Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/02/05

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] LUG Digest, Vol 44, Issue 86
From: steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour)
Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 07:12:42 -0800
References: <mailman.1117.1265359061.73134.lug@leica-users.org> <6a7544a61002050653r515e01e8r9e62f2685a5a7b33@mail.gmail.com>

On Feb 5, 2010, at 6:53 AM, Lawrence Zeitlin wrote:

> Mark writes:
> Whatever the origin of the pictures, they do illustrate the terrifying
> effects of a major attack.  I haven't read much about the history of the
> Pacific war, but that attack must have really hurt the US's capability
> to wage war for quite some considerable time.  How long did it take to
> rebuild those ships and train replacement sailors and marines?
> 
> - - - - - -
> 
> I'm not a military historian but it is my belief that the Japanese Pearl
> Harbor attack did not achieve its objectives regardless of the number of
> ships sunk and people killed. The attack occurred at a time when naval
> warfare was changing from a combat between ships at comparatively short
> range using cannons to one where ships battled at long range using 
> aircraft.
> The US carrier fleet was not in Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941 and escaped
> intact.

and the great Pearl Harbor damage was inflcted by Japanese carrier based 
planes, which helps prove your point...


Steve

> The subsequent battle of Midway was largely a carrier operation
> which inflicted disproportionate losses on the Japanese navy and turned the
> tide of the Pacific war.
> Larry Z
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information



In reply to: Message from lrzeitlin at gmail.com (Lawrence Zeitlin) ([Leica] LUG Digest, Vol 44, Issue 86)