|
Pearl Harbor and 9-10-04
Pearl Harbor & 9/11
Intelligence Failures
Preventable? Maybe
Cover-up? NO!
by
Richard J. Garfunkel
September 11, 2004
9/11 and Pearl Harbor- Both examples of disasters that theoretically could have been avoided if intelligence-sharing and analysis were stronger! Of course at Pearl Harbor, better local preparation could have made for a much more effective and spirited defense. Ironically the sinking of the old WWI era battleships did nothing but help our war effort. It made us concentrate on carriers and their far-reaching power. All of those old and almost obsolete battleships were raised, salvaged and eventually most served honorably in WWII. But they were slow, and were never able to keep up with the fast carrier fleets or their modern battleship escorts. They were refitted during the war with better anti-aircraft batteries and I believe some of their big guns were converted to radar controlled from range finder siting! They basically became barrage platforms for amphibious landings. All in all they were antiques. Washington expected competance at Pearl Harbor and had in place commanders with considerable experience who failed at their jobs.
In regards to 9/11 our spending on intelligence far outweighed, in comparable dollars, our expenditures in 1941. Our failure in 2001 was more a matter of culture than anything else. We have the best intelligence money can buy, but the competitive, non-sharing and over-lapping duties of 15 agencies has made our system overly expensive and almost unworkable. In a sense 9/11 was a result of the failure of internal security. The hijackers were in the United States. In fact there may be many, many others of that ilk, just awaiting their orders or their chance at mayhem. At Pearl Harbor we faced an external threat that was always out there. That threat had been obvious since the Russo-Japanese War. That threat represented by Imperial Japan, was at war in China since 1937 and Manchuria since 1931. That threat possessed one of the greatest navies in the world. That threat had substantive advantages in technology, ie; better and more flexible fighter planes, more accurate torpedoes, excellent optics, great night fighting ability, excellent gunnery. It also possessed well trained and disciplined seamen and pilots and aggressive leadership. All in all, if General Walter Short's combat air patrol had been used effectively and the Japanese fleet would have spotted and engaged, there may have been a greater disaster. But for sure the Japanese would not have had the advantage of surprise and they may have been surprised in the same way that they were at Midway in June of 1942. But without the aircraft carriers, that were out at sea, the Americans could have lost all of the capital ships in deep water. -rjg
Just read your piece comparing the so-called cover-ups of 9/11 and Pearl Harbor. I cannot speak for 9/11, let the historians and the investigators probe that disaster. But for sure you are incredibly off-base on FDR and Pearl Harbor. John Toland's book was thoroughly discredited. His Pulitzer Prize was awarded many years earlier and had nothing to do with his later idiotic and shoddy work. FDR's Chief of Staff Admiral William D. Leahy never said that remark, and the exhaustive works by Pearl Harbor expert Gordon Prange, “At dawn We Slept,” December 7, 1941,” and “Pearl Harbor, the Verdict of History” do not support the later and erroneous conclusions of Toland and your suppositions.
Toland's fantastic unsubstantiated conclusions were drawn from a host of lies, half-truths, rumors, political mumbo-jumbo and the like. I cannot remember the details regarding the exact criticisms made, point by point, of Toland's fairy tale, but they are a matter of public record. I am sure that with enough search on the internet you can find out easily how he was discredited.
For sure, the Pearl Harbor disaster was a consequence of many flaws in leadership, management and the improper use of intelligence. There are countless examples of those failures and lapses. But for sure, Pearl Harbor was on “war alert” as of November 1, 1941. The overlapping command structure of the Navy ( Admiral Husband Kimmel) and the Army and Army Air Corp (General Walter C. Short) added to the problem of a unified, coordinated and effective defense. Whether it was the proper use of Army Air Corp planes for air-sea search, or the lining up of fighter planes for defense against sabotage, or whether it was faulty information on a large flight of B-17's due to land in Hawaii that same morning, or whether it was non-implementation of proper radar equipment, or whether it was unloaded anti-aircraft guns on the battleships or a myriad of other short-comings, the fault certainly was in the hands of the local commanders. Another book by Lt. Cmdr Edwin Layton, the Chief Intelligence officer at Pearl Harbor attempted to shift the blame to Washington and also to make a case for a coverup. There was also a feeble attempt to blame George Marshall for the cover-up, because he sent the last warning by Western Union instead of by radio.(Weather conditions did not allow for radio transmissions or use of the phone lines.) These sensationalist books have been all failures in the end. The authors were out to make a “quick buck” and garner some historical footnoted acclaim..
Nothing in the Japanese code; naval or diplomatic, gave any clue to an imminent attack, especially at Pearl Harbor. When Kuruso and Nomura, the Japanese envoys arrived at Secretary of State Hull's office, Hull already knew of the attack. They ( the Japanese emissaries) were delayed because they had difficulty reading and translating their own codes and destroying their own documents. In a sense FDR and his colleagues new that their message was an ultimatum preceding an act of war. But no one knew where the attack would come or when it would happen. Most guesses picked the Dutch East Indies or possibly Australia. If anything Douglas MacArthur got a “pass” on his failures regarding the disposition of his forces in the Philippines. He was aware of the Pearl Harbor attack and did very little correct when it came to protecting his fleet of powerful B-17 bombers (among many other mistakes.)
FDR, a naval man, was thoroughly shocked by the attack. He was shaken to the core. His private secretary grace Tully observed him in a darkened room, utterly mortified and teary. FDR could only state, “The public will never forgive me for losing their navy!” FDR loved the navy and would have never allowed something to happen like Pearl Harbor. If they would have had an inkling of a potential attack, he would have allowed his carrier forces to be sent to Wake Island to deliver airplanes. They would have been off Pearl in a defensive posture. The battleships would have been on a much more ready-action alert basis. Thankfully they were all in the shallow waters around Ford Island. Therefore almost all the old pre-WWI battleships were raised and repaired for later duty in the war. They also never thought aerial torpedoes could do damage in the shallow waters of their base! US intelligence should have been aware of the success the British had in attacking the Italian naval base at Taranto. But the Japanese were certainly aware, and had developed a very effective shallow water aerial torpedo.
In conclusion, 9/11 was an intelligence breakdown as was Pearl Harbor.
Richard J. Garfunkel- http://publicthoughts.blogharbor.com/blog