to great aplomb, not per se his specific viewpoints. The point you make about it being a war of annihilation is spot on - which is why I emphasize it as the true conflict in the Nazi's eyes - the other things were pesky necessities born out of alliances - both opposite (England & France with Poland, who was part of the plan) and 'friends' (Italy fouling up the Balkans, Africa, everywhere they went).
slightly o/t - Goebbels is a fascinating character in his own right
He managed to be both a true believer in Nazi ideology (as virulent an anti-Semite as any of that lot) and breathtakingly cynical about the Third Reich at the same time.
On another point, their insinuation that Patton was brought back only after the Germans launched the Ardennes offensive was patently absurd.
Exactly. They skipped over the hedgerow difficulties (not to mention the British getting stonewalled at Caen), and completely left out Operation Cobra and the breakout at St. Lo. And, as I said, they didn't even mention Bradley or Montgomery.
having started this thread and not having watched any of this show yet Im not exactly in a hurry based on what Ive read here. Oh well, Ill save it for the dog days of summer I guess.
the carriers at Pearl Harbor, but they were not in port. Lucky for us, unlucky for them. Yamamoto had hoped to destroy the carriers along the the battleships at Pearl.
The biggest mistake was not bombing the fuel and repair facilities.
Many successful Japanese attacks and battles fell short even though they had the advantage. At Pearl Adm Nagumo failed to send the 3rd wave to destroy the dry docks and repair facilities perhaps fearing the US Carriers would appear at any moment and catch the Japanese fleet - missed opportunity.
Not destroying the American carriers was huge. There would have been no Coral Sea...no way to stop the Japanese from invading Australia and New Zealand...and obviously no Midway. Lucky or not, it was still a terrible mistake on the part of the Japanese forces.
I do agree that not destroying the repair facilities was a capital mistake, too. I think that most of battleships that fought in the Battle of Surigao Strait had been raised from the mud of Pearl Harbor.
Quote:
At Leyte Gulf, the Japanese fleet of battleships and cruisers ran from a squadron of destroyers and jeep carriers when they had the clear advantage. Had they pressed home the attack they would have destroyed the landing force left vulnerable when Holsey took off chasing the fainting force that the Japanese had sent to pull the US Fleet away from the landing area.
I'm always reminded of Sean Connery in The Hunt for Red October. "Halsey acted stupidly." And he was right. Luckily for us, Kinkaid and Oldendorf did not, and you can't say enough about "Taffy 2" and "Taffy 3" at San Bernadino Strait/Samar. As an ex-grunt, I usually don't like to say anything nice about squids, but both Admiral Spragues showed major league cojones there.
It would have given the Japanese a bigger head start, but ultimately the US built carriers like crazy anyway. We only had eight carriers in service on December 7, 1941 anyway. The USN commissioned 31 carriers between the bombing of Pearl Harbor and the end of the war in 1945. Nine more were either commissioned in 1946 or canceled while under construction. That doesn't even include escort carriers, of which there were around 60 that were commissioned during the course of the war.
The IJN had fifteen carriers in service on 12-7-41
All told, we built almost 10 times the carriers Japan built. The carriers being at sea on December 7 was important in the short term in late 1941 and 1942, but relatively unimportant in the long run.
Compare the ratings the TV critics and viewers gave. Looks like you didn't have to study history to critique documentaries. I'm not going to register, but I would have loved to have left a few comments of my own.
The point is that when they covered the attack on Pearl Harbor, they didn't mention the carriers at all. Then, when they covered the Battle of Midway, they said, "Following the attack on Pearl Harbor, the U.S. had only three aircraft carriers left."
That's not true. The U.S. had four left after Pearl Harbor, but the Lexington was sunk at the Battle of the Coral Sea.
How do you justify mistakes like that by supposed professionals?
The Battle of Samar illustrated the personal fortitude of a true professional navy from the flag rank down to the citizen sailor. Escort carriers, Destroyers and Destroyer Escorts heading out and taking the fight to Cruisers supported by a Battleship. Halsey's very poor decision making was made up for by the professional sailors and their leadership of those left to fight at Samar. Other than the intestinal fortitude exhibited by the crews of the original six frigates, I have a hard time coming up with the a better example of ships' crews answering the call of battle. The wartime rescue efforts like that in Pearl Harbor rank up there as well. I hope they make a movie about Samar and what the men achieved (and suffered) on that day.
and though I did see some things that made me scratch my head, (like no mention of Montgomery, Rommel or Hirohito), it was nothing on the level of what many of the more learned posters on here brought up. Thanks all for the excellent history lesson.
One thing I did learn was that the faux invasion of Germany by Patton had so many props with fake tanks, etc.. Never realized that before.
IMHO, they should have doubled the length to 12 hours and gone into more detail. It would have been a more enjoyable program.
Exactly. They skipped over the hedgerow difficulties (not to mention the British getting stonewalled at Caen), and completely left out Operation Cobra and the breakout at St. Lo. And, as I said, they didn't even mention Bradley or Montgomery.
The biggest mistake was not bombing the fuel and repair facilities.
Many successful Japanese attacks and battles fell short even though they had the advantage. At Pearl Adm Nagumo failed to send the 3rd wave to destroy the dry docks and repair facilities perhaps fearing the US Carriers would appear at any moment and catch the Japanese fleet - missed opportunity.
Not destroying the American carriers was huge. There would have been no Coral Sea...no way to stop the Japanese from invading Australia and New Zealand...and obviously no Midway. Lucky or not, it was still a terrible mistake on the part of the Japanese forces.
I do agree that not destroying the repair facilities was a capital mistake, too. I think that most of battleships that fought in the Battle of Surigao Strait had been raised from the mud of Pearl Harbor.
I'm always reminded of Sean Connery in The Hunt for Red October. "Halsey acted stupidly." And he was right. Luckily for us, Kinkaid and Oldendorf did not, and you can't say enough about "Taffy 2" and "Taffy 3" at San Bernadino Strait/Samar. As an ex-grunt, I usually don't like to say anything nice about squids, but both Admiral Spragues showed major league cojones there.
Metacritic - ( New Window )
That's not true. The U.S. had four left after Pearl Harbor, but the Lexington was sunk at the Battle of the Coral Sea.
How do you justify mistakes like that by supposed professionals?
Enjoy.
Link - ( New Window )
One thing I did learn was that the faux invasion of Germany by Patton had so many props with fake tanks, etc.. Never realized that before.
IMHO, they should have doubled the length to 12 hours and gone into more detail. It would have been a more enjoyable program.