Comments by "calvingreene90" (@calvingreene90) on "Guadalcanal Campaign - Santa Cruz (IJN 2 : 2 USN)" video.

  1. A Soviet era Russian General is quoted as saying "The reason that the American Army excels at war is because war is total chaos and chaos is something the American Army practices on a daily basis." I think he was trying to state the importance of battlefield initiative from junior officers and even enlisted men without being smited from above.
    140
  2. 40 mm guns were still screaming all night with teething pain at that point.
    21
  3.  @paulrasmussen8953  Ill temper himself: Admiral King put an end to the BuOrd Japanese Alliance.
    10
  4.  @chrisvickers7928  The biggest service the HMS Victorious/ USS Robin gave to the US Navy was teaching US Navy proper fighter directions, although the rest of her service is not to be slighted.
    9
  5.  @ramal5708  The radar could tell the carrier where the enemy aircraft are but there is a lot more to fighter direction than knowing where to send them. The Royal Navy was far better at it until the USofA Navy learned from the crew of the "USS Robin" on the proper way of doing so.
    2
  6. A bit late but in great force?
    2
  7.  @livingadreamlife1428  How much more nonsense are you planning on posting here.
    2
  8.  @RedXlV  Your opinion of MacArthur is at variance with reality.
    1
  9.  @andrewtaylor940  The Army Air Force never had enough B-17 bombers in the Pacific theaters to carry out a single anti-ship strike according to doctrine. The formation was supposed to be large enough to cover any possible defensive maneuvers made by the ships. The idea was that taking out the enemy ships with an aluminium overcast would consume lots of gas and bombs but very few planes and airmen would be lost. By the time the Army Air Forces had the planes to carry out their doctrine the enemies didn't have the ships left to use it against without generating the Navy's wrath and the ground targets were more important.
    1
  10.  @RedXlV  MacArthur's preperations for the defence of the Philippines were incomplete and not scheduled to be completed until several months into 1942 and reported as such. Pearl Harbor was reported as being fully secured well before the attack on December 7 1941. The Navy was not sharing intelligence about Japanese preperations for the attack on the Philippines including overhead photos of the invasion force in port. Nor has the Army high command forwarded General Chennault's 100% accurate reports of the capabilities of the Japanese Air Forces' Army and Navy including the range and maneuvering capabilities of the Mitsubishi Zero. Calling General MacArthur dugout Doug is a blatant slander but it does match the accuracy of the rest of your opinion of the man.
    1
  11.  @RedXlV  The Navy had the intelligence to provide the B-17s targets but refused to prove it to the Army, the Army Air Force was working up Targets for the B-17s with inadequate intelligence while asking questions about the morality and legality of bombing Japanese forces from bases in a country that had not yet been attacked by Japan and possibly bringing a country that might have been able to maintain neutrality into the war against their will. Information about this did not reach MacArthur. Japan had not attack for the same reason that the B-17 did not have targets. Bad weather over the places that the B-17s would have targeted. You are blaming MacArthur beyond his control. Are you going to blame him for eventually withdrawing from the Philippines as ordered.
    1
  12.  @andrewtaylor940  Not at the beginning of the war. Besides when they had enough B-24 bombers available do you send all of them after one ship at sea or choose to send them after more valuable targets since the Navy has figured out sinking Japanese ships. The Army Air Force doctrine called for saturating the entire area that the ship that they were attacking could be when the bombs hit no matter how they maneuvered. By the time that the Army Air Force had the planes the Japanese Navy was not enough of a threat to justify sending that amount of force after one ship when other targets were available.
    1
  13.  @andrewtaylor940  The high altitude bombing is far less dangerous to the bomber crews and planes. As I said it takes a lot of gas and bombs. But if the Army Air Force had the planes in 42 and 43 it would have been cost effective to use the hundreds of bombers to take out one carrier or battleship. There was nothing wrong with the doctrine except they didn't have the planes to use it at the time it cost effective to do so. Personally I think early in war the Army Air Force should have used the heavy bombers to drop torpedoes but that does not make the doctrine stupid.
    1
  14.  @andrewtaylor940  I forgot to mention it directly again the reason for needing so many bombers was to cover the whole area that the ship could move in. Bombs and fuel are cheap compared to planes and aircrews. And the advantage of the high altitude bombing was the very low loss rate of planes and men. The biggest benefit for the allies of the strategic bombing of Germany was how many German artillery shots it absorbed. 7 out of every 10 artillery shell German produced in WWII was shot into the air for very little gain.
    1
  15.  @Conn30Mtenor  That the same authority that accused Trump of colluding with the Russians?
    1