Midway: Legend & Fact ; \6 W$ n7 S* }, J# l) q; n1 B) h
"History is always written wrong, and so always needs to be rewritten."
h7 j" X3 F! L% w- K- George Santayana
" e( I# }( |2 M5 u# e, Y0 YIt has been many years since the long-standing Western version of the Battle of Midway has been challenged. With the publication of "Shattered Sword" in late 2005, a Midway account authored by Westerners but told from the Japanese point of view and strongly supported by Japanese primary sources, the battle has been cast in a new light.
6 I& M- ~- {/ R: TSome may find the new portrayal discomforting. "Shattered Sword" dismisses the fondly-held belief that the American victory at Midway resulted from sheer luck and divine intervention. It deflates the image of dive bombers saving the day, striking just as enemy was about to launch a devastating attack. It paints Japan's carrier striking force, the Kido Butai, as having significant weaknesses in its defensive capabilities. It compels the reader to question just why they thought they knew what happened at Midway.
& x e# _& A: Z2 ~! f/ Y8 u: vThe most perplexing question raised by "Shattered Sword" is why Western writers repeatedly included highly questionable statements in account after account, despite clues in Western sources that suggested major inconsistencies in the traditional telling.
1 D& P7 A' d( _: X" T; f5 U; A# bFor example, why did so many accounts depict armed planes packed on the decks of the Kido Butai when the USN dive bombers attacked, though seasoned observers such as VB-6 commander Dick Best reported exactly the opposite? Why did few question the assumption that the Aleutians operation was intended to lure the US fleet out of Hawaii ... when it was timed to start only a day before the main Midway operation, hardly giving the US fleet time to get underway? 9 W; Z% B. s' l
Explanations range from limited access to Japanese materials, to intentional distortions in available Japanese sources (particularly Fuchida's "Midway: The Battle That Doomed Japan"), to insufficient skepticism on the part of Western researchers. This writer is one of many who have been forced to reevaluate their account - and the methods that produced that account - in light of "Shattered Sword".
0 H7 M/ `: b* ?* L6 hAfter reading "Shattered Sword", other titles such as "Miracle at Midway" and "Incredible Victory" lose some of their allure. Midway - the battle - does not, however. The US victory may not have been a miracle, but that only increases its significance. The lopsided results were the result of carrier doctrine developed over twenty years of trial and error, the cool application of basic military theory, and the willingness of many, many pilots to accept poor odds of survival for the opportunity to do what they'd been trained to do. Japan suffered from poor strategy, relatively inefficient operational practices, and inadequate air defense and command systems that were overwhelmed by relentless American attacks.
: ~% b+ h! E- j0 S$ r) g"Shattered Sword" puts the credit, and the blame, for the outcome where it belongs: with those who planned and fought the battle, not with fate or fickle luck. And it reminds us that we only ever know part of the story. To remain intellectually honest we must be willing to admit the evidence that says we were wrong.
- ]1 C {; h* A这段是啥意思？ |
发表于 2008-5-21 10:46
| 
2 s+ V9 j2 W* Z# V: O
发表于 2008-5-21 11:02
| 
发表于 2008-5-21 12:31
| 
& J) H2 q& ]! }3 Z" w Q% B
