A_Bashkuev
King
Dear Knight-Dragon!
Excuse me for my offensive tone of my first message. I just like all facts concerning Far East situation. Are you sure that Port Arthur raid of Japanese fleet had any success??? And this raid gave Japanese some inspirational ideas those go to Pearl-Harbor??? It is really interesting - I thought that these raids (on Port Arthur & Chemulpo) were officially proclaimed as "disastrous" by Japanese military management itself. Commander-in-Chief of Japanese forces in this war Admiral Togo was demoted from his position in spite of abstaining of Russian Chief-in-Command of First Far East Fleet - Admiral Stark (for Japan Assault on Port Arthur), death next in command - Admiral Makarov (blasted by mine on battleship "Petropavlovsk") & death third in Russian command (after only "general" battle in first phase of this War) Admiral Withgeft (killed in action on battleship "Czesarevitch"). Very impressive list for Japan Chief-in-Command but - unimpressive for his superiours. Togo was demoted & his place was taken by Baron Nogi (chief-in command of Third Japan Army).
Admiral Togo get highest Power later for Tsushima battle especially, where he just rip open Second Russian Far East Fleet on the parts, but was demoted after this battle immediately again. Japanese military advisors stated that "lessons of Japan-Russian war showed that main source of Japan's strenghts is her ground forces - not fleet! This stratagem was imperious for any japanese strategy & preparations for Second World War: japanese fleet had only supportive meaning for really massive ground forces of invasion.
Pearl-Harbor attack had "secondary meaning" in japanese plans of entering WWII & Pearl-Harbor was "third-rate goal" for Japan in stage of planning. Their "primarily" & "secondary" aims was Hong-Kong, Saigon & Singapoor bases of England & France. Situation changed dramatically only in December of 1940 after attempt of Prince Konoe coup-d-etat that ended by death on Chief-in-Command on Kwantung Army & Minister on Internal Security of Japan. USA was blamed for that & preparations began. No any Head-quarter could prepare any meaningful plan in so short notice & "attack of Pearl Harbor" was taken as one of three alternatives of entering WWII. Yes, this attack had calculus from "Port Arthur assault", but was every time suspected due to complete ineffectiveness of Port Arthur racket. Main plans against: Soviet Far East & English part of China were more detailed & finished to that time - it was the cause of absence of Japanese land-drop on Hawaii. Then we can say - "Pearl Harbor" had "Port Arthur" as precedessor of some sort, but it is case of overextending of this issue. (Same thing as Russian assault on Sinope in begining of Crimea war: it was taken calculus from expected Russian assault on swedish Karlskrone, but without intended land-drop due to Karlskrone is near Stockholm, but Sinop is far from any meaningful Turkish centres. It had the same result as Pearl Harbor assault: complete victory in one battle, but lost war as result.) It is strange, but japanese Head Staff command pointed to strong resemblance of proposed Pearl Harbor attack with Russian attack on Sinope, but their doubts was waved out by superiours. I'm afraid that japanese strategists studied very many books & ideas about warfare, but take some half-baked & completely insane plan as result. I think - reason is in really unsatisfying level of training of high officers in Japan - training of their soldiers was perfect, officers - satisfying, & generals - worse then you can imagine. (Roots of it are in Bushi-do military tradition & some funny facts of japanese history.)
In any case I'm ready to state my cause: Japan had low aggression level in 1900s & begin its pursuit of power only in mid-20s (after creating of meaningful industry & railroad net in Japan's islands). You must remember that Japan "was open" by Europeans only in 1867 by "commodore Perry's cannons". Any belief that any country can get any military industry "from zero" in 30 years & any meaningful military tradition "of new age" in so short notice for me is - just laughing. Any japanese high officer in time of Russian-Japanese war had english instructor, by the way! What "high aggression level" of that times do you speak about???
"High aggression level" of Japan was developed in times of Russian-Japanese War, WWI & Civil War in China, where great batch of japanese field officers had really good practice. And only after that (i.e. around 1925) Japan became real menace for her neighbors. It is the time of motto: "All world under eight-sided roof", - first appearing of this slogan was in 1925 - not earlier!
It is resembling of human-baby behaviour: it lay, it sit, it google, it go, it speak, it learn to behave, to read, to write, to kiss any girl, to... , then he takes his katana or AK-47 or Colt Peacemaker & become "high agressive"! You can't blame milk-sucking kid or lop-earsed schoolboy for his "high aggression level" at all!
Sincerely yours, Alex.
Excuse me for my offensive tone of my first message. I just like all facts concerning Far East situation. Are you sure that Port Arthur raid of Japanese fleet had any success??? And this raid gave Japanese some inspirational ideas those go to Pearl-Harbor??? It is really interesting - I thought that these raids (on Port Arthur & Chemulpo) were officially proclaimed as "disastrous" by Japanese military management itself. Commander-in-Chief of Japanese forces in this war Admiral Togo was demoted from his position in spite of abstaining of Russian Chief-in-Command of First Far East Fleet - Admiral Stark (for Japan Assault on Port Arthur), death next in command - Admiral Makarov (blasted by mine on battleship "Petropavlovsk") & death third in Russian command (after only "general" battle in first phase of this War) Admiral Withgeft (killed in action on battleship "Czesarevitch"). Very impressive list for Japan Chief-in-Command but - unimpressive for his superiours. Togo was demoted & his place was taken by Baron Nogi (chief-in command of Third Japan Army).
Admiral Togo get highest Power later for Tsushima battle especially, where he just rip open Second Russian Far East Fleet on the parts, but was demoted after this battle immediately again. Japanese military advisors stated that "lessons of Japan-Russian war showed that main source of Japan's strenghts is her ground forces - not fleet! This stratagem was imperious for any japanese strategy & preparations for Second World War: japanese fleet had only supportive meaning for really massive ground forces of invasion.
Pearl-Harbor attack had "secondary meaning" in japanese plans of entering WWII & Pearl-Harbor was "third-rate goal" for Japan in stage of planning. Their "primarily" & "secondary" aims was Hong-Kong, Saigon & Singapoor bases of England & France. Situation changed dramatically only in December of 1940 after attempt of Prince Konoe coup-d-etat that ended by death on Chief-in-Command on Kwantung Army & Minister on Internal Security of Japan. USA was blamed for that & preparations began. No any Head-quarter could prepare any meaningful plan in so short notice & "attack of Pearl Harbor" was taken as one of three alternatives of entering WWII. Yes, this attack had calculus from "Port Arthur assault", but was every time suspected due to complete ineffectiveness of Port Arthur racket. Main plans against: Soviet Far East & English part of China were more detailed & finished to that time - it was the cause of absence of Japanese land-drop on Hawaii. Then we can say - "Pearl Harbor" had "Port Arthur" as precedessor of some sort, but it is case of overextending of this issue. (Same thing as Russian assault on Sinope in begining of Crimea war: it was taken calculus from expected Russian assault on swedish Karlskrone, but without intended land-drop due to Karlskrone is near Stockholm, but Sinop is far from any meaningful Turkish centres. It had the same result as Pearl Harbor assault: complete victory in one battle, but lost war as result.) It is strange, but japanese Head Staff command pointed to strong resemblance of proposed Pearl Harbor attack with Russian attack on Sinope, but their doubts was waved out by superiours. I'm afraid that japanese strategists studied very many books & ideas about warfare, but take some half-baked & completely insane plan as result. I think - reason is in really unsatisfying level of training of high officers in Japan - training of their soldiers was perfect, officers - satisfying, & generals - worse then you can imagine. (Roots of it are in Bushi-do military tradition & some funny facts of japanese history.)
In any case I'm ready to state my cause: Japan had low aggression level in 1900s & begin its pursuit of power only in mid-20s (after creating of meaningful industry & railroad net in Japan's islands). You must remember that Japan "was open" by Europeans only in 1867 by "commodore Perry's cannons". Any belief that any country can get any military industry "from zero" in 30 years & any meaningful military tradition "of new age" in so short notice for me is - just laughing. Any japanese high officer in time of Russian-Japanese war had english instructor, by the way! What "high aggression level" of that times do you speak about???
"High aggression level" of Japan was developed in times of Russian-Japanese War, WWI & Civil War in China, where great batch of japanese field officers had really good practice. And only after that (i.e. around 1925) Japan became real menace for her neighbors. It is the time of motto: "All world under eight-sided roof", - first appearing of this slogan was in 1925 - not earlier!
It is resembling of human-baby behaviour: it lay, it sit, it google, it go, it speak, it learn to behave, to read, to write, to kiss any girl, to... , then he takes his katana or AK-47 or Colt Peacemaker & become "high agressive"! You can't blame milk-sucking kid or lop-earsed schoolboy for his "high aggression level" at all!
Sincerely yours, Alex.
; I've been around here for quite awhile and had developed a matching set of skin armor. You can't insult me.... 
