21st Century Reporting of the Doolittle Raid

Status
Not open for further replies.

Drizzt

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
2,647
Location
Moscow on the Colorado, TX
21st Century Reporting of the Doolittle Raid

April 20, 2006: The recent anniversary of the April 18, 1942 the Doolittle raid raised the question of how the press of today might have reported on the event. At the time, the Doolittle raid, as militarily ineffective as it was, proved to be an enormously popular morale boost for the American people and their allies. However, times have changed. Here's a likely report, of the 1942 event, but as it would be reported by today's media.

New York Times, April 19, 1942: "AIR RAID ON TOKYO. In what the Roosevelt Administration described as retaliation for the attack on Pearl Harbor, the United States Army Air Corps launched an attack on Tokyo from an undisclosed location. The attack, using the North American B-25 Mitchell bomber, was described as a success, even though preliminary estimates indicate that little, if any, damage was done. A statement from President Roosevelt claimed the bombers launched from Shangri-La, although informed sources tell the New York Times that there was an unusually high degree of Army-Navy cooperation in the operation…"

San Francisco Chronicle, April 20, 1942: "DISASTER ON AIR RAID? Sources from inside the War Department report that nearly all of the planes failed to reach safe havens in China. These same sources report that the carrier force that was to deliver these bombers was detected by Japanese picket boats, forcing the attack to commence at least twelve hours ahead of schedule. In the ensuing skirmishes, at least three picket boats were sunk, and reports indicate at least two Navy dive-bombers were lost with their crews. No word has yet arrived on the status of the 80 Army Air Corps crew men – all of whom were said to be volunteers"

Washington Post, April 21, 1942 "AIRCREWS CAPTURED? Reports of a disastrous result appeared to be confirmed when one War Department source indicated that at least one of the aircrews has been captured by Japanese forces. The crew, said to be led by Lieutenant Dean Hallmark, and from the 95th Squadron, 17th Bombardment Group (Medium), reportedly crashed near Poyang Lake. Spokesmen from the War Department and the White House declined to comment on these reports. 'The President will make an announcement when it is safe to do so,' said another White House official. Unconfirmed reports from Russia indicate that one bomber landed there rather than ditching, and that the crew is in custody…"

New York Times Editorial, April 21, 1942: "Without a doubt, the decision to risk two carriers and their escorts to launch a raid that could do so little damage can only be described as incredibly stupid. The fact that the cost of this raid included all sixteen bombers, with most of the aircrews missing, only increases the level of disaster involved. By allowing this mission to go forward, Secretary of War Stimson and Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox have shown that they lack the judgment to carry this war to victory. If they will not resign, then President Roosevelt should fire them."

Washington Post, April 25, 1942: "MOST FLIERS SAFE! Sources in China indicate that at least 60 of the fliers are receiving assistance from Chinese peasants, who are moving them westward ahead of the Japanese advance. These efforts are said to have been coordinated by the Reverend John M. Birch, an American missionary, and Tung Sheng Liu, a Chinese engineer. War Department sources would not confirm the reports from China, but there is a sense of relief that is visible among many of the high-ranking officers, including General Hap Arnold…"

New York Times Editorial, June 18, 1942: "Two months ago, the Army and Navy carried out a joint mission to attack the Japanese homeland. All the B-25 bombers were lost, three men were killed, eight have been confirmed as having been captured, and while sixty-nine men made it back to friendly lines, some of them, like Lieutenant Ted Lawson, are gravely wounded. And for what? Minimal damage to Tokyo and Nagoya. One has to wonder if these bombers and their valiant crews might have done more had they been employed elsewhere. During the recent battle at Midway, these bombers could have damaged the fourth carrier, and thus, the United States Navy would still have had the Yorktown available, rather than on the bottom of the ocean…"

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htiw/articles/20060420.aspx
 
as militarily ineffective as it was, proved to be an enormously popular morale boost for the American people and their allies

The raid was tactically ineffective, but it proved to have real strategic value. The Japanese overreacted to the thought that the emperor was vulnerable to enemy air attack. They pulled back several fighter squadrons from active war zones to the home islands. Also, the navy got the Midway operation greenlighted as a way to extend the defensive perimeter, but mostly to engage and defeat the American carriers.

Roosevelt's "Shangri-la" conceit notwithstanding, the Japanese knew right away that the attack was launched from carriers. They had the radio signals from the picket boats and they interogated captured airmen. They even launched a pursuit force of surface ships, but they had no chance of engaging the retreating American task force.
 
New York Times Editorial, April 21, 1942: "Without a doubt, the decision to risk two carriers and their escorts to launch a raid that could do so little damage can only be described as incredibly stupid. The fact that the cost of this raid included all sixteen bombers, with most of the aircrews missing, only increases the level of disaster involved. By allowing this mission to go forward, Secretary of War Stimson and Secretary of the Navy Frank Knox have shown that they lack the judgment to carry this war to victory. If they will not resign, then President Roosevelt should fire them."


This is so right on. It's spooky:uhoh:
 
The raid was tactically ineffective, but it proved to have real strategic value. The Japanese overreacted to the thought that the emperor was vulnerable to enemy air attack.

Just like the United States has done after 9/11.

Tactically, 9/11 was a "bloody nose", at best. Strategically, our post-event actions have been so screwed up as to give our foe(s) precisely what they desired: evidence of Imperialist leadership in America and a willingness to discard our "way of life" under the guise of "safety."

Without a doubt, the decision to risk two carriers and their escorts to launch a raid that could do so little damage can only be described as incredibly stupid.

If you're looking for a tactical victory -- and I am aware this editorial is satire -- such assessment of the Doolittle Raid would be correct. We, however, were looking for something deeper: just as Osama is now.

Excellent opportunity for analysis?

"The knee-jerk and psuedo-strategic reaction to such things seems significantly worse then the actual event!"

Damn, that's something for me to ponder...

Great thread concept (interpretation of history using today's jaded lense), by the way.
 
Yeah, it's a darned shame we lost that war.
Yep, a quagmire that lasted for years -- and cost how many American lives? If only we had had Cindy Sheehan to spread the truth back then! :rolleyes:


Can we draw contextless parallels between the Nisei internment camps and Gitmo, too?
I don't see any.:scrutiny:
 
Good points Ezekiel.

I completely agree with you that several of the actions taken by the US domestically, like the Patriot Act, Dept. of Homeland Security, the beefing up of the TSA, are results that the jihadists actually applaud.

But I think some other points bear mentioning, too.

Unlike the forces of Imperial Japan, the jihadists are waging war because they really do believe that Allah himself wants fundamentalist Islam to become the dominant force on earth.

Unlike Imperial Japanese forces, the jihadists did not turn to suicide "kamikaze" attacks as a last, desperate action after convential warfare had failed.

Suicide martyrdom attacks are their standard operation procedure, and had been for a long time before 9-11. When you are a solider in Allah's army, and you really believe you're going to heaven by killing infidels, then dying in the attack is not really much of a consideration.

9-11 was "tactically" a "bloody nose" only because the jihadist didn't yet have their grubby little hands on weapons that could have and would have cause one thousand times as many casualties as 9-11 caused.

And that's the prickly part of the equation, I think.

It's not over-reacting in any way to acknowledge that yes, the Jihadists are real, and yes, they really truly do want to kill every single one of us dirty infidels in nasty ways, and yes, they are quite happy to die in the attack, just long as lots of us infidels die, too.

However, clamping down on the rights and freedoms of hundreds of millions of our own citizens who are not suicidal jihadists is over-reacting.

It seems to me a better idea would be to take the war to the jihadists and their supporters, not subject little old ladies from Brooklyn to strip-searches in airports.

hillbilly
 
OOOOOh if we had just not embargoed Japan and just had more dialogue(unilateral or multilateral who knows but the shadow) and not been such bullies and imperalistic and militaristic the blood shed of innocent lives could have been avoided. FDR is incompetent and he really wanted this war for several years. He and his buddies cooked up this plan well before Japan did anything to us while he was on vacation with his hawks. All because of his ideology. We are trying to destroy the great culture of the non white non christian people of Japan. There has been whispers of sending in Christian militant missionaries to preach evil Christianity to these people. There is also reports of a racist slur of JAP being used by FDR and his warmongers themselves. Amnesity international and the international red cross are reporting war crimes and are agitating to have FDR and the evil USA prosecuted for such. The NYT editoralized supporting such action.:eek:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top