Pearl Harbor Battle Analysis Essay Essays

Pearl Harbor Battle Analysis Essay Essays Pearl Harbor Battle Analysis Essay Essay Pearl Harbor Battle Analysis Essay Essay Essay Topic: The Pearl On a pleasant and beautiful Sunday. December 7. 1984. Japan implemented a surprise onslaught on the US Naval Base in Pearl Harbor on the island of Oahu. Hawaii which gave United States a door to come in into World War II. Even though Japan did non follow through with the onslaught doing the 3rd moving ridge of bombers to interrupt contact from dropping bombs to complete off the remainder of the fleet moorage in Pearl Harbor. it was a good prepared. and carefully orchestrated onslaught on the Americans because the Nipponese followed about all the nine Principles of War. However there was one rule that the Japanese did non executed doing them to give up subsequently on in World War II. There are nine Principles of War. that is ; integrity of bid. mass. nonsubjective. violative. surprise. economic system of force. manoeuvre. and security. The onslaught include mass–concentrating the combat power at the decisive topographic point and clip. The aim was clear and directed every military operation towards a clearly defined. decisive come-at-able aim. The onslaught was clearly violative where it prehend. retained. and exploited the enterprises. Surprise was the decidedly the most of import rule used striking Pearl Harbor on a given clip when it was unprepared. Economy of force was allocated to the moving ridge of onslaughts where indispensable combat power was given as a secondary attempt. The manoeuvres were clearly executed where Japan placed United States in a place of disadvantage through the flexibleness application of combat power. There was integrity of bid in which the Japanese ensured each aim had a responsible commanding officer. Integrity of bid was seeable within the Nipponese fleet. The commanding officer for the December 7th 1941 onslaught on Pearl Harbor was Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto ( People–Japan. ) . Yamamoto was responsible for the combined Nipponese fleet where he devised the scheme for the onslaught. and because of his careful. organized. and educated planing. Pearl Harbor was about to the full destroyed. Under Yamamoto is Vice Admiral Chuichi Nagumoto who was in bid of the First Air Fleet. Nagamuto relied to a great extent on the experience of his subsidiaries Comander Minoru Genda. and Rear Admiral Ryunosuke Kusaka. â€Å"No one can truly understand what happened at Pearl Harbor without at least a cernuous acquantance with these work forces. for the plan’s origin. readying. executing. and stupefying success were shaped by the personalities and experience of these men† ( Goldstein. 1991 ) . By component of mass with in the nine Principles of War. the Nipponese onslaught forces was good equipped for the onslaught on Pearl Harbor on December 7th. 1941. Japan understands that their state can non get the better of United Staes in a â€Å"conventional war. lacking as it did sufficient adult male power and natural stuffs ( notably oil ) for such a sustained attempt nevertheless Japan was able to set together combined fleet big plenty to travel toe to toe with the United States Navy in Hawaii† ( Long. 2007 ) . Nipponese air onslaught forces consisted of six bearers named Akagi. Kaga. Soryu. Hiryu. Shokaku. and Zuikaku. Support forces consisted of two battlewagon and two heavy patrol cars known as Tone and Chikuma. Screening forces consisted of one visible radiation patrol car and nine destroyers named Akuma. Patrol forces had three pigboats. In add-on. the supply forces ha eight oilers. Together these combined fleet was named the Kido Butai. or undertaking force which w as the largest figure of aircraft bearers of all time to run together ( Carlisle. 114 ) . Admiral Yamamoto and the Kido Fleet’s aim was to destruct the naval ships in Pearl Harbor and strike hard out the U. S. Pacific Fleet. In retrospect. this onslaught is besides an violative onslaught as a important Nipponese contending force so that the Americans could non oppose on Japan’s conquering of South East Asia and the Pacific Islands. Another ground for the onslaught is because President Roosevelt had banned all exports of bit Fe. steel and oil to Japan. The ground for the trade stoppage was the Nipponese invasion of China. Japan had lost more than 90 % of its oil supply ( Carlisle. 2006 ) . The economic isolation crippled their economic system and military. In add-on. Japan were keen on spread outing their imperium and had to do a determination between give uping or traveling to war with the United States. Last. United States had non yet entered the Second World War. because they were still staggering from depression due to the First World War. United States did. nevertheless. still possess the strongest naval fleets. In that position. the Japanese were about every bit strong as the American navy. As clip passed. America favored more and more towards fall ining the war. The Japanese anticipated a matured naval war with America and hence. decided to move first by bombing Pearl Harbor which was a cardinal terrain characteristic in the Pacific due to it’s monolithic and deep seaport for naval ships. The component of economic system of force was besides present during the onslaught on Pearl Harbor. This allowed Japans zero bomber to apportion minimal indispensable combat power towards the onslaught. With the economic system of force. the component of manoeuvre besides played abig function towards the foray. There were two aerial onslaught moving ridges. numbering 353 aircraft that was launched from the six Nipponese aircraft bearers. In actuality. Admiral Yamamoto’s plans consisted of three moving ridges of onslaught. The first moving ridge of attacked was launched at 0740 with 163 aircrafts that was coming from the North Shore. Their aim was to destruct landing fields at Wheeler. Ewa. Hickam. and Pearl Harbor. The 2nd moving ridge was launched an hr subsequently to the Windward side of the island with 167 aircraft bombers. Their mission was besides to destruct landing fields in Kaneohe and Bellows. Hickam. and Pearl Harbor. Admiral Yamamoto called off the 3rd moving ridge because he believed the 2nd work stoppage had basically satisfied the chief aim of his mission which was to stultify United States Pacific Fleet. In add-on Admiral Yamamoto did non wish to put on the line farther losingss. With Admiral Yamamoto’s careful planning of the Pearl Harbor onslaught. Japan was successful on finishing their aim in the Pacific by destructing the Naval fleet. However. they failed to follow through with the component of security. Security states that Japan should hold neer permitted United States from geting an unexpected advantage. With Admiral Yamamoto naming off the 3rd moving ridge. this allowed United States to acquire back up on its pess. Japan may hold won the conflict on Pearl Harbor. nevertheless that determination â€Å"woke up the kiping giant† doing Japan to give up the war to the Americans. The biggest impact on the Nipponese onslaught was the component of surprise which was Japans cardinal maneuver on Pearl Harbor and other military bases on Oahu that struck Americans as a â€Å"dastardly attack† - â€Å"stab in the dorsum. † On December 7th. 1941. everyone went about their day-to-day modus operandi. Naval and military bids in Hawaii did non surmise that this twenty-four hours would be the twenty-four hours they would acquire a immense surprise by acquiring attacked. Washington and Honolulu were cognizant of the Nipponese menaces to assail countries in Southeast Asia but they didn’t think a surprise onslaught at Pearl Harbor was in the programs. The bids in Washington and Honolulu had no thought because based on their intelligence they received largely from U. S wireless intelligence and diplomatic codification breakage. the intelligence received told them that the Japanese were traveling south and they weren’t traveling to be in â€Å"dan ger† . Washington received intelligence from the office of naval intelligence a few hours before the onslaught indicating that the all of Japan’s fleet bearers were in their place Waterss. This was one manner how the Nipponese wholly fooled and the U. S. intelligence and surprised them with a detrimental onslaught on Pearl Harbor and other military installings. Sunday forenoons are usually a clip of leisure for military forces. and during this clip. particularly in the forenoon. some are still asleep. or at church with their households. With the Nipponese knowing this. this was the best clip to establish their surprise onslaught because they knew people would non be able to react to the onslaughts quick plenty to contend back and it would be the perfect chance to destruct all of their fleets and aircrafts Japan’s careful and good orchestrated onslaught on Pearl Harbor on December 7th. 1941. destroyed about all the American Naval fleet in the Pacific. This allowed Japan to go on its imperialism towards Southeast Asian without United States intervention. Even when Japan failed to follow through with the component of security towards United States. they still followed about all the nine Principles of War in order for them to hold a successful foray. The 3rd moving ridge of onslaught could hold the destroyed the fuel storage. care. and dry dock installations that would hold crippled the U. S. Pacific Fleet far more earnestly than the loss of its battlewagons. If they had been wiped out. United States could non hold been able to resile back. fall in the war. and finally forced Japan to give up. Work Cited Carlisle. Rodney P. December 7. 1941: One Day in History: The Days That Changed the World. New York: Collins. 2006. Print. Long. Tony. July 27. 2007. â€Å"Dec. 7. 1941: Attack at Pearl Harbor a Bold. Desperate Gamble. † Wired. com. Conde Nast Digital. n. d. Web. 23 Jan. 2013. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. wired. com/science/discoveries/news/2007/12/dayintech_1207 Goldstein. Donald M. The Way It Was Pearl Harbor. The Original Photographs. Washington: Brassey’s. 1991. Print. â€Å"Global Research. † Pearl Harbor: A Successful War Lie. N. p. . n. d. Web. 23 Jan. 2013. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. globalresearch. ca/pearl-harbor-a-successful-war-lie/22305 â€Å"How Did Japan View the Pearl Harbor Attacks? † ThinkQuest. Oracle Foundation. n. d. Web. 23 Jan. 2013. hypertext transfer protocol: //library. thinkquest. org/CR0214300/nzjapaneseview1. hypertext markup language Hoyt. Edwin Palmer. Pearl Harbor Attack. New York: Sterling Pub. . 2008. Print. Kam. Ephraim. Surprise Attack: The Victim’s Perspective. Cambridge. Ma: Harvard UP. 1988. Print. â€Å"People-Japan–Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. IJN. ( 1884-1943 ) . † People-Japan–Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto. IJN. ( 1884-1943 ) . N. p. . n. d. Web. 23 Jan. 2013. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. history. navy. mil/photos/prs-for/japan/japrs-xz/i-yamto. htm â€Å"The Attack by the First Nipponese Wave. † The Attack by the First Nipponese Wave. N. p. . n. d. Web. 23 Jan. 2013. hypertext transfer protocol: //www. pacificwar. org. au/pearlharbor/FirstWaveAttack. hypertext markup language Tures A. Tures. LaGrange. â€Å"William ‘Billy’ Mitchell. the Man Who Predicted the Pearl Harbor Day Disaster. † Yokel! News. Yokel! . 06 Dec. 2011. Web. 23 Jan. 2013. Wisniewski. Richard A. Pearl Harbor and the USS Arizona Memorial: A Pictorial History. Honololu. Hawaii ( P. O. Box 8924. Honolulu 96830 ) : Pacific Basin Enterprises. 1986. Print.

How to Prove an Argument Invalid by a Counterexample

How to Prove an Argument Invalid by a Counterexample An argument is invalid if the conclusion doesnt follow necessarily from the premises.  Whether or not the premises are actually true is irrelevant.  So is whether or not the conclusion is true.  The only question that matters is this: Is it  possible  for the premises to be true and the conclusion false?  If this is possible, then the argument is invalid. Proving Invalidity: a Two-step Process The counterexample method is a powerful way of exposing what is wrong with an argument that is invalid.  If we want to proceed methodically, there are two steps: 1) Isolate the argument form; 2) Construct  an argument with the same form that is obviously invalid. This is the counterexample. Lets take an example of a bad argument. Some New Yorkers are rude.Some New Yorkers are artists.Therefore Some artists are rude. Step 1: Isolate the Argument Form This simply means replacing the key terms with  letters, making sure that we do this in a consistent way.  If we do this we get: Some N  are RSome N are ATherefore some A are R Step 2: Create the counterexample For instance: Some animals are fish.Some animals are birds.Therefore some fish are birds This is what is called a substitution instance of the argument form laid out in Step 1.  There is an infinite number of these that one could dream up.  Every one of them will be invalid since the argument form is invalid.  But for a counterexample to be effective, the invalidity must shine forth.  That is, the truth of the premises and the falsity of the conclusion must be beyond question. Consider this substitution instance: Some men are politiciansSome men are Olympic championsTherefore some politicians  are Olympic champions. The weakness of this attempted counterexample is that the conclusion isnt obviously false.  It may be false right now, but one can easily imagine an Olympic champion going into politics. Isolating the argument form is like boiling an argument down to its bare bonesits logical form.  When we did this above, we replaced specific terms like New Yorker with letters.  Sometimes, though, the argument for is revealed by using letters to replace whole sentences or sentence-like phrases. Consider this argument, for instance: If it rains on election day the Democrats will win.It wont rain on election day.Therefore the Democrats wont win. This is a perfect example of a fallacy known as affirming the antecedent.  Reducing the argument  to its argument form, we get: If R then DNot RTherefore not D Here, the letters dont stand for descriptive words like rude or artist. Instead, they stand for an expression like, the Democrats will win and it will rain on election day.  These expressions can themselves be either true or false.  But the basic method is the same. We show the argument s invalid by coming up with a substitution instance where the premises are obviously true and the conclusion is obviously false.  For instance: If Obama is older than  90, then hes older than 9.Obama is not older than 90.Therefore Obama is not older than 9. The counterexample method is effective at exposing the invalidity of deductive arguments.  It doesnt really work on inductive arguments since, strictly speaking, these are always invalid.