In article ,
B. Isaksen wrote:
...entered the war in Europe, for all practical
purposes, with the signing of the Lend-Lease treaty in early 1941.

The US oppinion did'nt want to interfere in the "European confict",
and only a "leasing deal" kept GB floating.

The way not to interfere in the "European conflict" was not to get involved.
Lend-Lease most assuredly constituted getting involved; it made the US a
silent (or not so silent :-)) partner in Britain's war effort.

In fact it has been
roumored that the ships were consentrated at PH to make it a tempting
carrot for the Japanese in order to turn public opinion.

There have been all sorts of stupid rumors about Pearl Harbor, and even a
few stupid books about it.

The ships were concentrated at Pearl Harbor because it was the *main base*
of the Pacific Fleet. No sinister explanation is required.

Had there been a deliberate intent to offer up the fleet as a target, the
carriers would have been in port (they weren't) and the battleships would
have been at sea (they weren't). As it happened, it worked out well,
because carriers were rapidly becoming far more important... but that was
*not* obvious at the time. Except for a few heretics :-), the general
naval view was that battleships were the main striking force of the navy,
while carriers were useful auxiliaries.
--
MOST launched 30 June; first light, 29 July; 5arcsec | Henry Spencer
pointing, 10 Sept; first science, early Oct; all well. |