Why do historians claim Yamamoto was Japan's greatest strategist?

[joko104]

Every war documentary about the war with Japan I see defines Yamamoto as Japan's greatest strategist. Why? He was a disaster for Japan!

The attack on Pearl Harbor - which he planned - was a total failure for Japan. The damage they did had virtually no negative impact on the USA militarily. No US carriers were sunk. Not destroying the fuel tanks prevented crippling the US Navy's Pacific fleet. Japan could have easily defeated our forces on Hawaii - pushing the USA back another 3,000 miles - and used Hawaii as an air base.

The only rational decision WOULD have been to invade and occupy Hawaii. Japan did massive invasions elsewhere. They stationed hundreds of thousands of troops on other island groups. Had Japan destroyed the fuel tanks our Pacific fleet would have to limp back to the West Coast. Had Japan invaded and occupied Hawaii, the USA would have been 6,000 miles away from Japan. Japan also would have had the massive fuel tanks there as well. We did not have anywhere near the military forces on Hawaii to stop Japan taking the Hawaiian Islands by surprise invasion - and quickly.

I heard one historian who claims the goal was NOT to defeat the USA, but by only attacking a military target without civilian casualties and invasion, the USA would negotiate an agreement to lift embargos on Japan and stop supplying China with weapons, aircraft and pilots. The reason is because that was commonly how major powers settled disputes, with China seeing Hawaii as a US colony, not actually part of the USA itself.

I don't see any brilliance by Yamamoto. I see someone whose miscalculation from day 1 cost Japan the war. If Japan had militarily defeated and occupied Hawaii, with Hawaii 3000 miles away from the West Coast, there would have been little we could have done about it. Sending an invasion force 3,000 miles - with Japan having Hawaii for aircraft bases - would not have been tenable and minimally would have caused horrific loses to the USA. That would be particularly so since at the start of the war Japan's aircraft was vastly superior to ours. Japan also had a larger naval fleet. We would have been in no position to even try to retake Hawaii - adding now we were at war with Germany and Italy too.

What did Yamamoto do as a military commander that was brilliant? Yamamoto was US educated. Could it be that somewhere inside him he really didn't have the stomach to actually invade and occupy US territory - and with the brutality against Americans there (mass rape and slaughter) that the Japanese Army did everywhere they went? Maybe he did not share the racism and bigotries due to his US education experience that was the practice of the Japanese Army and military in general?

 

[Questerr]

The Japanese could not have invaded Hawaii. They didn’t have the spare troops to do it, nor could they sustain the logistics of an invasion and occupation so far from their bases.

 

[Questerr]

Basically, the Japanese plan failed the moment the Japanese ambassador in Washington screwed up his time zone conversion and delivered their declaration of war after the attack already commenced. When the Japanese attack became a “cowardly surprise attack”, the US became totally unwilling to negotiate.

The plan wasn’t for the Japanese to totally obliterate the US Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor. They new chances of doing so were extremely unlikely. The plan was to simply cause enough damage to it to ensure that the US couldn’t respond to the invasions of the Philippines and (more importantly) the Dutch East Indies. Then once those were rapidly taken, they’d present the situation as a fait accompli to the US and negotiate a return of The Philippines to the US in exchange for lifting the embargo and the US recognizing Japanese ownership of Indonesia/Malaya.

But all that went out the window when the DoW was delivered late.

 

[Tigerace117]

Nobody in the Imperial Japanese hierarchy was really “rational“. Yamamoto was one of the few who realized that they couldn’t just run rampant forever.

 

[Jredbaron96]

Every war documentary about the war with Japan I see defines Yamamoto as Japan's greatest strategist. Why? He was a disaster for Japan!

The attack on Pearl Harbor - which he planned - was a total failure for Japan. The damage they did had virtually no negative impact on the USA militarily. No US carriers were sunk. Not destroying the fuel tanks prevented crippling the US Navy's Pacific fleet. Japan could have easily defeated our forces on Hawaii - pushing the USA back another 3,000 miles - and used Hawaii as an air base.

The only rational decision WOULD have been to invade and occupy Hawaii. Japan did massive invasions elsewhere. They stationed hundreds of thousands of troops on other island groups. Had Japan destroyed the fuel tanks our Pacific fleet would have to limp back to the West Coast. Had Japan invaded and occupied Hawaii, the USA would have been 6,000 miles away from Japan. Japan also would have had the massive fuel tanks there as well. We did not have anywhere near the military forces on Hawaii to stop Japan taking the Hawaiian Islands by surprise invasion - and quickly.

I heard one historian who claims the goal was NOT to defeat the USA, but by only attacking a military target without civilian casualties and invasion, the USA would negotiate an agreement to lift embargos on Japan and stop supplying China with weapons, aircraft and pilots. The reason is because that was commonly how major powers settled disputes, with China seeing Hawaii as a US colony, not actually part of the USA itself.

I don't see any brilliance by Yamamoto. I see someone whose miscalculation from day 1 cost Japan the war. If Japan had militarily defeated and occupied Hawaii, with Hawaii 3000 miles away from the West Coast, there would have been little we could have done about it. Sending an invasion force 3,000 miles - with Japan having Hawaii for aircraft bases - would not have been tenable and minimally would have caused horrific loses to the USA. That would be particularly so since at the start of the war Japan's aircraft was vastly superior to ours. Japan also had a larger naval fleet. We would have been in no position to even try to retake Hawaii - adding now we were at war with Germany and Italy too.

What did Yamamoto do as a military commander that was brilliant? Yamamoto was US educated. Could it be that somewhere inside him he really didn't have the stomach to actually invade and occupy US territory - and with the brutality against Americans there (mass rape and slaughter) that the Japanese Army did everywhere they went? Maybe he did not share the racism and bigotries due to his US education experience that was the practice of the Japanese Army and military in general?

Rose-colored glasses.

A couple of Yamamoto's quotes have been taken out of context and allowed him to be seen as some kind of pragmatic realist when he was in fact one of Japan's worst strategists.

See MacArthur for an American equivalent.

 

[joko104]

Rose-colored glasses.

A couple of Yamamoto's quotes have been taken out of context and allowed him to be seen as some kind of pragmatic realist when he was in fact one of Japan's worst strategists.

See MacArthur for an American equivalent.

MacArthur was absolutely awful!

 

[joko104]

Nobody in the Imperial Japanese hierarchy was really “rational“. Yamamoto was one of the few who realized that they couldn’t just run rampant forever.

The hard and non-cooperative division between Japanese Army and the Navy certainly was a real problem.

It should be commented that it was not Yamahomo who turned tail and ran due to not finding our carriers, rather than carrying out the planned second wave attack. The fuel tanks should have been a higher priority than the battleships. Battleships didn't decide the war. But if the fuel tanks were destroyed it would have causes a real problem for our Pacific fleet.

 

[Dayton3]

The hard and non-cooperative division between Japanese Army and the Navy certainly was a real problem.

It should be commented that it was not Yamahomo who turned tail and ran due to not finding our carriers, rather than carrying out the planned second wave attack. The fuel tanks should have been a higher priority than the battleships. Battleships didn't decide the war. But if the fuel tanks were destroyed it would have causes a real problem for our Pacific fleet.

Yes. But wars and battles are about optics as well. And Yamamoto understood the symbolic importance of destroying major fleet warships of the U.S. Pacific Fleet.

I doubt the Japanese would've proclaimed it a great victory if they had destroyed several dozen fuel tanks. Nor would the U.S. have considered it a great defeat.

 

[joko104]

Yes. But wars and battles are about optics as well. And Yamamoto understood the symbolic importance of destroying major fleet warships of the U.S. Pacific Fleet.

I doubt the Japanese would've proclaimed it a great victory if they had destroyed several dozen fuel tanks. Nor would the U.S. have considered it a great defeat.

Historically, many a military mistake has been made when the goal is optics rather than tactics. Not to minimize 3,000 casualties, the USA lost 2 battleships, a few aircraft and a few building. All but 2 of the 8 battleships went back into service.

Japan was extremely unlucky in naval warfare with the USA. Plus Japan was cowardly (such as no second attack on Pearl) when they should not have been, and were overly confident when they shouldn't have been. One mistake they often made was being certain what we were doing and where or assets were - and getting it all wrong.

An example of cowardice was when 3 US destroyers held of an entire Japanese battle fleet including the monstrous Yamato, heavy cruisers and 8 destroyers. At night, they figured 2 of our destroyers were heavy cruisers and 1 to be a battleship. So the Japanese sent their destroyers away, firing armor piercing ammo as broadsides rather than charging it firing high explosives round - for which one hit would obliterate a destroyer. Being light destroyers, the big battleship shells went completely thru our destroyers without going off. Only the Yamato had radar aiming so was about the only one even making hits in the night engagement (had the Japanese fleet not been trying to sneak in at night their fleet would have come straight thru.). It was only when they finally shifted to the correct shells was real damage done.

Whenever I read of WW2 battles, there are stunning examples of American's courage against impossible odds - and often winning due to having the bigger balls, so to speak. In the naval battle I just mentioned, the destroyers when thru every ammo they had. First, armor piercing. Then high explosive shells. Finally firing starburst flares - anything they had - and certain they would all be killed. Most survived even if their ship went down. A true never give up, never retreat, never surrender attitude. But all sides military personnel showed extreme courage time and again.

 

[joko104]

I am fascinated by WW2 as it was a moment in history never before and never to be repeated. Humans discovered how to make mass killing machines on a massive scale via assembly line techniques and the world went nuts over it.

 

[Dayton3]

Historically, many a military mistake has been made when the goal is optics rather than tactics. Not to minimize 3,000 casualties, the USA lost 2 battleships, a few aircraft and a few building. All but 2 of the 8 battleships went back into service.

Japan was extremely unlucky in naval warfare with the USA. Plus Japan was cowardly (such as no second attack on Pearl) when they should not have been, and were overly confident when they shouldn't have been. One mistake they often made was being certain what we were doing and where or assets were - and getting it all wrong.

An example of cowardice was when 3 US destroyers held of an entire Japanese battle fleet including the monstrous Yamato, heavy cruisers and 8 destroyers. At night, they figured 2 of our destroyers were heavy cruisers and 1 to be a battleship. So the Japanese sent their destroyers away, firing armor piercing ammo as broadsides rather than charging it firing high explosives round - for which one hit would obliterate a destroyer. Being light destroyers, the big battleship shells went completely thru our destroyers without going off. Only the Yamato had radar aiming so was about the only one even making hits in the night engagement (had the Japanese fleet not been trying to sneak in at night their fleet would have come straight thru.). It was only when they finally shifted to the correct shells was real damage done.

Whenever I read of WW2 battles, there are stunning examples of American's courage against impossible odds - and often winning due to having the bigger balls, so to speak. In the naval battle I just mentioned, the destroyers when thru every ammo they had. First, armor piercing. Then high explosive shells. Finally firing starburst flares - anything they had - and certain they would all be killed. Most survived even if their ship went down. A true never give up, never retreat, never surrender attitude. But all sides military personnel showed extreme courage time and again.

It helps to realize that the Battle of Samar (Taffy vs. a huge amount of Japanese firepower that

1) The Japanese military already had one foot in the grave (so to speak) so they figured they could not afford to use their valuable fleet units that still were afloat.
2) The Americans knew they were the last line of defense for tens of thousands of American troops ashore (but still within range of off shore bombardment).

 

[Questerr]

The hard and non-cooperative division between Japanese Army and the Navy certainly was a real problem.

It should be commented that it was not Yamahomo who turned tail and ran due to not finding our carriers, rather than carrying out the planned second wave attack. The fuel tanks should have been a higher priority than the battleships. Battleships didn't decide the war. But if the fuel tanks were destroyed it would have causes a real problem for our Pacific fleet.

They didn’t carry out the planned attacks because they would have been suicidal. The defenses of Peal Harbor (including defensive fighters) were up and active at that point.

Even had they destroyed the fuel tanks, they at best set the US back 6 months.

 

[joko104]

It helps to realize that the Battle of Samar (Taffy vs. a huge amount of Japanese firepower that

1) The Japanese military already had one foot in the grave (so to speak) so they figured they could not afford to use their valuable fleet units that still were afloat.
2) The Americans knew they were the last line of defense for tens of thousands of American troops ashore (but still within range of off shore bombardment).

It is an amazing story. I got it backwards. They thought 2 battleships. This was a night engagement. The destroyer with the 5 inch guns also had new ammo with a lower flash. So the Japanese figured the brighter flash from the 4 inch guns of the other 2 must be bigger. It was a stroke of luck because while the Japanese were scoring hits (mostly by the Yamato with radar aiming) the shells were only punching holes, not exploding until thru the ship into the water.

Yes, they knew they were all that stood between them and Japan - not only against troops on shore, but escort carriers and I seem to remember even American troop carriers? Still, a lot of people would not go into a hopeless seemingly certain death battle to save others.

There are so many recounts. The lone P51 that took on a squad of Zeros alone as the only defender of our bombers. The story of "Old 666" on what almost certainly was a suicide mission. The Dolittle raid etc.

 

[Fledermaus]

The hard and non-cooperative division between Japanese Army and the Navy certainly was a real problem.

It should be commented that it was not Yamahomo who turned tail and ran due to not finding our carriers, rather than carrying out the planned second wave attack. The fuel tanks should have been a higher priority than the battleships. Battleships didn't decide the war. But if the fuel tanks were destroyed it would have causes a real problem for our Pacific fleet.

20/20 hindsight

Battleships were still considered indispensable for naval operations at the time of planning. If fact both the UK and the US sent battleships into harms way as soon as they were available.

It was not Yamamoto's fault the carriers were out of the harbor... He knew the location of the carriers like we knew the location of Japanese fleet.

And it was the miracle of Midway that saved the US. A combination of factors many of which Yamamoto had no control over.

 

[Redress]

It helps to realize that the Battle of Samar (Taffy vs. a huge amount of Japanese firepower that

1) The Japanese military already had one foot in the grave (so to speak) so they figured they could not afford to use their valuable fleet units that still were afloat.
2) The Americans knew they were the last line of defense for tens of thousands of American troops ashore (but still within range of off shore bombardment).

One of the oddities of Samar was that the escort carriers and destroyers lacked armor, so some of the Japanese shells passed entirely through the ships without detonating.

 

[Fledermaus]

One of the oddities of Samar was that the escort carriers and destroyers lacked armor, so some of the Japanese shells passed entirely through the ships without detonating.

And leaving brightly colored splashes where they missed.

 

[Redress]

And leaving brightly colored splashes where they missed.

Well, all Japanese shells did. Actually a cool thing they did.

 

[joko104]

20/20 hindsight

Battleships were still considered indispensable for naval operations at the time of planning. If fact both the UK and the US sent battleships into harms way as soon as they were available.

It was not Yamamoto's fault the carriers were out of the harbor... He knew the location of the carriers like we knew the location of Japanese fleet.

And it was the miracle of Midway that saved the US. A combination of factors many of which Yamamoto had no control over.

Yes, Midway was an example of Japan's bad luck.

As for the carriers not being there, that is an example of cowardice. The Japanese could have split their carriers duties - one for 2nd wave and 3rd wave attacks while the other 2 were on station. But, again, the real flaw was not just lack of the 2nd wave, but not sending an invasion force. Even with our carriers operational (but somewhat low on fuel) the combination of Japan's carriers, a full invasion force and a full battle fleet - plus prior sent submarine force - would have taken Hawaii. Simply, Japan should have thrown everything at Hawaii to defeat and occupy it. That was his failure in my opinion - not invading Hawaii.

If our carriers stuck around for battle and even caused more damage, they would be limping home of fumes and likely a portion of the Japanese battle fleet could have likely run them down as our carriers would likely not have enough fuel to run at full speed.

I do think there may be some basis to believe Yamato thought that total war with the USA could be avoided by just demonstrating Japan was overwhelmingly superior so we had to negotiation - and with the carriers gone he didn't accomplish that goal - and basically accomplished little more than really pissing us off.

In my non-expert opinion, the war for Japan could have been won by taking Hawaii and not doing so doomed Japan. Even without the luck of Midway, our superior industrial power would have caught up - but with Japan now 6,000 miles away and our closest target being Hawaii to try to retake it at 3,000 miles away. Japanese airbases on Hawaii would be superior to our carriers because land can't be sunk. He also couldn't know the declaration of war by Japan would NOT be made prior to the attack.

 

[joko104]

And leaving brightly colored splashes where they missed.

Yes, except for the Yamaho's radar aiming, each Japanese ship's shells exploded in a difference color for adjusting angle and range. Most hits were by the Yamaho, but using armor piercing shells meant they caused little damage - basically drilled a hole the diameter of the shell - no explosion. When the Japanese FINALLY figured it out, it was game over for the destroyers... but even then our small escort carriers then were open firing with their smaller guns - ultimately spooking the Japanese - who had calculated sneaking in with no opposition and couldn't reset their thinking.

If their battle fleet had just continued, their 8 destroyers could have dealt with ours - but instead were sent off to protect them from what they perceived to be our heavy cruisers and battleships. Our cruisers could only scratch the Yamato, the most badass battleship in world history.

 

[Questerr]

Yes, Midway was an example of Japan's bad luck.

As for the carriers not being there, that is an example of cowardice. The Japanese could have split their carriers duties - one for 2nd wave and 3rd wave attacks while the other 2 were on station. But, again, the real flaw was not the 2nd wave, but not sending an invasion force. Even with our carriers operational (but somewhat low on fuel) the combination of Japan's carriers, a full invasion force and a full battle fleet - plus prior sent submarine force - would have taken Hawaii. Simply, Japan should have thrown everything at Hawaii to defeat and occupy it. That was his failure in my opinion - not invading Hawaii.

If our carriers stuck around for battle and even caused more damage, they would be limping home of fumes and likely a portion of the Japanese battle fleet could have likely run them down as our carriers would likely not have enough fuel to run at full speed.

In my non-expert opinion, the war for Japan could have been won by taking Hawaii and not doing so doomed Japan. Even without the luck of Midway, our superior industrial power would have caught up - but with Japan now 6,000 miles away and our closest target being Hawaii to try to retake it at 3,000 miles away. Japanese airbases on Hawaii would be superior to our carriers because land can't be sunk.

Where exactly is your proof that the Kido Butai could have “easily” conquered the Hawaiian Islands? Where are they getting sufficient ground forces from to overrun the defensive troops in Hawaii? How are they logistically supporting those troops? As it was they were already operating at the limit of their logistic capabilities to launch the strikes they did.

How are the Japanese planes on Hawaii staying in operation when US subs are sinking the cargo ships bringing in their supplies?

 

[Bullseye]

Every war documentary about the war with Japan I see defines Yamamoto as Japan's greatest strategist. Why? He was a disaster for Japan!

The attack on Pearl Harbor - which he planned - was a total failure for Japan. The damage they did had virtually no negative impact on the USA militarily. No US carriers were sunk. Not destroying the fuel tanks prevented crippling the US Navy's Pacific fleet. Japan could have easily defeated our forces on Hawaii - pushing the USA back another 3,000 miles - and used Hawaii as an air base.

The only rational decision WOULD have been to invade and occupy Hawaii. Japan did massive invasions elsewhere. They stationed hundreds of thousands of troops on other island groups. Had Japan destroyed the fuel tanks our Pacific fleet would have to limp back to the West Coast. Had Japan invaded and occupied Hawaii, the USA would have been 6,000 miles away from Japan. Japan also would have had the massive fuel tanks there as well. We did not have anywhere near the military forces on Hawaii to stop Japan taking the Hawaiian Islands by surprise invasion - and quickly.

I heard one historian who claims the goal was NOT to defeat the USA, but by only attacking a military target without civilian casualties and invasion, the USA would negotiate an agreement to lift embargos on Japan and stop supplying China with weapons, aircraft and pilots. The reason is because that was commonly how major powers settled disputes, with China seeing Hawaii as a US colony, not actually part of the USA itself.

I don't see any brilliance by Yamamoto. I see someone whose miscalculation from day 1 cost Japan the war. If Japan had militarily defeated and occupied Hawaii, with Hawaii 3000 miles away from the West Coast, there would have been little we could have done about it. Sending an invasion force 3,000 miles - with Japan having Hawaii for aircraft bases - would not have been tenable and minimally would have caused horrific loses to the USA. That would be particularly so since at the start of the war Japan's aircraft was vastly superior to ours. Japan also had a larger naval fleet. We would have been in no position to even try to retake Hawaii - adding now we were at war with Germany and Italy too.

What did Yamamoto do as a military commander that was brilliant? Yamamoto was US educated. Could it be that somewhere inside him he really didn't have the stomach to actually invade and occupy US territory - and with the brutality against Americans there (mass rape and slaughter) that the Japanese Army did everywhere they went? Maybe he did not share the racism and bigotries due to his US education experience that was the practice of the Japanese Army and military in general?

The attack on Hawaii was a stroke of genius that got deflated by circumstance. If you read how strategies and misdirection that went into just getting the various fleets underway from japan without divulging the size of the force or the direction it was traveling.

Transitting the Pacific undetected and launching an attack that size (don’t forget he also attacked the Aleutian islands as well) was an amazing military operation. Only one thing went wrong - the US carriers were out on maneuvers when the attack occurred. When he heard the carriers weren’t at PH Yamamoto is rumored to have said “We have lost the war”.

Japan’s follow up to capture Midway was an attempt to establish a logistic forward base from which to attack Hawaii an mainland America. Again a chance occurence - a US scout plane spotting Japanese carrier and guiding Spruance’s attack in on the Task force saved the day. And yet another lucky chance - one of the japanese carriers was caught with its flight deck fouled with planes configured as bombers so it was unable to launch fighters to join the air battle. AND with all those bombs on deck the carrier became shark bait quickly

 

[swing_voter]

A lot of history books pump Rommel up. If you want your side to be heroic, you need a formidable foe. Rommel was good, but he wasn't great.

 

[joko104]

The attack on Hawaii was a stroke of genius that got deflated by circumstance. If you read how strategies and misdirection that went into just getting the various fleets underway from japan without divulging the size of the force or the direction it was traveling.

Transitting the Pacific undetected and launching an attack that size (don’t forget he also attacked the Aleutian islands as well) was an amazing military operation. Only one thing went wrong - the US carriers were out on maneuvers when the attack occurred. When he heard the carriers weren’t at PH Yamamoto is rumored to have said “We have lost the war”.

Japan’s follow up to capture Midway was an attempt to establish a logistic forward base from which to attack Hawaii an mainland America. Again a chance occurence - a US scout plane spotting Japanese carrier and guiding Spruance’s attack in on the Task force saved the day. And yet another lucky chance - one of the japanese carriers was caught with its flight deck fouled with planes configured as bombers so it was unable to launch fighters to join the air battle. AND with all those bombs on deck the carrier became shark bait quickly

This is an agree to disagree topic.

Even if we learned a total Japanese carrier, battle fleet, submarine fleet and invasion force was coming with a few days notice, there would be almost nothing we could do about it. The Japanese fleet was larger and superior to ours in the Pacific. Since their ships were faster at the start of the war, if it wasn't working out they could have just turned around since invasion forces are on slower ships and always come in last.

Basically their carriers would have come in first - with the battle fleet held back - more subs already on station. After their carriers did their damage, the battle fleet would join to soften up the resistance for landing, plus the battle fleet could offer fire against our aircraft if our carriers were not there and our planes showed up from our carriers. It also is hard to believe the Japanese could not have even 1 person watching Pearl Harbor as a spy.

But that is what-if hindsight, of course.

 

[joko104]

A lot of history books pump Rommel up. If you want your side to be heroic, you need a formidable foe. Rommel was good, but he wasn't great.

Rommel is impressive - like all of the German military - as usually they had less mechanized transport, less tanks and even inferior equipment - France being one example. However, Rommel tended to do the same tactics - because of his limitations - and what beat him was logistics (not enough supplies) due to Britain mostly coming to control the Med - due to the miserable performance of the Italian Navy which was highly modernized and substantial - but just wasn't any good at it for some reason.

I've never understood why the Italians did so poorly in the war. It wasn't for lack of courage. Just skill and tactics.

 

[Bullseye]

This is an agree to disagree topic.

Even if we learned a total Japanese carrier, battle fleet, submarine fleet and invasion force was coming with a few days notice, there would be almost nothing we could do about it. The Japanese fleet was larger and superior to ours in the Pacific. Since their ships were faster at the start of the war, if it wasn't working out they could have just turned around since invasion forces are on slower ships and always come in last.

With a few days warning we could have sortied battleships, submarines and any other ships capable of getting underway.

Basically their carriers would have come in first - with the battle fleet held back - more subs already on station. After their carriers did their damage, the battle fleet would join to soften up the resistance for landing, plus the battle fleet could offer fire against our aircraft if our carriers were not there and our planes showed up from our carriers. It also is hard to believe the Japanese could not have even 1 person watching Pearl Harbor as a spy.

But that is what-if hindsight, of course.

As I mentioned there were plans afloot to capture Midway and use it to jump off to Hawaii and mainline USA.
Darn you, now I’m going to have to find my copy of At Dawn We Slept.