Suppose there were a counterfactual where the Japanese divebombers come out of a cloud, sink 4 carriers and win the battle. The US is fucked, that's the Pacific Fleet neutered for the time being. They can keep producing but how can they keep Pearl Harbour from being bombed to shit? What good is a carrier without bases to fuel it? What good is cycling in new and untrained crews vs veterans?
Uh, how exactly are the Japanese going to bomb Pearl Harbor after the initial strike on December 7th? Even during the attack, American sailors were actively defending the base and the ships with AA fire once the initial surprise wore off. The increasing resistance was one of the factors that made Nagumo avoid a third strike.
It is not impossible to bomb defended targets with carrier-based aircraft. See the Doolittle raids, island-hopping, the entire Pacific War, strategic bombing in general...
The Doolittle Raid was a total surprise, the Japanese were not expecting the US to launch army bombers from carriers. Secondly, the US did very little material damage in the raid.
This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a
court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to
optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.
The weekly Culture War threads host the most
controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are
appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy;
if in doubt, post!
Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts.
You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.
Why are you called The Motte?
A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently,
it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey",
originally identified by
philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial
but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens
this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for
the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired
propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."
On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.
New post guidelines
If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it.
A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts
such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a
submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).
Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or
significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Uh, how exactly are the Japanese going to bomb Pearl Harbor after the initial strike on December 7th? Even during the attack, American sailors were actively defending the base and the ships with AA fire once the initial surprise wore off. The increasing resistance was one of the factors that made Nagumo avoid a third strike.
It is not impossible to bomb defended targets with carrier-based aircraft. See the Doolittle raids, island-hopping, the entire Pacific War, strategic bombing in general...
The Doolittle Raid was a total surprise, the Japanese were not expecting the US to launch army bombers from carriers. Secondly, the US did very little material damage in the raid.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link