Hollywood: 3 Top Movie Myths About Pearl Harbor
Pearl Harbor is in the news, six months ahead of schedule, owing to the release of the Hollywood blockbuster, which earned $75 million dollars over the Memorial Day weekend. Following are the top three myths perpetuated by the film:
MYTH #1 The Japanese were guilty of staging a sneak attack. This is undoubtedly the myth that Americans hold most dearly about the war. Evidence in support of it seems overwhelming: Newsreels at the time noted that the attack occurred while Japanese diplomats were negotiating with the State Department, successfully exploiting American naivety, it seemed. Further, the Pacific fleet was taken by surprise. Finally, FDR himself told Congress, in his"day of infamy" address, that the attack had come as a shock.
While the Japanese certainly intended to catch us flatfooted in Hawaii, repeating a successful strategy used at the outset of the Russo-Japanese War in 1904, they also intended to give Secretary of State Cordell Hull prior warning of at least a couple of hours. The war warning was indeed prepared and sent to the Japanese embassy in Washington, but owing to faulty transmission and a delay in translation, the message was not delivered to Secretary Hull until an hour after the attack had begun.
War did not come out of the blue, in any case. FDR was expecting war by then; on December 6, in a final effort to prevent hostilities, he'd sent a personal note to Emperor Hirohito appealing for peace. War simply had become virtually inevitable. Nothing we could do or say could convert the Japanese militarists to democracy and peace; unless Japan suddenly changed we would continue our crippling oil embargo.
Even if the Japanese warning had arrived prior to the attack, American officials would likely still have regarded Pearl Harbor as shocking. A few hours notice would hardly have diminished the surprise, especially since when the war came it came in Hawaii; the expectation was that the Japanese would strike further east, probably in the Philippines, not at Pearl Harbor, thousands of miles from Japan.
But the charge that the attack was sneaky plays on a stereotype that Asians are sly. More precisely, it was shocking. Isn't that enough?
MYTH #2 The attack on Pearl Harbor destroyed the Pacific fleet and caused catastrophic losses to our air forces. Stanley Weintraub, author of Long Day's Journey into War: December 7, 1941, effectively demolished this myth years ago. To be sure, he noted:"Eighteen ships were indeed sunk, including eight battleships. At least 347 aircraft were destroyed or badly damaged. Nearly 4,000 men were killed or wounded. It looked very bad. Results even exceeded Japanese expectations." But-and it's a big but-"more than half the U.S. planes destroyed were obsolete, and battleships, the Navy's proud dinosaurs, played a minor role in the war. No aircraft carriers were lost at Pearl Harbor-none were there at the time of the attack. This was crucial."
MYTH #3 Admiral Kimmel was playing a round of golf when the attack began. Kimmel and General Short had indeed been scheduled to play gold Sunday morning on the island of Oahu. But it was called off at the last minute when visitors had arrived.
comments powered by Disqus
Phillip Fahle - 6/15/2010
The Japanese did attack the USA without declaring war. That makes it a sneak attack. Moreover they attacked while they had envoys in the country discussing ways to avoid war. That makes it a sneak attack. Sometimes it is given the more respectable sounding title preemptive strike, but it is a sneak attack. That is one thing Hollywood got right. The message the Japanese were supposed to give to Mr Hull was not a declaration of war, so even if it had been delivered on time it still would have been a sneak attack.
The British consider a ship sunk when its hull touches the harbor bottom. They credit the Italians with sinking two of their battleships in Alexandria
Harbor. They then covered up that achievement by deceiving the Axis into thinking they were undamaged by hosting a party aboard one for local officials. So even counting the British way the Japanese only sank 5 battleships.
CHRIS L JEWELL - 12/6/2006
ONE OF YOUR ARTICALS SAYS THE WWII DESTROYERS PLAYED A MINOR ROLE IN THE WAR AND THE OTHER ONE SAYS THEY WERE VERY EFFECTIVE, SO WHICH IS IT? THE MEN THAT SERVED AND DIED ON THE DESTROYERS NEED JUST AS MUCH RESPECT AND HONNOR AS ANY. C.L.J.
Tschrny Wolf - 7/5/2003
Read "At Dawn We Slept", it was a four hours warning. Two, three or two that was not enough time. The news had to travel all the way around the globe and back down to the pacific. Plus time delays in finding qualified translators, bad sea weather that conflicted with clear telegraph delivery.How in hell, were we supposed to know what Tora, Tora, Tora mean?
Lets face it boy, the Japanese wanted to attack by surprise. In the long run attacking Pearl Harbor turned out to be a big loss for Japan. For the three and a half thousand sailors killed, Japan later lost two million civilians in Iroshima and Nagasaky. And then total surrender!
So excuses do nothing, sir. Worse, attacks by semi-surprise denote dishonor. At the time the Japanesse claimed to be the most "honorable" people on Earth or, something like that.
Gee if P. H. was "honorable", we dont need the word dishonorable.
The US did not know when, how and where would Japan strike; the Americans did know that Japan would soon hit, but they could not tell for sure. Historians do say that 4 hrs. before Japan stroke, the American security council decided not to strike first.
While we offered the Japs an olive branch, they were happily loading their bombs on their planes.
Tell the truth, liar-san! hahahahahahaha, NO BAD BLOOD!
Good day! Tschrny
- Florida professor to burn Confederate flag
- Could another English king be buried under a parking lot?
- Huckabee says archaeology supports the Bible
- George W. Bush's CIA Briefer: Bush and Cheney Falsely Presented WMD Intelligence to Public
- Unfinished film about the Holocaust made in 1945 to finally be seen by audiences
- Daniel Pipes calls the rulers of Iran "madmen" on official Iranian TV
- A Professor Tries to Beat Back a News Spoof That Won’t Go Away
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- Sean Wilentz is being called “Hillary’s Historian"
- Hundreds of British historians challenge assumptions of “Historians for Britain” campaign