<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
    <channel>
        <title>Comments for Pearl Harbor... a little photo-allegory.</title>
        <description>We&apos;re the Military and Airpower Guys of Jonah Goldberg of National Review Online + a stray we found wandering around looking lost.  All original material JHD, BHD, JR, WT,  and KA 2003-2010</description>
        <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html</link>
        <atom:link href="http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a_rss.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />

        <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Jan 2010 16:33:12 Z</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>Movable Type 4.12</generator>
        <language>en</language>
        <copyright>Copyright 2010</copyright>
        <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>

        <item>
            <title>Pearl Harbor... a little photo-allegory.</title>
            <description>Before. During - the beginning During - the End. After. The USS Missouri, moored astern of the USS Arizona. The Instrument of Surrender of the Empire of Japan was signed on the deck of the Missouri USS Missouri, moored astern of the USS Arizona. The Instrument of Surrender of the Empire of Japan was signed on the deck of the Missouri.&quot;&gt;...</description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2007 07:09:43 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>

        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from Murray on 2007-12-07</title>
            <description>
                A better question Grumpy would be what did THEY learn from Pearl.

Not much if  Sept11 is anything to go by.
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67395</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67395</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2007 17:03:07 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from wolfwalker on 2007-12-07</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[Kat,

All true.  However, what I meant was this: even after Pearl, American battleships did fight in at least a few surface actions.  As best I can tell, the USN started WW2 with fifteen old battleships in commission.  Two of them were sunk at Pearl Harbor; the rest all saw service of one sort or another during the war.  Between 1941 and 1945 the Navy commissioned ten new battleships.  Out of those 23, at least six of the old and five of the new ones did see action against enemy ships.  But <i>Missouri</i> wasn't one of them.  ]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67393</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67393</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2007 16:27:16 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from Grumpy on 2007-12-07</title>
            <description>
                John, I wonder sometimes, what have we learned from Pearl Harbor? We start with the history of war, based on the this history, we develop principles of war. Based on these very same principles, we develop the methods of war. Based on these methods of war, we develop weapons of war. Now interlaced through this whole process we also have the laws of warfare. These laws of warfare are both national and international. We are bound to them by LAW! If for any reason we break them the nation&apos;s citizens pay the consequences. Many say do not forget Pearl Harbor.  My question is this- What have we learned from Pearl Harbor on the principles of war level? Do we still apply them? NOTE: Do I really expect an answer? No, but I do visit the question from time to time. I like the idea of a place in my mind that I have a crock pot where I just let questions slow cook. This is the crock pot of my mind. This is just a question for that very same crock pot in your mind. This is a way to give value to  those tragic losses of that &quot;Day of Infamy&quot; in today&apos;s world.

Respectfully,
Grumpy
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67381</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67381</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2007 14:11:30 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from kat-missouri on 2007-12-07</title>
            <description>
                I would say that after the advent of the carrier group, their days were significantly numbered as &quot;ships of the line&quot; that would engage other ships directly.

True even today.

For all we know, modern missiles have rendered the carrier useless beyond a throw away &quot;first strike&quot; before the missiles fly.  
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67374</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67374</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2007 11:05:54 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
        <item>
            <title>Comment from wolfwalker on 2007-12-07</title>
            <description>
                <![CDATA[I consider it a sad irony that the two battleships which memorialize the beginning and the end of the Pacific War share one point in their service records: neither ever performed the function for which she was actually built, engaging enemy warships in the line of battle.  <i>Arizona</i> spent most of WW1 as a training and patrol ship, never fired her guns in anger, had a relatively quiet life between the wars and then died on December seventh.  <i>Missouri</i> sailed with Fast Carrier Force Pacific Fleet and used her guns against numerous land targets, then did the same in Korea, Vietnam, and finally the 1991 Gulf War.  But neither ship ever fired on, or was fired on by, enemy warships.   ]]>
            </description>
            <link>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67371</link>
            <guid>http://www.thedonovan.com/archives/2007/12/pearl_harbor_a.html#comment-67371</guid>
            <pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2007 10:40:57 -0600</pubDate>
        </item>
        
    </channel>
</rss>

