Food for Thoughts

Hello everybody!

A bit of an ‘intermezzo’, if you like, in order to address a specific kind of requests addressing me the last few days. Indeed, this is something prompted by a combination of reactions to my sarcasm from several readers, but also many of ‘Experten’ between ‘war monitors’ in the West, and the media (regardless if mainstream or social), to the Ukrainian operation into the Kursk Oblast of the Russian Federation…

***

On 4 June 1942, around the high point of the Japanese conquest of the Far East and the (Western) Pacific, the US Navy de-facto ambushed a fleet of aircraft carriers of the Imperial Japanese Navy. It did so in an area north-west of the Midway atol, in the central Pacific Ocean. In a matter of few hours, the Americans sunk four enemy aircraft carriers, while losing one.

The battle is variously described as the ‘most stunning’, ‘decisive’, and ‘turning point’ in ‘world history’ and similar…

Though, please mind: actually, this battle began with a Japanese diversion. In an attempt to divert the attention of the US Navy away from Midway, the Japanese first attacked the Aleutian islands, far in the northern Pacific. They bombed the Dutch Harbour and then invaded, secured and held occupied the ‘holy’ US territory…

***

Now, at the time, there was no internet, and thus no social media.

But: lets imagine there was…

***

As first, and because crews of the US (Army) Air Force based in the Hawaii (until 1948, the US Air Force was still a sub-branch of the US Army) were ‘first back to the bar’, it was them who broke the story that their Boeing B-17 bombers have sunk the Japanese aircraft carriers.

Correspondingly, the social media would be full of ‘selfies’ of the involved B-17-crews, and photos of their bombs ‘striking the enemy fleet’.

One of B-17Es of the US Army Air Force forward deployed at Midway as of early June 1942.

The US media, renowned for its ‘extremely stringent, high-quality standards’ (so I’ve been taught by one of its members, the last weekend) would promptly jump to that story – without any cross-examination. Because… well, in the USA (and not only the USA), it’s a norm to blindly trust what the US armed forces say. Meanwhile, one is not researching about them - or if, then facing charges of treachery by the Pentagon -, never cross-checking what they say, but: the standard practice is to copy-paste and forward official releases from the CENTCOM, SOCOM, EUCOM, the Pentagon, White House etc. without further commentary, or adding background and context… Moreover, the modern-day mainstream media is driven by the same greed that’s driving the Wall Street: why miss such a wonderful opportunity for a sensation about B-17s sinking Japanese aircraft carriers? Sensations are attracting lots of clicks, and clicks are earning big bucks.

Therefore, one would have to expect both the US media and the social media to promptly declare Boeing B-17 bombers of the US (Army) Air Force for the winners of the Battle of Midway... and the entire war... and the rest of the Western media to follow in fashion.

This, even more so considering, and just like this is the case nowadays, the social media would be full of praise for tax-avoiding oligarchs. Back then there were no such corporations like Tesla (indeed, as of 1942, Nikola Tesla was still alive), but the Boeing Aircraft Corporation grounded in 1915 was already around and a major economic factor. So, now imagine William Boeing possessing the social media of the 1940s. It wouldn’t take 5 minutes for that instance to not only praise its owner as ‘genius inventor of war winning B-17s’, but – right after lauding his critique for public spending for the construction of ‘useless but extremely expensive’ aircraft carriers for the US Navy - that owner would be posting the praise of the strength and superiority of the Imperial Japanese Navy, and recommending the White House to enter negotiations and the US Navy not to dare fighting the Japanese ever again…

…because it’s pointless…

…and too risky…

…and all of that, although, in reality, not one of bombs dropped by B-17s on 4 June 1942 hit anything at all…

A Japanese aircraft carrier (think, this was Akagi) turning jhard to avoid bombs dropped by B-17Es of the US Army Air Force during the Battle of Midway, on 4 June 1942.

Of course, all the geo-locators would be over each other into geo-locating the places where B-17s have bombed the Japanese carriers, and everybody would be in the 'video, or it didn't happen'-mode…

And then, please mind: because on 4 June 1942 it was able to ambush the Japanese only thanks to breaking their communication code, the US Navy was not particularly keen to boast with this victory in the public. On the contrary, the service was zip-lip about its success at Midway for quite a while after.

...and even if there would have been smartphones and the social media at the time, units of US Navy’s torpedo bombers have suffered such losses - three squadrons were de-facto annihilated - that they would have no ‘selfies’ to bring back and show their attacks on the Japanese aircraft carriers (besides: they’ve hit nothing). While, crews of US Navy’s dive bombers, which really sunk four Japanese aircraft carriers, were running their dive-bombing attacks in a fashion (see: almost vertically) rendering all efforts at taking selfies entirely hopeless.

The - obsolete, underpowered, slow, and poorly-armed - Douglas TBD Devastator was still the principal torpedo bomber of the US Navy at the time of the Battle of Midway. Two squadrons of them were hacked to pieces while trying to attack Japanese aircraft carriers: shot down almost to the last…

Only six of the big and powerful Grumman TBF-1 were available during the Battle of Midway. They were brand new at the time: still in the process of entering service. Yet, the emergency was such that Nimitz rushed them to Midway. They flew one strike and almost experienced the same fate like two squadrons of Devastators. This one made an emergency landing at Midway after the battle, with a dead crewman on board… subsequently, the type received the nick ‘Avenger’ - for not only a few good reasons.

So, all the fallen of the three bomber squadrons of the US Navy - would have been declared for ‘in wain’, and the US Navy for ‘short of collapse’, because its torpedo-bomber fleet was ‘wiped out’…

All provided that would become known, of course. Much earlier, and because the Japanese have captured a number of Aleutian Islands, all the possible experts would have drawn the only logical conclusion: that the US Navy first ‘failed to react’ and then also ‘lost one aircraft carrier for nothing in return, only suffered heavy losses’.

Therefore, one can assume that the commander of the US Navy in the Pacific, Admiral Chester W Nimitz, nowadays considered a military genius, would’ve been declared an incompetent idiot – alone for ‘sending his fleet in the wrong direction’.

Similarly, Admiral Raymond A Spruance, the commander of that carrier fleet and nowadays considered a ‘superb’ tactician, would’ve been called an idiot for basing his decision-making process during that battle on the ‘principle of calculated risk’. Which, that’s 1000% sure, in the modern-day media landscape, would result in widespread public demands for his immediate dismissal.

….probably for a court martial of both of them, too. Alone for the loss of the USS Yorktown - that one US aircraft carrier sunk by the Japanese during the Battle of Midway. Free along the motto: ‘hang them higher, we want to see blood!’

Why that?

Because the US Navy was down to only five aircraft carriers at the time (which was less than the Japanese had even after Midway), and – even more so – because only a few weeks earlier the Yorktown was damaged during the Battle of the Coral Sea, then rushed back to Pearl Harbour, patched up in a matter of 72 hours, and then sent to the sea to fight at Midway again with repair crews still on board…

USS Yorktown as seen while undergoing rushed repairs in a dray dock of Pearl Harbour, only hours before being re-floated and sent back to combat - and the fateful Battle of Midway.

...do I need to go on?

…but, people demand me to stop being sarcastic in my reporting about Ukraine...?

***

Dear readers,

I do not have a trace of clue for how authoritative, or important, and influential, or what kind of an outstanding expert you consider me. I am grateful for your attention, but: my point is that I do not consider myself for anything of that kind. I’m just an analyst: somebody with, arguably, lots of experience in what I’m doing but, still, just analysing the info I happen to get, and trying to explain that.

….where one should always keep in mind: yes, I’m often right. But, other times I’m wrong, too. That’s life.

Now, perhaps it is really so that my analyses are ‘unique’ & ‘exclusive’, ‘world-wide’, as some of you say. I know to appreciate your kind words, but, and by best will, I cannot even comprehend anything of that kind. That’s too abstract for me and I never busied myself with such issues: therefore, I do not intend to do so now. Foremost, I think that many of you might want to understand that what I’m doing on this blog is not for the purpose of some ‘fame & fortune’, nor for the purpose of ‘influencing’. It’s for the purpose of collecting, analysing, and understanding information, and then trying to explain, and to be corrected when wrong - all with the aim of, sometimes in the future, writing another book that’s going to be read by 500-2,000 of what I call ‘usual suspects’: people kind enough to pay attention and buy my books already long ago, and, I hope, who are going to do the same in the future, too.

Therefore, while I appreciate your best wishes and intentions, I simply fail to understand why should I let myself be driven into illusions about ‘power & influence’, and why should I get corrupted into adapting my points of view, my way of thinking, my way of understanding- and my way of explaining developments? Why should I stop being sarcastic - although this has proven as the only method keeping me sane amid all the things I’ve experienced 1st hand, or seen or read 2nd-, 3rd-, or 4th-hand?

As next, mind that I am all the time perfectly aware of few simple, cold facts: originally, I did nothing else but post few ‘updates for few friends’ - about ‘this or that war’ - on another of my social media presence. Yes, this blog came into being as an expansion of the same, and ‘on popular demand’, but foremost because that other social media presence began curbing my activity there. Atop of that, I’ve never forced anybody to read this blog (especially not ‘at a gun point’): therefore, it’s really so that, when you click on a link to a social media presence named the Sarcastosaur, you’re doing that at your own discretion.

Finally, it might be so that few people more than usually are paying attention about my reporting (at least about what’s going on in the War in Ukraine)… at least it’s few people more than years ago, when I was doing the same for the wars in the Congo, then in Afghanistan (already well before 9/11), in Libya, in Syria, in Azerbaijan etc… ‘Five minutes after’ - and nobody cared about any of these affairs. Thus, another cold matter of fact (or at least: ‘my 1st-hand-experience’) is that ‘5 minutes after’ this war in Ukraine is over, nobody is going to care any more.

I do like to network, and love helping promising researchers. That said, I was always on my own, and thus never expecting anything from anybody. Unsurprisingly, I have no trace of clue who you all are, what are you doing, what are your experiences, and even less so: what are your intentions. Perhaps I’m making it easier for myself but the fact is: I consider that none my business (my business is analysis of contemporary warfare, sarcastic style).

Accept the fact that the same is valid for you in regards of my work.

If that’s making things easier for you, feel free to be sarcastic in this regards: it’s a formula that’s working fine for me.

Thanks for your attention!