Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy - Ludwig von Mises ...

Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy - Ludwig von Mises ... Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy - Ludwig von Mises ...

01.01.2013 Views

The Navy Court of Inquiry (July 24–October 19, 1944) 541 and then sent, with little threat to security. 181 But that hadn’t been done either. Kimmel Reviews Pre-attack Pearl Harbor Situation Admiral Kimmel said he had received none of the secret Japanese intercepts introduced to the NCI that had been received in Washington between November 1 and December 7, 1941. 182 He had, of course, received the November 27 “war warning” dispatch. In response to that, on November 30 he set forth in a memorandum “the action which we would take in case hostilities should suddenly break out.” He thought that “it was well to be prepared and ready to take action immediately.” Th ese plans were revised as necessary from time to time and on December 5, a new memorandum was “prepared and approved and put in the hands of the Staff Duty Offi cer . . . so that he would know exactly what to do . . . in case of an emergency.” 183 Kimmel reviewed again the situation at Pearl Harbor in the months preceding the attack. 184 During the months preceding the attack, Stark sent Kimmel a number of rather general warnings concerning the Japanese threat in the Pacifi c. In Washington, tension was building toward the end of November; many Japanese messages were being intercepted, decrypted, and translated every day off ered clues to the thinking of the Tokyo government. Th ose privy to this ultra secret MAGIC were well aware that the Japanese were planning some kind of aggressive action. Yet in spite of Kimmel’s frequent requests to Stark for information, 181Ibid., pp. 915, 918. 182Ibid., part 32, p. 654. 183Ibid., p. 653. 184Ibid., pp. 658–59.

542 Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy the actual warnings sent to Kimmel revealed little of this growing sense of emergency. 185 In Hawaii, Kimmel “put into eff ect all the security measures that I thought we could put into eff ect, and still continue the training at anywhere near a satisfactory condition.” Th e “war warning” of November 27 as well as the warnings he had received earlier, Kimmel said, “followed a pattern that had continued for some time.” He “felt that before hostilities came that there would be additional information, that we would get something more defi nite.” When the attack actually came without his having heard anything more specifi c, he was inclined to blame myself for not having been much smarter than I was. But when I found, some time later, that the information was, in fact, available in the Navy Department; that the information which, if it had been given me, would have changed my attitude and would have changed the dispositions, I ceased to blame myself so much. 186 Hindsight is always better than foresight. Yet Kimmel believed that, if he had known what was in the November 26 State Department note to the Japanese government and that the Navy Department thought this note “would prove entirely unacceptable to the Japanese government,” his outlook would have been aff ected “very considerably.” 187 Moreover, the ships-in-harbor “messages inquiring as to the disposition of ships inside Pearl Harbor itself, wanting to know which ones were in areas, the report of the Japanese Consul giving in detail the courses taken by those in the harbor, would have indicated to me that they [the Japanese] were not only interested in the ships that were in the 185Ibid., pp. 655–57. 186Ibid., p. 659. 187Ibid., p. 660.

542 <strong>Pearl</strong> <strong>Harbor</strong>: <strong>The</strong> <strong>Seeds</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>Fruits</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Infamy</strong><br />

the actual warnings sent to Kimmel revealed little <strong>of</strong> this growing<br />

sense <strong>of</strong> emergency. 185<br />

In Hawaii, Kimmel “put into eff ect all the security measures<br />

that I thought we could put into eff ect, <strong>and</strong> still continue the<br />

training at anywhere near a satisfactory condition.” Th e “war<br />

warning” <strong>of</strong> November 27 as well as the warnings he had received<br />

earlier, Kimmel said, “followed a pattern that had continued for<br />

some time.” He “felt that before hostilities came that there would<br />

be additional information, that we would get something more<br />

defi nite.” When the attack actually came without his having heard<br />

anything more specifi c, he<br />

was inclined to blame myself for not having been much smarter<br />

than I was. But when I found, some time later, that the information<br />

was, in fact, available in the Navy Department; that<br />

the information which, if it had been given me, would have<br />

changed my attitude <strong>and</strong> would have changed the dispositions,<br />

I ceased to blame myself so much. 186<br />

Hindsight is always better than foresight. Yet Kimmel<br />

believed that, if he had known what was in the November 26<br />

State Department note to the Japanese government <strong>and</strong> that the<br />

Navy Department thought this note “would prove entirely unacceptable<br />

to the Japanese government,” his outlook would have<br />

been aff ected “very considerably.” 187 Moreover, the ships-in-harbor<br />

“messages inquiring as to the disposition <strong>of</strong> ships inside <strong>Pearl</strong><br />

<strong>Harbor</strong> itself, wanting to know which ones were in areas, the<br />

report <strong>of</strong> the Japanese Consul giving in detail the courses taken<br />

by those in the harbor, would have indicated to me that they [the<br />

Japanese] were not only interested in the ships that were in the<br />

185Ibid., pp. 655–57.<br />

186Ibid., p. 659.<br />

187Ibid., p. 660.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!