story well but he flew nap of the earth and in a certain manner he knew would counter the aa system and embarrassed the hell out of the bluefor test team and engineers who said he cheated. A friend in the army did an excercise at Bragg where Special…

You have to take into account that some of these exploits are possible exactly because you are in an exercise and can work around the rules.

Flying nap of the Earth with a Cobra probably works because he knew the location where the AA system was located, there were no other "combatants", no air cover or spotters/infantry along the route to inform the AA that helicopter is flying low.

SF story about circling back is fun, but in a real scenario it would mean you kill a couple of guys but end up surrounded by unknown number of people and infantry.

Re: We only ever talk about the third attack on Pearl Harbor

#80

Post by corty » Mon, May 31, 2021, 8:37 PM UTC

enriquto wrote: post #72

kevmo wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Check out the most expensive War Games in history -- the USA got annihilated, and there were a lot of hurt feelings. The Lt. Gen. quit in the middle of the games, because he kept winning and they kept changing the rules to force a USA victory. Red, commanded by retired Marine Corps Lieutenant General Paul K. Van Riper, adopted an asymmetric strategy, in particular, using old methods to evade Blue's sophisticated elec…

This story is absolutely bonkers. If the wikipedia page is true, this paints a very ridiculous state of US high brass. I refuse to believe that a major military nation may engage in such petty stupidity. Thus my conclusion is that the whole summary of the events is carefully crafted to misled future enemies of their true capabilities.

Exercises are different. When you don't have to fear death for you or your troops, you don't act the same I guess. I think the blue team would have thought twice about letting their ego run the show if the red team had used life ammo.