• Today marks the 65th Anniversary of Doolittle’s Raid


  • I do.

    Thanks for the info Switch I was unaware of that.

    Here’s to the Raiders. May their valor set an example for all of us.


  • Am I a bastard if I think the CO’s last name says everything you need to know about this operation?  :evil:


  • @Jermofoot:

    Am I a bastard if I think the CO’s last name says everything you need to know about this operation?  :evil:

    While the raid did “Doolittle” sometimes you just need to get some points on the board.


  • I wasn’t meant to cripple em, just to get the civvies morale up.


  • @M36:

    I wasn’t meant to cripple em, just to get the civvies morale up.

    My point exactly.  :-)

    Didn’t it give everyone (non-civvies too) a “Hey, wait a minute we’re not out of this thing.” sort of thing?


  • Eh, it might have made some people excited, but I still don’t think it made a major impact.  Even Doolittle thought it was a failure.
    I checked the wiki, and supposedly the Japanese made an attack on China for helping the US, killing 250,000 civilians in reprisal.


  • Arguably, it also confirmed Japanese thinking that something had to be done about the remaining US carriers, which was the purpose of the attack on Midway.  Of course, everyone knows what happened there.

    While the Doolittle raid was not intended to provoke the Japanese to attack (it was really just a propaganda exercise designed to boost morale in the armed forces and civilian population), the fact that Tokyo was bombed and the emperor potentially put at risk pushed the Japanese to concoct an elaborate plan to trap the US carriers.  While not a “turning point” in the war, the Doolittle Raid did play a small part in precipitating the actual turning point of the Pacific War at Midway.

    SS


  • Jermofoot:

    I checked the wiki, and supposedly the Japanese made an attack on China for helping the US, killing 250,000 civilians in reprisal.

    Yes. Although Doolittles attack was indeed very very smart strategic move, it should not be considered a glorius act. It was much rather a shameful deed!  :x

    The Americans REAL intention was of course to lead the Japanese to think that the planes came from China, so all the Japanese forces would leave the US alone to concentrate on China, which they surely did. The US planes returned, not back to USS Hornet who retreated cowardly, but to China without any permission from Chiang Kai-shek. The mission was kept in complete silence from the chinese allies. That’s what make this seem like a cowardly act, and that’s why that day should perhaps live in infamy.  :-(

    Cheating on your allies, is that a US speciality? No surprise the Chinese (like others) turned against US after the war. Yet another reason why it’s weird that China belongs to the US in A&A, but that is maybe Mr. Harris way of saying that US just couldn’t do it alone. :-D

    That’s just a viewpoint, guys. No hard feelings :-P

    I of course admit that Doolittle did a really great job. This is not up for debate for my part (although i think he really should have returned the planes to USS hornet or at least notified the Chinese in advance).

  • '19 Moderator

    You’ve got to be kidding me.

    That is the most rediculous pulled out of thin air nonsence I have heard in quite some time.

    It looks to me like yo uare trying to bait an arguement, because you can’t seriously think this tripe is acurate…


  • Jesus Christ Jermo, so now we cant even defend ourselves? We aren’t responsible for another countries actions, if they want to kill Chinese  civilians because their pride was pricked then its not our fault.


  • @dezrtfish:

    You’ve got to be kidding me.

    That is the most rediculous pulled out of thin air nonsence I have heard in quite some time.Â

    It looks to me like yo uare trying to bait an arguement, because you can’t seriously think this tripe is acurate…

    I have to agree.  Not only is Cool’s comment historically inaccurate but it is slanderous and inflammatory as well.

    SS

  • 2007 AAR League

    @saburo:

    @dezrtfish:

    You’ve got to be kidding me.

    That is the most rediculous pulled out of thin air nonsence I have heard in quite some time.

    It looks to me like yo uare trying to bait an arguement, because you can’t seriously think this tripe is acurate…

    I have to agree.  Not only is Cool’s comment historically inaccurate but it is slanderous and inflammatory as well.

    SS

    Don’t forget retarded


  • Lol !!! :-D

    Colonel Cool said:
    “…Doolittles attack was indeed very very smart strategic move…”.
    “…Doolittle did a really great job…”

    Replies to this:
    “Slanderous and inflammatory”, “retarded”,

    Nah…I may not be obliged to reply to this, I think  :|

    “historically inaccurate”,

    :-D Now, That’s fine!  ……so what is exactly inaccurat? Can anyone educate me?

    Here’ my assertions, Pick any assertion for free, you choose:

    1. Is it inaccurate that Doolittles attack can be seen as a very very smart strategic move?
    2. Is it inaccurate that the Japanese initially believed the planes came from China?
    3. Is it inaccurate that the Japanese, because of the raid, turned towards china, with heavy chinese losses following?
    4. Is it inaccurate that USS Hornet, retreated immidiately without the planes?
    5. Is it inaccurate that the B-25’s made it for China, without permission from Chiang Kai-shek?
    6. Is it inaccurate that the mission was kept a complete secret to the Chinese?
    7. Is it inaccurate that the secrecy towards China can be considered as cheating an allied partner?
    8. Is it inaccurate that China belongs to the US player in A&A?
    9. Is it inaccurate that Doolittle did a really great job?

    :evil: Now, show me what ya got!!!  :evil:


  • @M36:

    Jesus Christ Jermo, so now we cant even defend ourselves? We aren’t responsible for another countries actions, if they want to kill Chinese  civilians because their pride was pricked then its not our fault.

    When did I say we can’t defend ourselves?  I’m just arguing the importance of the mission - which to me is: “Not much.”

    Practically and strategically, it was useless.  It was a unique mission to see if it could be pulled off.  Yay, big whoop.  Maybe they developed new technology for AC-borne planes.

    I don’t think it was worthwhile morale-wise either - everyone was in agreement that the Japanese should pay for what they did at Pearl Harbor.  And they would, whether Doolittle did this or not.

    One thing I am wowed about: it was less than six months after Pearl Harbor.  When you take the planning & logistics + the fact that Japan had a decent navy at the time, this was an amazing feat.  Doesn’t mean it was worth it though…

    I merely mentioned something that probably goes unnoticed: that the Chinese paid for our “accomplishment.”


  • Cool,

    Your historic inaccuracies are many:

    You called this a very, very smart strategic move.  This is not an accurate statement because the raid was never conceived of in strategic terms.  It was simply intended as a limited attack in retaliation for Pearl Harbor.  The fact that it later turned out to be stategically significant because of the reactions of the Japanese does not make the move “smart” as you suggest.

    You suggest that the US’s intention with the raid was to make the Japanese focus on the Chinese and leave the US alone.  Not true.  As stated many times, the US raid was a morale booster, nothing more.  It was certainly not designed to push the Japanese in the direction of China.

    You state that the USS Hornet beat a cowardly retreat and that the planes should have landed back on the carrier.  For one, it was hardly a retreat when it was part of the plan that the Hornet would return to Pearl Harbor after launching the planes.  The reason for this was that the flight deck was not long enough for the planes to land on - so what you suggest was physically impossible, therefore historically misleading and inaccurate.

    You say that the US was “cheating on its Ally”.  This is false and is demonstrated by the reactions of the Chinese when the encountered the US airmen after they had landed their planes in China.  The Chinese did not feel cheated.  They assisted the airmen to escape the Japanese and most only returned to the US with Chinese help.

    You state that the Chinese turned on the US after the war, suggesting that the Doolittle Raid was the reason for this.  Hogwash!!  The Nationalist forces of Chiang Kai Shek were defeated by the communists in the Chinese Civil War.  They retreated to Formosa (now Taiwan) and remain a staunch ally of the US to this day.  The fact that the communists did not support or side with the US has everything to do with the fact that they were communists and nothing to do with the US war record in China.

    SS

  • '19 Moderator

    Ditto what saburo sakai said, plus,

    I read Doolittle’s Biography on the plane ride home from Iraq a few months ago.  The man was a genius.  He figured out how to get the bombers onto and more importantly off of a Carrier when it was believed impossible.  Note: it was impossible to land them, they were loaded with cranes.  It was he that chose the B24 as the only bomber with the ability to do the job, with modifications.

    If the planes didn’t have to launch early due to a suspected detection, they were to be used in China to help fight the Japanese and aid the Chinese.

    The assertion that we didn’t tell the Chinese was treachery is ludicrous, there were very few people who new the objective of the raid prior to the crossing of the no return line.  This included most of the Pilots and sailors on the mission.

    The bombing did have strategic value in that The Japanese transferred planes from the “front lines” back to Japan for home defense. 
    Also:

    The raid, however, made a profound impression on the Japanese leadership. For several months, the Japanese high command had been debating its next major move against the Allies. The Navy General Staff, headed by Admiral Osami Nagano, called for a strategy of cutting off America from Australia, by occupying the Fiji Islands, New Caledonia and Samoa. Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander in Chief of the Combined Fleet, disagreed, arguing that the U.S. Navy - in particular, its carriers - had to be neutralized. This necessitated seizing bases in the Aleutian Islands to the north, and the western tip of the Hawaiian Island chain. From those bases, as well as the bases already held in the Gilbert and Marshall Islands, Japanese long-range bombers could keep the American carriers penned up in Pearl Harbor, perhaps even forcing them to retire clear back to the American west coast.
    The Doolittle raid ended the debate. With Japan’s military deeply embarrassed by having exposed the Emperor to danger, and fed up with the harassing American carriers, Yamamoto prevailed. His staff was given the go-ahead to prepare and execute a major operation in the central Pacific. Yamamoto hoped the operation - a complex plan involving a thrust to the north, followed by the occupation of several American-held islands near Hawaii - would result in “decisive battle” with the American fleet near a tiny atoll known as Midway.

    http://www.cv6.org/1942/doolittle/doolittle_2.htm

    You do have some facts, but your conclusions are completely off the wall.


  • saburo sakai argued:

    You called this a very, very smart strategic move.  This is not an accurate statement because the raid was never conceived of in strategic terms.  It was simply intended as a limited attack in retaliation for Pearl Harbor.

    I believe it was a smart strategic move, regardless of what they might tell you. There was at least three very important strategic gains. These are obvious and consequently you can not persuade me into believing that the US commanders did not consider these gains at all. Please don’t tell me US commanders are that careless)  :|

    1. Getting the Imperial Army out and away to China
    2. Getting the Imperial Fleet back from the Bengal and up to Japan (instead of down towards Australia)
    3. Getting the Fleet Air Force, and the Army Airforce back home to Tokyo (dezrtfish agreed with this one)

    You suggest that the US’s intention with the raid was to make the Japanese focus on the Chinese and leave the US alone.  Not true.  As stated many times, the US raid was a morale booster, nothing more.  It was certainly not designed to push the Japanese in the direction of China.

    First: There is one good reason why I don’t believe in the moral boosting story at all: Would you really think that US would risk 33% of there pacific carrier force, just for that? How would this boost to morale, be affected by the very possible loss of a rare indispensible carrier for a few useless bombs dropped on Yukosuka ….Nah…

    Second: If the strategic gains was in fact the intention, logically they would of course never unveil it. They would state again and again that it was simply a booster.

    You state that the USS Hornet beat a cowardly retreat and that the planes should have landed back on the carrier.  For one, it was hardly a retreat when it was part of the plan that the Hornet would return to Pearl Harbor after launching the planes. The reason for this was that the flight deck was not long enough for the planes to land on - so what you suggest was physically impossible, therefore historically misleading and inaccurate.

    physically impossible? Nonsens!! Sorry my language, it’s not pointed at you, but i believe, that i’s a bad excuse. If they could make bellylanding in China they could just as well have made bellylanding close to CV-8. Therefore the length of the flightdeck was definitely NOT the reason for USS Hornet retreating. But yes of course - that’s what they would tell you, indeed.  :-D

    You say that the US was “cheating on its Ally”.  This is false and is demonstrated by the reactions of the Chinese when the encountered the US airmen after they had landed their planes in China.  The Chinese did not feel cheated.  They assisted the airmen to escape the Japanese and most only returned to the US with Chinese help.

    Well, The Chinese pretty much had to accept it since it was a done deal. All this just shows that the Chinese was sincerely faithful to their US allies. The reference to their reactions demonstrates nothing but that.

    You state that the Chinese turned on the US after the war, suggesting that the Doolittle Raid was the reason for this.  Hogwash!!

    Nahh, that’s not really what I said is it? I certainly wouldn’t give the Doolittle Raid that much credit.  :-D
    Â

    The Nationalist forces of Chiang Kai Shek were defeated by the communists in the Chinese Civil War.  They retreated to Formosa (now Taiwan) and remain a staunch ally of the US to this day.  The fact that the communists did not support or side with the US has everything to do with the fact that they were communists and nothing to do with the US war record in China.

    ….everything to do with the fact that they were communists? The communists of China was allied to USA just as the nationalist. So i don’t get your point. Well alright, perhaps you want to say that the fact that they were communists was the thin pretext for the Americans to turn against an allied? I don’t know.

    And then dezrtfish with a reply:

    The assertion that we didn’t tell the Chinese was treachery is ludicrous, there were very few people who new the objective of the raid prior to the crossing of the no return line.  This included most of the Pilots and sailors on the mission.

    Yes maybe, but if your assertions are true, these premises should surely apply for actions in the European theater as well. How come The Americans did not conduct such secret missions over british territory, if secrecy was a necessity, as you postulate dezrtfish? The US did never behave like this to the British. So why the Chinese? This does not make much sense, so I guess I can still conclude that the reasons for this secrecy seems to be the ones that I suggested  8-)

    I believe the Doolittle raid was a very smart strategic move, accomplished with great skill, no doubt. Initially very sad for the Chinese, but hey, that’s life (or war). But a “booster to morale” being the only reason for this mission, ….Doubt it! :|

  • '19 Moderator

    Of your strategic goals I see 2 and 3 being viable, but I believe that Number 1 was an unforeseeable circumstance.  I also think blaming Japanese barbarism on a mission like this is unreasonable.  I think that most Americans were shocked by the inhumanity that the Japanese considered culturally acceptable.

    I also don’t believe that they were necessarily “risking” 33% of the Carrier force.  If that was the case they could have done the job with naval bombers.  I’m sure your aware of the contingency plan to dump the bombers overboard if the carrier was detected.

    I don’t think you are taking into account the logistics involved in flying the bombers back to the carrier.  The entire task force was on radio silence.  Not to mention the original plan was to land the B24s in china and not crash them.

    Secrecy from the British wasn’t necessary in Britain, because the British weren’t living in an occupied territory.  The Japanese have heavily infiltrated most of china.  Mission secrecy was extremely important.  With warning the Japanese could have put up a token fighter screen and actually accomplished the kills that the later claimed.

    To gain some better insight try Col. Doolittle’s after action report, it’s a bit lengthy, but it’s strait from the horse’s mouth so to speak.
    http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/AAF/rep/Doolittle/Report.html

  • 2007 AAR League

    the japanese had been pounding the chinese since what 33’?  most of their army in the beginning of the war was in china anyways.  we didnt make more japs go to china.  just made the troops their do more action to get rid of bomber bases.  which they could never do.

    why would you want the pilots to risk their lives in a very dangerous landing on a carrier.  it might not be impossible, but near impossible. like a 1% chance of actually belly crashing onto the deck and keeping it on there.  its way easier to go to china.  it was a great move to get the navy and air force back to japan.  it was demoralizing for them, and a boost for us.

    i’m gonna have to say guys, once again, some people just try to blame america for everything.  its infused in their brain, its how their synapses work.  you know what i call these people, the L word, which i wont take out of the political forum.  but seriously, its fun to watch their brains in action.  so what else is our fault in WWII.

Suggested Topics

  • 18
  • 2
  • 6
  • 2
  • 9
  • 6
  • 10
  • 2
Axis & Allies Boardgaming Custom Painted Miniatures

36

Online

17.0k

Users

39.3k

Topics

1.7m

Posts