Jump to content

Talk:Battle of Dutch Harbor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Diversion

[edit]

Recent historians, such as Tully and Parshall in Shattered Sword, with better access to Japanese records, have said that the Japanese Aleutian Islands operation was not meant as a diversion for the rest of the Combined Fleet approaching Midway. Instead, they argue, the goal of the plan to attack and occupy the Aleutians was, as with Midway, to extend Japan's defensive perimeter outward to give greater protection to the home islands. If it served as a diversion, that was only a secondary objective. Cla68 (talk) 08:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, I know that Fuchida says that it was meant as a diversion. Tully and Parshall, however, say that Japanese records don't support his claim. Cla68 (talk) 08:30, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

POW/MIA

[edit]

"As a result of the enemy actions the Eleventh Air force lost 4 B-17s, 2 Martin B-26 Marauders, 2 P-40s, the Fleet Air wing suffered the most with 6 PBY Catalinas destroyed and 23 killed. 3 POW, 10 MIA and 2 wounded.[9]"

Since this battle was an aerial attack, how is it possible that any US troops were taken prisoner? MIA is confusing too -- it's a tiny isolated island, where are they going to disappear to? -- though I suppose it's possible they died but their bodies weren't found.

The reference is a Google books link and that only shows you part of the text so it's difficult to get the context for these numbers. Is it possible that they're the casualty numbers for the 11th Air force for the entire war? There's no indication other than this sentence that there were B-17s on the island during the battle, for instance. --Jfruh (talk) 00:52, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Battle of Dutch Harbor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:42, 16 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]