Re: Former Los Alamos nuclear physicist says: "What? And betray the Likudniks?"
- From: "Usenet Supreme Loser ChuckWorth" <quartenkerry@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 9 Dec 2006 05:05:15 -0800
Chuck Hearts Foley wrote:
Remember Pearl Harbor
by Gordon Prather
Perhaps it is fitting that the Iraq Study Group chose to make its
report public on "Pearl Harbor Day," calling on, inter alia, President
Bush to seek Iran's help in extricating us from the mess he got us
into by his "preemptive" attack on oil-rich Iraq's non-existent
nuclear weapons program.
Perhaps even Bush will pause, briefly, to ponder the probable
consequences of launching yet another preemptive attack, this time on
oil-rich Iran's non-existent nuclear weapons program.
Of course, the Japanese preemptive attack on our blockade fleet (which
was moored at Pearl Harbor in the Hawaiian Islands, an American
"possession") on December 7, 1941, was provoked; by President
Roosevelt's embargo of July 24, 1941, on Japanese imports of oil.
You see, in 1940, when Roosevelt stood for re-election to an
unprecedented third term, he promised American mothers on a stack of
Bibles that he was never going to send American boys to fight "in any
foreign wars"!
Unless, of course, we were attacked.
Aha!
Of course, in Bush's 2002 State of the Union Message, he gave notice
to mothers, everywhere, that he was not going to wait to be attacked.
That he fully intended to launch pre-emptive strikes against the likes
of Iraq, North Korea and Iran - using nuclear weapons, "if necessary"
- if he suspected they were acquiring or seeking to acquire nuclear
weapons and/or ballistic missile delivery vehicles.
But, back to Pearl Harbor.
Why did Roosevelt slap an oil embargo - an act of war - on Japan, a
country that had done nothing to us?
And why did he do it when he did it?
Well, apparently Roosevelt slapped the embargo on Japan when he did
because Hitler had invaded the Soviet Union only a few weeks before, on
June 22, 1941, and it already looked like the Wehrmacht would be in
Moscow in a matter of weeks.
And for the commie-symp intellectual fore-fathers (around Roosevelt) of
today's Likudniks (around Bush), that would never do.
Japan - although nominally allied with Germany and other European
Axis Powers - had little interest in their European war.
In fact, Japan had been engaged in an all-out war on the Asian mainland
since 1933, the year Roosevelt became president and Hitler came to
power in Germany. By the fall of 1941, Japan's armies occupied a huge
hunk of Asia, including Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam and almost a third of
China.
But the Japanese were then - as they are today - resource poor. In
particular, they were completely dependent on oil (and rubber) from
Indonesia and Borneo and other possessions of the European colonial
powers in the southwest Pacific and Indian oceans.
So, after months of fruitless negotiations with Roosevelt about lifting
his stranglehold on them, Admiral Yamamoto issued Combined Fleet Order
No. 1. The Imperial 1st Fleet - which included all the Japanese
aircraft carriers - was to attack our principal blockade fleet at
Pearl Harbor. The Imperial 2nd Fleet was to attack all Dutch, British
and U.S. aircraft, air fields, warships and naval installations in the
Dutch East Indies, on the Malay Peninsula and in the Philippines
Islands. The 2nd Fleet was also to support the invasion that same day
of Malaya and the Philippine Islands by units of the Japanese army.
The Japanese "shock and awe" attacks were spectacularly successful.
They destroyed most of the aircraft and sank most of the warships they
found, including the pride of the Royal Navy, HMS Prince of Wales.
All eight of our battleships at Pearl Harbor were essentially sunk by
the Japanese, and nearly all Army Air Corps aircraft destroyed.
Now, Roosevelt et al did expect - and had warned our forces in the
Pacific - that the Japanese might well attack us because of the oil
embargo in late November or early December, 1941, but at Clark Field
and/or Subic Bay in the Philippines. Roosevelt et al never dreamed that
the Japanese would - or could - come all the way to Hawaii to wipe
out the Pacific Fleet.
And in their worst nightmares, Roosevelt and Churchill never imagined
that the Japanese - having sunk our battleships and destroyed our
land-based bombers - could then actually invade and quickly conquer
Singapore and the Philippines, as they proceeded to do.
Who fought and ultimately won the War in the Pacific?
Basically, it was our reconstituted and greatly enhanced "embargo"
fleet. In the Pacific, the war was from the very beginning a naval war,
about oil.
In 1973, when the Arabs slapped an oil embargo on us, because of our
support for Israel in their war against Egypt and Syria, we only
imported about a quarter of the oil we consumed. Still, there was panic
for a while. There were gasoline and home-heating oil shortages because
of federally-imposed price controls, but prices still went sky high,
increasing by about a factor of five within a few months.
Now, if Bush launches a preemptive war of aggression against Iran -
"provoked" by their refusal to give up their "inalienable" rights,
guaranteed to them under the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear
Weapons, to the peaceful use of nuclear energy (subject, of course, to
a comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the International Atomic
Energy Agency) - sky-high gasoline prices will be the least of our
worries.
In particular, what about our Navy, the warships and supply ships in
the Persian Gulf? They provide absolutely essential support to our
armed forces in Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar and elsewhere. But those ships are
sitting ducks for Iranian supersonic sea-skimming anti-ship missiles,
and are far more vulnerable than were our ships at Pearl Harbor.
And without the Navy's support, how long do you think those garrisons
in Iraq - already besieged - will last?
So, Bush has wisely "decided" to follow the advice of the Iraq Study
Group; to "reach out" to the Iranians for help in extricating us from
the unbelievably disastrous mess he has gotten us into in Iraq, rather
than launching yet another "shock and awe" bombing campaign against the
non-existent - according to the IAEA - Iranian nuclear weapons
program - right?
What? And betray the Likudniks?
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: ot
- From: Jan Musinski the criminal
- Re: ot
- Prev by Date: Re: Former Los Alamos nuclear physicist says: "What? And betray the Likudniks?"
- Next by Date: Re: ot
- Previous by thread: Re: Former Los Alamos nuclear physicist says: "What? And betray the Likudniks?"
- Next by thread: Re: ot
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
