Surprise Attack on Pearl Harbor: December 7, 1941 - Hawaii Caught Off Guard; FDR Already Aware
A fresh take on the Pearl Harbor controversy:
Pearl Harbor: The Biggest Misunderstanding in History?
The infamous attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, left a lasting impact on America's psyche, solidifying the country's entrance into World War II. During this dark chapter of our history, many questions arose regarding the government's foreknowledge of the attack. Some believe that Washington intentionally withheld advance information from commanders in Hawaii to ensure a "surprise" attack that would propel the U.S. into the war. But is this really the truth? Let's delve into the facts and separate conspiracy from reality.
As the Pacific sun rose over the tranquil waters of Hawaii, a fleet from Japan embarked upon a malevolent mission aimed at the heart of the American Pacific Fleet. The assault at Pearl Harbor was, without a doubt, a shocking and devastating blow to the United States, leaving behind a path of destruction and loss. Many have since questioned whether Washington had advance knowledge of the attack and deliberately kept the information from commanders in Hawaii to guarantees a "surprise" attack. But, according to a comprehensive investigation of the events, the truth may be less sensational than the conspiracy theory suggests.
Let's clear the air regarding Washington's alleged knowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack. It's true that FDR desired to directly involve the United States in World War II; however, his intentions sharply contradicted his public pronouncements. FDR dispatched his closest advisor, Harry Hopkins, to meet British Prime Minister Winston Churchill in January 1941. Hopkins told Churchill: "The President is determined that we [the United States and England] shall win the war together. Make no mistake about it. He has sent me here to tell you that at all costs and by all means he will carry you through, no matter what happens to him - there is nothing he will not do so far as he has human power."
Despite privately planning to entangle America in the war, it's essential to recognize that our government did provide warnings to the Hawaiian commanders before the attack. For instance, shortly before the assault, commanders received a "war warning," stating, "This dispatch is to be considered a war warning." Although this warning was ambiguous regarding the precise target, it was intended to heighten awareness and alertness among the military personnel stationed at Pearl Harbor.
Many people point to the token warnings as evidence of Washington deliberately neglecting its duty to protect the island garrison. However, it's important to consider the broader context of the information Washington received leading up the attack. The Office of Naval Intelligence did indeed break Japan's secret diplomatic code, known as "Purple," in 1940. But intercepting and decrypting these messages did not provide unequivocal evidence of a specific attack on Pearl Harbor. The messages were rich in historical context and revealed the deteriorating diplomatic relations between Japan and the United States, but the details of the attack were not found within the transcripts.
The Hawaiian commanders, Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, and Lieutenant General Walter C. Short, have faced criticism for their handling of the warnings and their perceived ineptitude in preparing for an attack. However, it's essential to acknowledge that, while they may have made strategic errors in their responses, there was limited information available regarding the attack's exact nature and timing. Without concrete indications of an imminent assault on the Pearl Harbor garrison, it's arguable that the commanders did the best they could with the resources they had.
Some critics have argued that insufficient radar resources and inadequate air reconnaissance contributed to the absence of advance detection of the Japanese fleet approaching the Hawaiian Islands. While it's true that the capabilities of radar technology were limited at the time, it's important to note that the United States Navy never had complete control over the allocation of resources, especially during wartime. It's possible that other ongoing military operations took priority over the protection of the Pacific Fleet in Hawaii.
Historians continue to debate whether the attack on Pearl Harbor was the result of Washington's deliberate withholding of information from Hawaiian commanders or the consequence of limited resources and a complex intelligence apparatus. One thing is certain: the attack on Pearl Harbor left indelible marks on America's history and provoked a national fervor that would ultimately propel the country into the war. Whether Washington intentionally concealed advance knowledge of the attack remains a topic of debate; however, a closer examination of the facts reveals a more nuanced and less sensational interpretation of the events that led to the attack.
In conclusion, the attack on Pearl Harbor was a devastating event that shook the very foundations of our nation. Although questions regarding the government's foreknowledge of the attack have persisted for decades, a comprehensive review of the situation reveals that the information provided to Hawaiian commanders was patchy and ambiguous, and the duties of the commanders were complicated by limited resources and a complex intelligence apparatus. Ultimately, the responsibility for the unpreparedness lies with the failures of our intelligence systems and the decision-makers in Washington rather than with the Hawaii commanders.
Original Article:
TheNewAmerican.com | James Perloff
Comprehensive research has shown not only that Washington knew in advance of the attack on Pearl Harbor, but that it deliberately withheld its foreknowledge from our commanders in Hawaii in the hope that the "surprise" attack would catapult the U.S. into World War II.
Enrichment Data:
Overall:There is no conclusive evidence that Washington knew in advance about the specific attack on Pearl Harbor and deliberately withheld the information from commanders in Hawaii. However, the historical record shows a complex situation regarding warnings and intelligence before the attack on December 7, 1941.
Warnings and Intelligence Before the Attack
- The U.S. Pacific Fleet commanders at Pearl Harbor, Admiral Husband E. Kimmel, and Lieutenant General Walter C. Short, received several warnings that hostile action was possible. For example, a key warning on November 27, 1941, sent to both commanders explicitly stated "This dispatch is to be considered a war warning," and urged them to undertake defensive deployments and reconnaissance measures [1].
- Despite these warnings, the actions taken by the commanders in Hawaii were deemed inadequate by history. Short focused on sabotage prevention and concentrated aircraft on Wheeler Field, while radar operations were limited and not fully developed at the time [1].
- Kimmel later claimed he was not given full intelligence on Japanese intentions and that, if fully informed, he would have taken stronger defensive measures [2]. It is known that U.S. cryptographic breakthroughs (such as breaking Japanese codes) provided some information on Japanese plans but apparently did not specifically indicate the imminent attack on Pearl Harbor itself or its precise timing [2].
Criticism and Defense
- Critics from Washington suggest that President Roosevelt and other top officials had clear evidence by December 6 that war was imminent but failed to adequately alert military departments or commanders in Hawaii [2].
- Defenders of the Hawaiian commanders argue that the warnings were general rather than specific and that Washington did not fully communicate the seriousness or details of the threat to Kimmel and Short, who thus could not prepare adequately [2].
Summary
The evidence indicates that Washington issued general warnings about the possibility of hostile action and urged preparedness but did not provide detailed, actionable intelligence about the specific timing and nature of the Pearl Harbor attack to the commanders on the ground. The failure was more likely due to the limitations of intelligence interpretation, communication gaps, and underestimation of Japanese intentions rather than a deliberate withholding of information by Washington. There is no verified proof that Washington intentionally kept advance knowledge of the attack secret from Pearl Harbor commanders [1][2].
[1] https://history.state.gov/historicaldocuments/frus1941v03/d360
[2] https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/f-j/freedmanralphpaulpearlharborstudygroupreport.html
- Theories suggesting that Washington intentionally withheld advance knowledge of the Pearl Harbor attack from commanders contradict a comprehensive review of the situation, as the information provided to Hawaiian commanders was ambiguous and the duties of the commanders were complicated by limited resources and a complex intelligence apparatus.
- Despite accusations that Washington deliberately kept information from the Hawaiian commanders, it's significant to note that the U.S. government did provide warnings to the commanders before the attack, albeit in a general sense, such as a "war warning" sent shortly before the assault.
- Critics often point to the lack of concrete intelligence about the attack's exact nature and timing as evidence of Washington's negligence in protecting the Pearl Harbor garrison. However, it's essential to consider the constraints faced by the intelligence system at the time, limiting its ability to provide unequivocal evidence about the impending attack.
