RhinoDad
Posts: 221
Joined: 12/22/2020
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
quote:
ORIGINAL: RhinoDad
quote:
ORIGINAL: bradfordkay
"but it sure helped the Japanese when US congressman in '43 told Japanese that US subs could and did dive below the 150' depth that they tended to set their charges at"
It would be more accurate to say that the Congressman revealed the fact that the Japanese depth charges were being set too shallow in a newspaper interview (Chicago Tribune, IIRC). The way you wrote it makes it sound like he was working with the Japanese. Both he and the Tribune's editors were at fault for that secret getting out.
When Japanese are by and large using a max depth setting of 150' and are told through a public platform that their depth charges are set too shallow is pretty much the same as saying that he told them that the 150' depth was too shallow. Sounds like a distinction without a difference.
Stating in a public forum, which will be monitored by the other side, information that is helpful to the other side or damaging to your own is telling the other side. After being told to the press, and being published, the information was either known or should be known by the enemy. Revealing to a major newspaper is telling the Japanese, just through a third party.
The newspaper would have reason to believe that a US congressman who would be briefed on sensitive information would not run out and leak such information. The burden is on the one leaking the information not on the paper to ensure everything told them is not sensitive; though it would have been nice. But it was not common knowledge so it would be difficult for the newspaper to check it out with out leaking it in the process and missing the story.
Does not make it sound like he was working with the Japanese. That is just a conclusion you are jumping to that is neither stated or implied. It does however, make it sound like he had a big mouth and possibly was trying to look important by revealing sensitive/important information that few would know, or just forgot, in a forum that would be available to the Japanese; and that would be of benefit to the Japanese. Yes, he was told the information, given to him as a committee chair, was sensitive at time of briefing.
If you say Mayor Diane Feinstein told the Serial killer that the police could identify his murders by the shoes he was wearing, imply or sound like she was in league with the killer. No, it merely states she gave away crucial information, in a public forum, (close to the same as telling him) to an ongoing string of murders in California that would be of use to the perpetrator.
Meh... I just prefer to write in a factual manner rather than in an accusatory one. There's enough rancor in this world as it is. YMMV
Perhaps just a younger generations look at things but it was in factual manner nothing implied. Congressman told Japanese. Through a newspaper but none the less told them. But, then again I am up in the years and language style is very different from what it was. No accusation was meant nor implied. 
_____________________________
Improvise, Adapt and Overcome
Success is how you bounce on the bottom
Experience is a comb life gives us after we have lost our hair
|
Printable Version
Destroyer ASW TFs - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread