Think twice before you buy Duracell batteries

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 17:17:57 -0700 (PDT), jurb6006@gmail.com wrote:
(...)

Look what I found on my battery "shelf":
<http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/Kirkland-AAA-leak.jpg>
They were unopened until today, when I ripped open the left side to
pull out a few batteries.

They're marked with a 7 shelf life. I'm only 2.7 years over the 2014
expiration date, but have no idea when I bought them. I guess it's
"use them or lose them" because I stupidly used up newer battery
packages before diving into the older batteries buried in the back of
the battery "shelf".

Grumble, and $15 gone. Oddly, most of the batteries I pulled out and
cleaned seem to work. I'll run a capacity test on a leaky battery
later. No, I'm not going to put an expired and leaking battery in my
toys.

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <d33428cf-de93-496f-8c83-165a153e9310@googlegroups.com>,
jurb6006@gmail.com says...

rock I could have made a nice little pile.

Speaking of which, how come that package says "Piles" on it ? Is that some foreign word for batteries ? In fact those aren't even batteries technically, they are cells. A battery means a bunch of them like a nine volt. But like alot of words in this country, they are used incorrectly, but once accepted the thing is that the listener understands the speaker. But I have never seen the word piles on anything of
the sort.

That is French for Battery ( or some such equal word). I bet if you
look at the packge you will see some other words that may not be spelled
in American English. Probably more French. That is to save from
printing seperate packages for different languages.


Not sure how it relates to the modern usage,but the old batteries were
called Voltaic piles in honor of the man Volta that had a lot to do with
the first batteries (cells).

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 10:40:47 -0700 (PDT), jurb6006@gmail.com wrote:

"Grumble, and $15 gone. "

That's nothing.

That's my lunch plus a tip.

>You probably have your first dollar

It was a $2 bill and it disappeared in a move long ago. I replaced it
with my first rubber check.

and you got better credit than at least 90 % of
the population in this country.

Yep. I am authorized by my predatory bank (Wells Fargo) to dig a
bigger hole for myself and bury myself in it. As I get older, my
credit improves even though my income has dropped. That's because the
bank knows that I'll probably die before I pay off any loan and they
can then grab the collateral.

>But I do understand that $15 is probably $20 today.

Sorry. I don't recall what I paid. I just looked up what a 48 AAA
box is currently selling at Costco. If it's really 10 years old, then
I probably only paid about $10.

That can probably still get you a bag of weed over there in
case you happen to smoke it.

You would not believe how many retail "medical marijuana" places we
have in the area. At the present rate, they'll outnumber tattoo
parlors and electronic smoke shops. Looks like all I can get for $15
is a gram or two:
<http://health.costhelper.com/medical-cannabis.html>

Anyway, I think we have to see by now that batteries leak whether
you use them or not. When depends on the brand I guess, or not so
much. Maybe the manufacturer.

I had previously proclaimed that Costco Kirkland batteries leak less
than Duracell batteries. Now, I'm not so sure. I guess the next
questions are what makes them leak and how do I prevent leakage?
Refrigeration?

The company that sells Duracells is probably not in the US so
they probably have them made elswhere. Hell, Union Carbide was
doing that in India when my sister still needed a fake ID to
drink. Boy if I had some money when their stock dropped like
a rock I could have made a nice little pile.

Yep:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhopal_disaster>

Speaking of which, how come that package says "Piles" on it ?
Is that some foreign word for batteries ?

Dunno. A "bank" of batteries has always be referred to as a "pile".
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaic_pile>
Note: This has little to do with my reference to a disorganized web
site as a "web pile".

In fact those aren't even batteries technically, they are
cells. A battery means a bunch of them like a nine volt. But
like alot of words in this country, they are used incorrectly,
but once accepted the thing is that the listener understands
the speaker. But I have never seen the word piles on anything
of the sort.

Thanks. I never thought of it that way. Sounds right.
However, words and phrases have a tendency to change meaning. If you
call a cell a battery often and long enough, the definition can
change.

We have to treat them like electrolytic caps I guess. I have
read plenty of people reporting that they leaked without
ever being used.

Yep. As with drugs and foods, an expiration date is a nifty feature
for the manufacturer. Toss the battery out before it goes bad. Or,
like the bulging electrolytics, toss the entire product out before the
capacitors trash it. Kinda like a built in warranty timer.


--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

Bluntly, this happens to consumers because they are either careless or lazy and would rather complain than take effective action. Battery makers, in my experience jump all over themselves to make customers happy. Do you think, after my experience I would ever buy a second tier battery?

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 13:56:54 -0700 (PDT), "pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>
wrote:

The difference between Duracell/Eveready/US-Made batteries is
that if the units kill something, the Manufacturer will replace
or pay. I received a check for $378 and change, representing
the cost of a Geiger Counter that I purchased for $50 at
surplus, when a pair of Eveready batteries self-destructed inside.
They even refunded the cost of shipping the unit to them.

Impressive. I managed to get about $20 from Eveready and $30 from
Mallory for trashing various Maglites. I've filed a few random claims
over the years, that usually get disappeared by the manufacturer.

>Otherwise, one is SOL and deserves _exactly_ what one gets.

Really? You seem ready to accept failure as inevitable and
inexorable. I think otherwise.

Ever wonder why there are alkaline cells around that live a normal and
useful life well beyond their expected lifetime? I've seen plenty of
really old alkaline batteries that simply discharged their coulombs
gracefully without a hint of leakage. Perhaps I'm using more alkaline
batteries these days, but I don't seem to recall such massive a
leakage problem during the 1970's. I certainly don't recall seeing
any leak in the original packaging.

It might also be useful for you to consider the possibility that the
leakage problem might be artificial and might easily be fixed by
better sealing methods or construction methods. This explains the
failure mechanism (hydrogen gas outgassing rupturing the vent seal).
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alkaline_battery#Leaks>
Now how hard would it be to make a better seal, or direct the gas away
from the electrolyte? I would be tempted to conjure a conspiracy
theory that this failure mode is intentional, since it sells plenty of
batteries. Why fix something that produces sales?

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Tue, 4 Oct 2016 19:00:23 -0700 (PDT), "pfjw@aol.com" <pfjw@aol.com>
wrote:

Bluntly, this happens to consumers because they are either
careless or lazy and would rather complain than take effective
action.

Right. Blame the victims. To most consumers, batteries are a
commodity item, where the various manufacturers and labels are
interchangeable. Perhaps an astute buying might read reviews or run a
few tests, but the GUM (great unwashed masses) will tend to buy the
same brand of battery repeatedly even when faced with demonstratable
failures, leaks, counterfeits, and marginal warranties. The Energizer
rabbit probably sold more batteries than any magazine or online
battery review.

Also, "effective action" usually follows a complaint. More
specifically, I have had a vendor spontaneously provide effective
action or financial compensation without me providing a suitable
complaint. Even if I were "careless and lazy", I can still produce a
suitable complaint, which just might produce "effective action" by the
battery vendor or manufacturer.

Battery makers, in my experience jump all over themselves to
make customers happy. Do you think, after my experience I would
ever buy a second tier battery?

Yes, I do think you would, if you didn't know it was a second rate
battery. That happens all the time, when a manufacturer outsources
their production to the lowest bidder, changes supplier, or simply
cheapens the product. I can supply examples if you need them. I have
no idea what company manufacturers Kirkland batteries, or even if it's
only one company. Volume manufacturers usually have multiple
suppliers, between which they arrange bidding wars to produce the
absolute lowest possible price. A drop in quality is implied, but
never mentioned. If it lasts the warranty period, it's good enough.
In this case, the Kirkland batteries probably lasted the required 7
year shelf life.

If you were a Prepper, who stores batteries for some future
Armageddon, shelf life would be a major issue. Devices with low drain
and low duty cycle, where the battery would be expected to last well
beyond its shelf life is another problem area. For these users, there
are better types of cells available, such as Lithium AA at 5 times the
cost of alkaline cells. However, for the commodity applications,
alkaline cells are cheap, commonly available, cheap, fairly reliable,
cheap, warranties, cheap, and did I mention cheap? So for your
commodity applications, where a $2 cell is not an economical option,
you're stuck with the $0.40 alkaline cell. Yes, I think you will be
buying 2nd rate batteries, unless you can find a genuine leak proof
alkaline for the same price.



--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

On Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 10:42:34 PM UTC-4, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Yes, I do think you would, if you didn't know it was a second rate
battery. That happens all the time, when a manufacturer outsources
their production to the lowest bidder, changes supplier, or simply
cheapens the product. I can supply examples if you need them. I have
no idea what company manufacturers Kirkland batteries, or even if it's
only one company.

Now, here is where you go off the rails. When one purchases a 'house brand' to save a few pennies towards a critical application, the consequences of such a choice are to be factored into it. "I have no idea what company..." means that you accept without qualification or complaint that these devices may be second tier.

And that is exactly my point. Batteries, whether in use or not are wearing parts - just like tires. In an urban setting or areas where there are elevated levels of ozone, tires 'age out" in anywhere between 3 and 6 years depending on the type and composition. Those who do not keep this in mind are taking their lives in their hands.

Battery manufacturers make their batteries *JUST* good enough to support their price-point, and no more. Those that do not support an infrastructure that provides warranties and replacements are at a significant advantage. And, like lemmings, the great unwashed gobble them up based on price, alone. Then have the temerity to whine and pule about the results.

Two things - one philosophical, one very practical: If that first package of underwear at $3.29 from China stayed on the shelf for the $3.69 package made in the US, life would be different in this country today. But, no, the great unwashed gobbled them up, saving that $0.40. Little did they realize or care that their neighbors lost their jobs thereby *UNTIL* their own jobs were threatened - and you could hear them howl three states away. Do you want to give up a small, but vital technology to the Chinese? Do you want it such that your flashlight/radio/game depends on a 12,000 mile supply line crossing (at least) one ocean?

Lastly, do you know that there is not one single LCD device manufactured in the US. Not one. That Boeing aircraft would have analog controls were it to depend on US sources. Or, that fighter jet, gauges in a nuclear submarine.. The US does not even have the tooling or basic infrastructure to make LCD devices were the need to arise. It would probably take 2-3 years to ramp up. So, yes, we can entirely lose vital industries by neglect, ignorance or by simply not recognizing the implications.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

>"Lastly, do you know that there is not one single LCD device >manufactured in the US. Not one. That Boeing aircraft would >have analog controls were it to depend on US sources. Or, >that fighter jet, gauges in a nuclear submarine. The US does >not even have the tooling or basic infrastructure to make LCD >devices were the need to arise. It would probably take 2-3 >years to ramp up. So, yes, we can entirely lose vital >industries by neglect, ignorance or by simply not recognizing >the implications. "

No rockets either, the US buys them from Russia. So bitch Clinton wants to start shit with them. And both candidates probably want to start shit in the South China Sea.

Good thinking. How's that globalism working out forya now ?

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 12:29:01 PM UTC-4, jurb...@gmail.com wrote:

No rockets either, the US buys them from Russia. So bitch Clinton wants to start shit with them. And both candidates probably want to start shit in the South China Sea.

Good thinking. How's that globalism working out forya now ?

RANT WARNING RANT WARNING

We have enough "Rockets" to vaporize all of Asia and Europe several times over, and with capacity to spare. What we do not have are man-lifting rockets in place. We absolutely have the capacity to make such rockets from the Saturn V up to de-mothballing a shuttle, and in surprisingly short order. My concern is related to not having the capacity to make it at all.

The LCD screen was invented in Pittsburgh, PA and refined in Switzerland. Despite that, we do not have the *CAPACITY* to make them in this country at all. Not the tooling, not the technology, not even the legacy knowledge. It is a subtle, but very important difference.

And, for the political record, it is the lack of understanding of this difference that is an indication of how big a problem systemic ignorance is in the good old USA.

We get exactly the government we deserve, as we vote them in time after time after time, and every part and piece of our government devolves back to those elected "representatives" as by deliberate choice or by neglect, they permit all those parts and pieces to continue.

The difference between *your* politicians and *my* politicians is that mine tell me the lies that I want to hear, yours tell you the lies you want to hear. That they are lying is neither in doubt or a subject of debate. But, to get direct, getting in bed with Putin is probably not a good idea. And 'starting shit' with him has the virtue of putting him in the same position as pretty much every other Russian/Soviet leader has been since the 1940s - on the top of a shaky edifice sustained only by the passivity of the populace. The greatest fear of any dictator/autocrat is the loss of that power. Putin is not stupid, and understands that he will get away with everything if not challenged. As long as there is a scintilla of actual risk to his power, he will back down.

Lastly, keep in mind that the Average American:

Does not have a college education.
Does not have a passport.
Speaks one language - badly.
Has never traveled voluntarily more than 200 miles from his/her birthplace.
Has never visited a foreign country, not even the Mexico or Canada.
Cannot name the Speaker of the House, even today.
Cannot name the three branches of government.
Does not believe in Evolution (42% creationism, 32% evolution, 26% no opinion).
Only 71.2% of eligible voters are registered.
Only 57.5% of registered voters voted in 2012.
Meaning that the average American eligible to vote does not vote (only 41.5% net).

And you think that our present government is anything other than exactly what we deserve, doing exactly what we should expect it to do based on what we tell it (and allow) it to do?

This has not one damned thing to do with party, democrat, republican, libertarian, communist, green, whatever. It has to do with massive, systemic and deliberate neglect, and industrial-grade stupidity mixed equally with mil.Spec. ignorance.

Like some few of you here, I have lived in another culture vastly different from here - and I have seen how Americans are perceived in other parts of the world. You might be surprised how easily it is for other cultures to separate Americans (whom they largely respect and admire) from American Culture (continuous amazement, mixed with a varying amounts of jealousy and horror) and the American Government (poorly understood, largely disliked - much as here). Would that Americans had the same ability to separate the individual and sub-group from the various other parts and pieces of the entirety in other cultures and regions.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

[Chuck]

On Tue, 04 Oct 2016 10:11:15 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Mon, 3 Oct 2016 17:17:57 -0700 (PDT), jurb6006@gmail.com wrote:
(...)

Look what I found on my battery "shelf":
http://802.11junk.com/jeffl/crud/Kirkland-AAA-leak.jpg
They were unopened until today, when I ripped open the left side to
pull out a few batteries.

They're marked with a 7 shelf life. I'm only 2.7 years over the 2014
expiration date, but have no idea when I bought them. I guess it's
"use them or lose them" because I stupidly used up newer battery
packages before diving into the older batteries buried in the back of
the battery "shelf".

Grumble, and $15 gone. Oddly, most of the batteries I pulled out and
cleaned seem to work. I'll run a capacity test on a leaky battery
later. No, I'm not going to put an expired and leaking battery in my
toys.

I have never seen alkaline AAA batteries of any brand where some
didn't leak. As far as AA ones go, Kirkland and the AA that Dollar
General used to have manufactured in Indonesia seemed to leak the
least.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

 

>"We have enough "Rockets" to vaporize all of Asia and Europe >several times over, and with capacity to spare."

Then why have they never defended this country ?

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

On Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 7:04:32 PM UTC-4, jurb...@gmail.com wrote:

"We have enough "Rockets" to vaporize all of Asia and Europe >several times over, and with capacity to spare."

Then why have they never defended this country ?

Lemme see....

Please tell me how a nuclear holocaust defends anyone or anything?
Please tell me exactly how a "rocket" defends any one or any thing?
Do you understand the concept of MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction)?

Now, you first decry how we "have no rockets", and when it becomes clear that we do, now you are shifting your premise.

One would think that you are at least logically challenged. I think it goes much deeper than that - that you are both ignorant and the victim of received wisdom, having no ability to think for yourself. That is a sad condition as you have no ability to discern truth from fiction and threat from perception.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

>"Lemme see...."

I don't know from where you derived all that but all I can say is to read the lines, not between the lines.

Pearl Harbor, the WTC, all they got are excuses and they don't hold much water.

They started this "read between the lines" shit when I was in school. My thought was - if that is what he meant why the fuck didn't he just type it ?

But I'll admit you have better reasoning skills then I, you can reason bullshit that isn't there.

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

Thank you for carefully avoiding taking responsibility for the question you asked, or for clarifying the basis on which it was asked.

Of course, by making several statements, I must also ask where "rockets" or the 1941 equivalent thereof, would have stopped the US from entering into WWII, or is that a conspiracy too? Keep in mind that the conspiracy theorists believe that Roosevelt know all about the attack and allowed it to happen to get the US into to war... Is that your position as well?

Give you the credibility and sensibility of housefly, with apologies to the insect.

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 1:25:43 PM UTC-4, pf...@aol.com wrote:

Thank you for carefully avoiding taking responsibility for the question you asked, or for clarifying the basis on which it was asked.

Of course, by making several statements, I must also ask where "rockets" or the 1941 equivalent thereof, would have stopped the US from entering into WWII, or is that a conspiracy too? Keep in mind that the conspiracy theorists believe that Roosevelt know all about the attack and allowed it to happen to get the US into to war... Is that your position as well?


Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

I want to preface what I'm about to say in that I believe most conspiracy theorists are effing insane..

However: I do believe that Roosevelt and the U.S. military knew an attack was imminent. Roosevelt was elected on a non-intervention platform that was extremely popular at that time, particularly since WWI was still in recent memory. The anti-war movement in America was quite large and vocal. By the time 1941 rolled around, it was clear that Nazi Germany would likely defeat England and we'd be fighting them eventually, and mostly by ourselves. The Lend-Lease act was helping England but without direct help from the U.S., it wouldn't be enough. The only way Nazi Germany could be defeated was with an expansion of the war (sounds silly, doesn't it?).

Roosevelt did not want to declare war on the Axis without direct provocation, and the "surprise" attack by Japan provided that. The sneak attack changed America's perception of the war overnight and recruitment offices were flooded the next day and continued on.

But I also want to be clear in that I believe that no one in the U.S. military or Roosevelt himself could have possibly foreseen the devastation that that attack on Pearl delivered. The only thing "surprise" about the Dec 7th attack was the brilliance planning and execution of it.

John
Wolcott, CT

 

[pfjw@aol.com]

On Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 2:32:03 PM UTC-4, ohg...@gmail.com wrote:

I want to preface what I'm about to say in that I believe most conspiracy theorists are effing insane..

However: I do believe that Roosevelt and the U.S. military knew an attack was imminent. Roosevelt was elected on a non-intervention platform that was extremely popular at that time, particularly since WWI was still in recent memory. The anti-war movement in America was quite large and vocal. By the time 1941 rolled around, it was clear that Nazi Germany would likely defeat England and we'd be fighting them eventually, and mostly by ourselves.. The Lend-Lease act was helping England but without direct help from the U.S., it wouldn't be enough. The only way Nazi Germany could be defeated was with an expansion of the war (sounds silly, doesn't it?).

Roosevelt did not want to declare war on the Axis without direct provocation, and the "surprise" attack by Japan provided that. The sneak attack changed America's perception of the war overnight and recruitment offices were flooded the next day and continued on.

But I also want to be clear in that I believe that no one in the U.S. military or Roosevelt himself could have possibly foreseen the devastation that that attack on Pearl delivered. The only thing "surprise" about the Dec 7th attack was the brilliance planning and execution of it.

John
Wolcott, CT

Agreed on most of this. That Japan attacked Pearl may not have been have been a complete surprise. I expect that the war department was more focused on the Philippines than Pearl. I expect that some suspected a possible attack on the West Coast, or Pearl, but neither so large nor with so much of the Japanese fleet.

At the same time, the Japanese high command recognized that if the US was aroused *and* at full strength from the very beginning, their chances were nil and the devastation to the home Island would have started much earlier. A knock-out blow was their only chance - and one that did not risk the fleet was equally at issue.

What is equally remarkable is how small a role Battleships actually played in the Pacific war. Carriers did the grunt work, submarines did fleet and commerce harassment ((The Japanese lost 1,178 Merchant Ships sunk for a tonnage total of 5,053,491 tons. The Naval losses were 214 ships and submarines totaling 577,626 tons. A staggering five million, six hundred thirty one thousand, one hundred seventeen tons, (5,631,117 tons), 1,392 ships. All to US submarines)) Not until late in the war were there enough large surface vessels to provide invasion/landing support, and by then the Japanese fleet was either destroyed or bottled up in the home islands.

Shadows of things to come. Th

Peter Wieck
Melrose Park, PA

 

[Ralph Mowery]

In article <e425680b-5b5c-4582-b111-d8602bdf2633@googlegroups.com>,
ohger1s@gmail.com says...

Roosevelt did not want to declare war on the Axis without direct provocation, and the "surprise" attack by Japan provided that. The sneak attack changed America's perception of the war overnight and recruitment offices were flooded the next day and continued on.

But I also want to be clear in that I believe that no one in the U.S. military or Roosevelt himself could have possibly foreseen the devastation that that attack on Pearl delivered. The only thing "surprise" about the Dec 7th attack was the brilliance planning and execution of it.

John
Wolcott, CT

While we lost a lot of good men, the ships that were sank and dammaged
and the aircraft were a bunch of left over old junk. The main ships
(aircraft carriers) were not there at the time. I believe that was a
setup just to get Japan to attack ,but not suffer too much of a loss to
the US.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per ohger1s@gmail.com:

However: I do believe that Roosevelt and the U.S. military knew an attack was imminent.

This is sort of tangential, but when I was stationed in Hawaii I worked
the 4-to-midnight shift and used to hitchhike into Waikiki every morning
during summer surf season.

Got a few very interesting rides - and one of them was an old guy who
claimed to be operating the radar up by Wheeler AFB the day of the
attack.

His story was something to the effect of "This radar stuff was new to
everybody and we were considered to be sort of on the fringe..... but we
saw the attack planes coming on the radar, tried to alert the higher
ups, but did not get anywhere."

I cannot recall whether the higher-ups just didn't believe them or
whether they attributed the sighting to some expected flight of aircraft
approaching from the mainland.... but there's not doubt in my mind that
the old guy was telling it like he experienced it.
--
Pete Cresswell

 

[Benderthe.evilrobot]

"Ralph Mowery" <rmowery28146@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:MPG.326068cc2af41c9f98975e@news.east.earthlink.net...

In article <e425680b-5b5c-4582-b111-d8602bdf2633@googlegroups.com>,
ohger1s@gmail.com says...


Roosevelt did not want to declare war on the Axis without direct
provocation, and the "surprise" attack by Japan provided that. The sneak
attack changed America's perception of the war overnight and recruitment
offices were flooded the next day and continued on.

But I also want to be clear in that I believe that no one in the U.S.
military or Roosevelt himself could have possibly foreseen the
devastation that that attack on Pearl delivered. The only thing
"surprise" about the Dec 7th attack was the brilliance planning and
execution of it.

John
Wolcott, CT

While we lost a lot of good men, the ships that were sank and dammaged
and the aircraft were a bunch of left over old junk. The main ships
(aircraft carriers) were not there at the time. I believe that was a
setup just to get Japan to attack ,but not suffer too much of a loss to
the US.

The historical evidence tells me there was a fair bit of fuckwittery in the
top brass.

American codebreakers were more or less keeping up with the Jap codes - so
they should've known the shit was about to hit the fan.

All the airfield fighters were lined up in a neat row for fear of sabotage
near the tree line.

They ignored warnings from British Intelligence about suspicious Jap troop
movements.

The footsloggers working the radar set did their job and reported the
incoming - they were told; "don't worry about it".

Some historians claim that all the ammo was locked away - the officer with
the key couldn't be found and they had to smash the door in - getting
strafed and frantically running around handing out ammo clips so a few
people could shoot back.

How they weren't prepared for an air raid is one of the great
mystries..................................

 

[Benderthe.evilrobot]

"(PeteCresswell)" <x@y.Invalid> wrote in message
news:ie7dvbpvjjvq6bco7bs9dnagre4gikqk1o@4ax.com...

Per ohger1s@gmail.com:

However: I do believe that Roosevelt and the U.S. military knew an attack
was imminent.

This is sort of tangential, but when I was stationed in Hawaii I worked
the 4-to-midnight shift and used to hitchhike into Waikiki every morning
during summer surf season.

Got a few very interesting rides - and one of them was an old guy who
claimed to be operating the radar up by Wheeler AFB the day of the
attack.

His story was something to the effect of "This radar stuff was new to
everybody and we were considered to be sort of on the fringe..... but we
saw the attack planes coming on the radar, tried to alert the higher
ups, but did not get anywhere."

I cannot recall whether the higher-ups just didn't believe them or
whether they attributed the sighting to some expected flight of aircraft
approaching from the mainland.... but there's not doubt in my mind that
the old guy was telling it like he experienced it.

A flight of B17s was due, but I think the "incoming" reported by the radar
operators was from the wrong direction.

The base was "on alert" - but didn't do much about
it.............................