Draft of Final Paper

The Battle of Midway

This paper is a historical view of the Battle of Midway between the United States and the Japanese.  The Purpose of this paper is to present evidence and insight to explain the reason that this battle in World War II is important in history.  There will be three major points discussed in this paper to explain how the United States was able to win the Battle of Midway.  The Battle of Midway was a battle that took place in the Pacific Theater during World War II.  The battle started on June 4th, 1942 when the Japanese attacked Dutch harbor Alaska and the Island of Midway.[1]  The United States was able to win the battle in the long run; however there are many different factors that play in to the reason the United States was able to win the battle.  Which raises the question of how the United States was able to win the Battle of Midway even though the Japanese had navel superiority in the Pacific at the time of the battle?  The United States was able the win the Battle of Midway for three reasons; they had a better military intelligence, they took more strategic risks, and they had a more powerful and well supported air force.  The reasons stated before will be explain in greater detail later in the body of this paper.

The Battle of Midway is an important battle in history for many different reasons.  Many people believe that the battle was a major turning point in the Pacific theater.  The Battle of Midway had come at a tough time for the United States.  Just a month earlier the United States had suffer some big loses at the Battle of Coral Sea when the USS Yorktown was forced to go to port for repairs.[2]  Historians believe that the Battle of Midway lose, the Japanese suffered was one of the reasons that the Japanese lost the war in the Pacific.  The historiography section will explain some of the other reasons why the Japanese may have lost the war along with the help of other historians.

Many historians have different theories about how the Allied powers won World War II.  Better yet some historians question how the Axis powers lost the war.  This section of the paper focuses particularly on the Japanese and the United States fighting in the Pacific theater.  This section will analyze two different historians views on World War II and why the Japanese might have lost the war.  Many historians believe many different reasons about why the Japanese lost but the two historians analyzed in this section breakdown the Japanese war tactics.

The first of the articles that will be analyzed is titled “Why Japan Surrendered” written by Robert A. Pape.  Pape looks at three main ideas that might be the reasons why Japan surrendered.  The first idea that is argued is that Japan surrendered before the U.S. invaded, because the U.S. had already used to atomic bombs on Japan.  They were scared that the U.S. would continue to use atomic bombs and that why they surrendered.[3]  The next argument that Pape looked at is that the Japanese surrendered to avoid having their centers of population destroyed. The final argument that Pape looked at is that the U.S. would allow Japan to keep their emperor if they surrendered to the United States.[4]   However Pape said that all of the above reasons are not the real reason why the Japanese surrendered.  Pape gives a fourth reason that he believed led to Japanese surrender.  Pape said the reason the Japanese surrendered is because of military vulnerability.  Pape supports his reason with three pieces of evidence.  The first is the sea blockade that crippled the Japanese economy.  The second piece of evidence that Pape used to show military vulnerability was the fall of Okinawa in June of 1945. Pape final piece of evidence was the collapse of the Japanese armies in Manchuria.[5]  These three pieces of evidence are the reasons that Pape believes the Japanese Surrendered and in turn lost the war.

The second article that analyses one of the reasons the Japanese many have lost the Pacific theater on the war is titled “American Navel Intelligence of Japanese Submarine Operations Early in the Pacific War”.  World War II historian Carl Boyd wrote the article.  In the article Boyd covers the relatively ineffective use of Japanese submarines in the Pacific during World War II.  Boyd said the Japanese I class submarines were for the most part ineffective in sinking American ships as they had only sank one American ship by May 1942 while on the other hand the Americans had sank “seven I class subs and five midget subs”.[6]  Boyd also said the Japanese subs were ineffective during the attack on Pearl Harbor and the U.S. had become very good at detecting Japanese subs by the end of December 1941.[7] Boyd also states that the Japanese subs did a poor job of keeping U.S. mainland supplies from reaching Pearl Harbor, and the subs also did not attack the crippled American ships after the Pearl Harbor attack.[8]  Boyd uses the evidence in his article to formulate a reason that the Japanese lost in the Pacific theater.

Both of the two articles above give good evidence for why the Japanese may have lost World War II.  However there are problems with both articles.  In Pape’s article “Why Japan Surrendered” Pape is quick to overlook the significant role that the atomic bomb played in the surrendered of the Japanese.  Pape says that the atomic bombings were an important part of the Japanese surrender, but then says that the Japanese surrendered only because their military was vulnerable, and not because they were afraid of the atomic bomb.  There is too much evidence out there in history books and articles that would say that the atomic bomb was one of the many reasons behind the Japanese surrender.   In Boyd’s article “American Navel Intelligence of Japanese Submarine Operations Early in the Pacific War” he only talks about how the Japanese subs were ineffective in attacking the American fleet.  Boyd even says in his article that it was written only in terms of the ineffectiveness against the American Navy.  Boyd does not really look into any other reasons that may have lead to the ineffectiveness of the Japanese submarines.

There are many different historians out there were and are willing to give reasons on why the Japanese may have lost the war.  However the historiography on World War II is very incomplete.  The reason that is, is because there are very few sources that give a reliable history of World War II from the standpoint of the Japanese and the rest of the Axis powers.  Therefore it is very difficult to write an accurate historiography of World War II with out accurate perspective from both sides of World War II.

The Japanese going into the Battle of Midway had the upper hand in the Pacific.  They had caused major damage to the USS Yorktown and other United States ships during the Battle of Coral Sea.[9] The Japanese had also crippled the United States Pacific fleet On December 7, 1941 with their surprise attack the Untied States navel base in Pearl Harbor.[10]  Which became known as the “Day of infamy” in America[11].  With the major loses at Pearl Harbor, and the loses at the Battle of Coral Sea the United States had to change their strategies in the Pacific to be able to defeat the Japanese in the Pacific.

However the Battle of Midway way turned out differently because the United States Military intelligent had discovered the Japanese plans to attack Midway. The Japanese had planed to attack the Aleutian Islands in Alaska to distract the American Navy from the real target, which was the Island of Midway.[12] According to an article written by Lloyd Wendt it said that the Americans had cracked the Japanese secrete codes before the battle of Coral Sea.  Which allowed them decode the Japanese plan to attack Midway and use the attack on the Aleutian island as a distraction.[13]  It was because of the United States Navel intelligence that the United States knew the Japanese were going to attack Midway and they were able to prepare for the battle.  Also because the codes were cracked the Americans had more time to put up anti-air defenses on Midway.[14]   The decoding of the Japanese plans put the Japanese force at a huge disadvantage because the United States was able to take advantage of the extra time they had to prepare for the upcoming battle and more their navel forces to were they needed to in order to defend the Island of Midway. Despite the superior American military intelligence playing a factor in the Battle of Midway there was more to the American victory at Midway then just military intelligence.

The United States was forced to make a choice when they cracked the Japanese codes they had to decide if they should put more troops at Midway or more troops in the Aleutian Islands because some military officials believed that the Japanese codes may have contained false information and that the Japanese true target was the Aleutian Islands. However more forces were posted at Midway to defend the Island.  The Americans also needed to take more risks in order to defeat the Japanese at the Battle of Midway.  Part of the United States strategy was to perform long range attacks on the Japanese to keep them from reaching Midway.[15]  Also according to the Lloyd Wendt article part of the United States Strategy to attack and sink the Japanese carriers because they believed that was the only way the stop the Japanese attack.[16]

The Japanese attacks on the Island of Midway were not very successful.  During the attack on Midway the Japanese lost 243 aircrafts, one heavy cruiser, and four aircraft carriers. The United States however lost 152 aircrafts, one destroyer, and one aircraft carrier.[17]  Both sides lost hundreds of aircrafts, however the Japanese lost many more aircraft carriers then the United States did so the battle was more devastating the Japanese in terms of the naval force that was lost.  Also the United States was able to stop the Japanese from taking over Midway.  However, the Japanese were able to take control of the islands Attu, and Kiska in the Aleutian Islands, which did help boost Japanese morale.[18]  It is fair to say that the Japanese plans to attack Midway and the Aleutians was not a total failure but major loses at Midway hurt the Japanese, and in turn may have lost them war in the long run.

One of the major reasons that the United States won the battle of Midway is because of the Japanese air force’s lack of coordination, and the stronger U.S. Air Force.   The United States Naval War College claims that the timing of their attacks was off which, one the major reasons the Japanese did not succeed at the Battle of Midway.  The Naval College also claimed that if the Japanese would have had their plane lunching time down better they might have been able to win the battle.[19] Although the United States Air Force had better coordination then the Japanese air force it still suffered its fair share of problems during the battle.  According to Ensign George H. Gay a pilot account from the book The Battle of Midway by Irving Werstein, who was part of the Torpedo Squadron 8 remembers diving in on the Japanese carriers and him rest of him squadron were shot out of the sky before they were able to do any damage to the carriers.[20]  When Gay’s plane was shot down he landed in the water and saw that they had not done any damage to the carrier.[21]  However the next attacks the Americans did on the carriers was much more successful and devastating to the Japanese carriers.  By 10:24 AM on June 4th the Americans started their attack on the Japanese carriers for a second time. The Americans attacked the Japanese carriers Akagi, Kaga, Soryu, and Hiryu.  Six minutes later the Akagi, Kaga and Soryu were all very badly damaged and all but done for.[22]  Although both the United States and Japanese lost many aircrafts, it was the Japanese that suffered the bigger losses as mentioned before the Japanese lost a total of four aircraft carriers.  In the end it was the United States Air Force that proved too much for the Japanese navy, and allowed the United States to win the Battle of Midway.

There were many different factors that played into the American victory at Midway.  It is not possible to say that one factor is more important then the others in the American Victory at Midway.  Every factor played into the victory whether it was military intelligence, the risk they took or the strength of the Air Force that helped the United States to victory at Midway despite the strength of the Japanese navy at the time of the Battle of Midway.  Although the battle proved to be very difficult for the United States it was the three factors listed above that made it possible for the United States to win the Battle of Midway.

 

 

Bibliography

 

Bates, Richard., W.  “ The Battle of Midway: Including the Aleutian Phase June 3 to

June 14 1942.   Washington: U.S. Navel War College, 1948.

Boyd, Carl. “American Navel Intelligence of Japanese Submarine Operations Early in

the Pacific War” The Journal of Military History 53 No. 2. (April 1989): 169-   189.

Pape A. Robert. “Why Japan Surrendered”. International Security 18 No. 2 (Fall

1993): 154- 201.

Sears, Stephen W.  Carrier War In The Pacific.  New York: American Heritage, 1966.

Wendt, Lloyd. “The First Complete Story Of The Battle of Midway” Chicago Tribune

(Chicago), June 5, 1949.  Accessed September 27, 2014.

Werstein, Irving. The Battle of Midway.  New York:  Thomas Y. Crowell Company,

1961.

 

 



[1] Richard, Bates., W.  “ The Battle of Midway: Including the Aleutian Phase June 3 to June 14 1942.   Washington: U.S. Navel War College, 1948.  https://archive.org/details/battleofmidwayin00bate. 5.

[2] Ibid 2.

[3] Robert A. Pape.  “Why Japan Surrendered”. International Security 18 No. 2 (Fall 1993): 155

[4] Ibid 155.

[5] Ibid 156.

[6] Carl Boyd. “American Navel Intelligence of Japanese Submarine Operations Early in the Pacific War” The Journal of Military History 53 No. 2. (April 1989): 169.

[7] Ibid 171

[8] Ibid 172

[9] Bates., 2.

[10] Stephen, Sears, W. Carrier War in The Pacific. New York: American Heritage (1966.) 22-27

[11] Ibid., 27.

[12] Bates., 2.

[13] Lloyd Wendt. “The First Complete Story Of The Battle of Midway” Chicago Tribune June 5, 1949. 2.

[14] Ibid., 2.

[15] Ibid., 2.

[16] Ibid., 2-3.

[17] Bates., 4.

[18] Ibid., 4.

[19] Ibid., 84

[20] Irving, Werstein. The Battle of Midway.  (New York:  Thomas Y. Crowell Company,

1961.) 88.

[21] Ibid., 89.

[22] Ibid., 91.

Outline for Paper

Outline: Battle of Midway

Thesis Question: How was the U.S. able to win the Battle of Midway despite the Japanese navy being larger and more powerful at the time of the battle?

 

Thesis statement: The U.S. won the Battle of Midway despite Japanese navel superiority because the U.S. had a three-part strategy for defeating Japan in the Pacific theater.  The U.S. had better military intelligence, the U.S. took strategic risks that helped them get the upper hand on Japan, and finally that had a economic advantage and a more powerful air force/air force resources then Japan did.

 

  1. Introduction:  This paper will explain the reason that the Battle of Midway is historically significant. This paper will cover three main reasons that the United States was able to win the Battle of Midway as well as give the historical context of the battle.  The three major parts the paper will cover are; United States military intelligence, Strategic risks the United States took during the Battle of Midway, and the economic advantage the United States had over Japan.
  2. Introduction part 2:  The second paragraph in the introduction will be use to explain the historical background of the battle and why the battle is historically special in the context of war up until this point in history.
  3. Historical context Historical context will be taking from a pervious blog assignment.
  4. Historiography:  The historiography will also be taking from a pervious blog assignment.
  5. Body
    1. Body paragraph I

i.     Mini thesis/Statement: Going into the Battle of Midway the Japanese had naval superiority in the Pacific Theater.

ii.     Evidence/Fact (s): The Japanese was able to do heavy damage to the U.S. Pacific fleet when they attacked Pearl Harbor, and then again during the Battle of Coral Sea.

iii.     Insight: Because the Japanese were able to gain naval superiority in the Pacific this caused the United States to have change their strategy in the Pacific and forced the United States to have to take bigger risks.

iv.     Transition: Because the Japanese had naval superiority in Pacific the United States had to get help from their military intelligence to be able to compete with the Japanese.

  1. Body paragraph II

i.     Mini Thesis/Statement: One advantage the United States had over Japan in the Battle of Midway was their military intelligence.

ii.     Evidence/Fact (s):  The U.S. was able to break the Japanese codes, which gave the U.S. knowledge of a Japanese attack on the Island of Midway.

iii.     Insight:  By knowing this information a head of time the U.S. was able to prepare for the Japanese attack.  This put the Japanese at a disadvantage because it gave the U.S. more time to prepare of the Japanese attack.

iv.     Transition: Military intelligence was only one of the factors that lead to a U.S. Victory at Midway.

  1. Body Paragraph III

i.     Mini Thesis/Statement: The U.S. was at a naval disadvantage during the Battle of Midway because many of their ships were damaged in the battles leading up to the Battle of Midway.  Therefore the U.S. had to take bigger risks in order to be successful against the Japanese at Midway.

ii.     Evidence/Fact (s):  The U.S. had to use their air force to be able to do significant damage the Japanese aircraft carriers.

iii.     Insight:  Even though the U.S. was a naval disadvantage they were still able to do significant damage to the Japanese carriers.  However the U.S. still suffered huge loses during the Battle of Midway.

iv.     Transition:  Although the U.S. suffered huge loses at the Battle of the Midway they were able to cope with loses better because they were able replace some of planes that were lost during the battle.

  1. Body Paragraph IV

i.     Mini Thesis/Statement: One advantage that the U.S. had during World War II is that they had a big economic advantage.

ii.     Evidence/Fact(s): The U.S. was able to spend more money building airplanes and repairing their ships in the Pacific, which allowed them to win decisive battles in the Pacific.

iii.     Insight: The U.S. economic advantage allowed them to recover better after suffering major loses in the Pacific.

  1. Body Paragraph V:  This body paragraph will be used to tie together the four paragraphs above and explain how each factor tied into the U.S. Earning a victory at the Battle of Midway.
  2. Conclusion:  The U.S was able to use their military to gain knowledge of the Japanese attack on Midway, which made it possible for them to prepare for the battle. During the battle the U.S. took some strategic risks that made it possible to damage the Japanese ships and aircraft carriers, and they were able to use their economic advantage over Japan to help repair aircraft carriers and build more airplanes to be able to help win battles in the Pacific Theater.                  

Historian Blog Assignment 5 Historiography

Many historians have different theories about how the Allied powers won World War II.  Better yet some historians question how the Axis powers lost the war.  This section of the paper focuses particularly on the Japanese and the United States fighting in the Pacific theater.  This paper will analyze two different historians views on World War II and why the Japanese might have lost the war.  Many historians believe many different reasons about why the Japanese lost but the two historians analyzed in this paper breakdown the Japanese war tactics.

The first of the articles that will be analyzed is titled “Why Japan Surrendered” written by Robert A. Pape.  Pape looks at three main ideas that might be the reasons why Japan surrendered.  The first idea that is argued is that Japan surrendered before the U.S. invaded, because the U.S. had already used to atomic bombs on Japan.  They were scared that the U.S. would continue to use atomic bombs and that why they surrendered.[1]  The next argument that Pape looked at is that the Japanese surrendered to avoid having their centers of population destroyed. The final argument that Pape looked at is that the U.S. would allow Japan to keep their emperor if they surrendered to the United States.[2]   However Pape said that all of the above reasons are not the real reason why the Japanese surrendered.  Pape gives a fourth reason that he believed led to Japanese surrender.  Pape said the reason the Japanese surrendered is because of military vulnerability.  Pape supports his reason with three pieces of evidence.  The first is the sea blockade that crippled the Japanese economy.  The second piece of evidence that Pape used to show military vulnerability was the fall of Okinawa in June of 1945. Pape final piece of evidence was the collapse of the Japanese armies in Manchuria.[3]  These three pieces of evidence are the reasons that Pape believes the Japanese Surrendered and in turn lost the war.

The second article that analyses one of the reasons the Japanese many have lost the Pacific theater on the war is titled “American Navel Intelligence of Japanese Submarine Operations Early in the Pacific War”.  World War II historian Carl Boyd wrote the article.  In the article Boyd covers the relatively ineffective use of Japanese submarines in the Pacific during World War II.  Boyd said the Japanese I class submarines were for the most part ineffective in sinking American ships as they had only sank one American ship by May 1942 while on the other hand the Americans had sank “seven I class subs and five midget subs”.[4]  Boyd also said the Japanese subs were ineffective during the attack on Pearl Harbor and the U.S. had become very good at detecting Japanese subs by the end of December 1941.[5] Boyd also states that the Japanese subs did a poor job of keeping U.S. mainland supplies from reaching Pearl Harbor, and the subs also did not attack the crippled American ships after the Pearl Harbor attack.[6]  Boyd uses the evidence in his article to formulate a reason that the Japanese lost in the Pacific theater.

Both of the two articles above give good evidence for why the Japanese may have lost World War II.  However there are problems with both articles.  In Pape’s article “Why Japan Surrendered” Pape is quick to overlook the significant role that the atomic bomb played in the surrendered of the Japanese.  Pape says that the atomic bombings were an important part of the Japanese surrender, but then says that the Japanese surrendered only because their military was vulnerable, and not because they were afraid of the atomic bomb.  There is too much evidence out there in history books and articles that would say that the atomic bomb was one of the many reasons behind the Japanese surrender.   In Boyd’s article “American Navel Intelligence of Japanese Submarine Operations Early in the Pacific War” he only talks about how the Japanese subs were ineffective in attacking the American fleet.  Boyd even says in his article that it was written only in terms of the ineffectiveness against the American Navy.  Boyd does not really look into any other reasons that may have lead to the ineffectiveness of the Japanese submarines.

There are many different historians out there were and are willing to give reasons on why the Japanese may have lost the war.  However the historiography on World War II is very incomplete.  The reason that is, is because there are very few sources that give a reliable history of World War II from the standpoint of the Japanese and the rest of the Axis powers.  Therefore it is very difficult to write an accurate historiography of World War II with out accurate perspective from both sides of World War II.

 

 

Bibliography

Boyd, Carl. “American Navel Intelligence of Japanese Submarine Operations Early in

the Pacific War” The Journal of Military History 53 No. 2. (April 1989): 169-   189.

Pape A. Robert. “Why Japan Surrendered”. International Security 18 No. 2 (Fall 1993): 154- 201.

 

 



[1] Robert A. Pape.  “Why Japan Surrendered”. International Security 18 No. 2 (Fall 1993): 155

[2] Ibid 155.

[3] Ibid 156.

[4] Carl Boyd. “American Navel Intelligence of Japanese Submarine Operations Early in the Pacific War” The Journal of Military History 53 No. 2. (April 1989): 169.

[5] Ibid 171

[6] Ibid 172

Blog 4/ Blog 3 rewrite

Blog assignment 3

The primary source that I have chosen to use for this assignment is The Battle of Midway: Including The Aleutian Phase June 3 To June 14, 1942.  This document was written by the U.S Navel War College in 1948.  This document takes an in depth look at the Battle of Midway including facts and statistics from the battle. Some of the items included in this document are the battle statics from both the American and Japanese armies.  However the document has an American point of view on battle because it was written by the U.S. Navel War College.

The purpose of this document was to document the Battle of Midway using data from both the American and Japanese armies.  Another reason that this document was made was to help the future U.S navel students learn from the lessons the navy learned during the Battle of Midway.  The data that this document is comprised of is not complete because some of the data from the Japanese army was destroyed after the battle.[1] This document provides both qualitative and quantitative data. This document includes battle plans, names of important people on both sides of the war, such as generals, and the types of airplanes and the ships involved in the battle are also a part of this document’s qualitative data.  Some of the other qualitative data that is in this document is the weather conditions in the days leading up to the battle of Midway.  Some of the quantitative data that is in the document are the number of airplanes involved in the Battle of Midway as well as the number of ships that were involved in the battle.  This is just a few of the many things in this document that could be considered qualitative data in this particular document.  This document has a lot of great data however the data may not be completely unbiased because it does not include complete data from the Japanese side of the battle due to it being destroyed following the battle.

The authors of this document are in a great position to write about the Battle of Midway because it was written because they were the ones involved in the battle.  However because this document was written three years after World War II some of the data may have been omitted due to the information being classified.  However much of the data is accurate.  As it was mentioned before weather conditions was large part of the battle of Midway as a mater of fact it affected both the American navy and the Japanese navy.  In the days leading up to the battle of Midway the Japanese were faced with the trouble of moving through heavy fog. The Japanese were worried about the fog because they were afraid of American submarine attacking them in the fog on their way to the Island of Midway.[2]  I was able to find a book in the library that covered the Pacific theater, and I was able to find data in the book that supported data that was presented in the primary document that I was using.  In the primary document that I was reading it said that one of the reasons the Japanese wanted to attack Midway was to keep the American from reaching Tokyo.  I was able to find supporting data in the book I found.  In the book it said the Admiral Yamamoto was determined to defeat the U.S. navy after the Doolittle raid on Tokyo.  Yamamoto said the Japanese army’s pride was hurt after the raid because they knew that the Americans could reach Tokyo with their bombers.  So Yamamoto said it was time to attack Americans at Midway.[3]

I have found that this primary document to be very useful.  This document has a lot of qualitative and quantitative data that has come from the people who were involved in the battle of Midway.  I would need to look into more documents both primary and secondary in order check and see if the data in this primary document is truthful and accurate.

 

 

Bibliography

Bates, Richard., W.  “ The Battle of Midway: Including the Aleutian Phase June 3 to

June 14 1942.   Washington: U.S. Navel War College, 1948.

Sears, Stephen W.  Carrier War In The Pacific.  New York: American Heritage, 1966.

 

Werstein, Irving. The Battle of Midway.  New York:  Thomas Y. Crowell Company,

1961.

 



[1]  Richard, Bates., W.  “ The Battle of Midway: Including the Aleutian Phase June 3 to June 14 1942.   Washington: U.S. Navel War College, 1948.  https://archive.org/details/battleofmidwayin00bate 9

[2] Irving, Werstein. The Battle of Midway.  (New York:  Thomas Y. Crowell Company,

1961.) 40.

 

[3]  Stephen, Sears, W.  Carrier War In The Pacific.  New York: American Heritage, 1966.) 55.

 

 

History 200 Primary document assignment

Blog assignment 3

The primary source that I have chosen to use for this assignment is The battle of Midway: Including The Aleutian Phase June 3 To June 14, 1942.  This document was written by the U.S Navel War College in 1948.  This document takes an in depth look at the battle of Midway that includes facts and statistics from the battle. Some of the items included in this document are the battle statics from both the American and Japanese armies.  However the has a American point of view on battle because it was written by the U.S. Navel War College.

The purpose of this document was to document the battle of Midway using data from both the American and Japanese armies.  Another reason that this document was made was to help the future U.S navel students learn from the lessons the navy learned during the battle of midway.  The data that is document is comprised of is not complete because some of the data from the Japanese army was destroyed after the battle.[1] This document provides both qualitative and quantitative data. This document includes battle plans, names of important people on both sides of the war, such as generals, and the types of planes and the ships involved in the battle are also a part of this document’s qualitative data.  Some of the other qualitative data that is in this document is the weather conditions in the days leading up to the battle of Midway.  Some of the quantitative data that is in the document are the number of planes involved in the battle of Midway as well as the number of ships that were involved in the battle.  This is just a few of the many things in this document that could be considered qualitative data in this particular document.  This document has a lot of great data however the data may not be completely unbiased because it does not include complete data from the Japanese side of the battle due to it being destroyed following the battle.

The authors of this document are in a great position to write about the battle of Midway because it was written because they were the ones involved in the battle.  However because this document was written three years after World War II some of the data may have been omitted due to the information being classified.  However much of the data is accurate.  As it was mentioned before weather conditions was large part of the battle of Midway as a mater of fact it affected both the American navy and the Japanese navy.  In the days leading up to the battle of Midway the Japanese were faced with the trouble of moving through heavy fog. The Japanese were worried about the fog because they were afraid of American submarine attacking them in the fog on their way to the Island of Midway.[2]  I was able to find a book in the library that covered the Pacific theater, and I was able to find data in the book that supported data that was presented in the primary document that I was using.  In the primary document that I was reading it said that one of the reasons the Japanese wanted to attack Midway was to keep the American from reaching Tokyo.  I was able to find supporting data in the book I found.  In the book it said the Admiral Yamamoto was determined to defeat the U.S. navy after the Doolittle raid on Tokyo.  Yamamoto said the Japanese army’s pride was hurt after the raid because they knew that the Americans could reach Tokyo with their bombers.  So Yamamoto said it was time to attack Americans at Midway.[3]

I have found that this primary document to be very useful.  This document has a lot of qualitative and quantitative data that has come from the people who were involved in the battle of Midway.  I would need to look into more documents both primary and secondary in order check and see if the data in this primary document is truthful and accurate.

 

 

Bibliography

Bates, Richard., W.  “ The Battle of Midway: Including the Aleutian Phase June 3 to

June 14 1942.   Washington: U.S. Navel War College, 1948.

Sears, Stephen W.  Carrier War In The Pacific.  New York: American Heritage, 1966.

 

Werstein, Irving. The Battle of Midway.  New York:  Thomas Y. Crowell Company,

1961.


[1]  Richard, Bates., W.  “ The Battle of Midway: Including the Aleutian Phase June 3 to June 14 1942.   Washington: U.S. Navel War College, 1948.  https://archive.org/details/battleofmidwayin00bate 9

[2] Irving, Werstein. The Battle of Midway.  (New York:  Thomas Y. Crowell Company,

1961.) 40.

 

[3]  Stephen, Sears, W.  Carrier War In The Pacific.  New York: American Heritage, 1966.) 55.

 

 

Historian Blog Assignment number 2

Thesis Question: How were the Americans able to win the battle of Midway despite the fact that the Japanese had a much more powerful Navy?

Thesis Statement:  There are many factors that play into the reason why the Americans were able to win the battle of Midway they knew that Japanese were planning to attack Midway, they able to badly damage the Japanese carriers, and the Americans were able to use their aircraft carriers more effectively during the battle despite suffering great loses.

Barde E. Robert, “Midway: Tarnished Victory” Military Affaris, 47, no 4 (December,

1983): 188-192 Accessed September 26, 2014.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1987858.

This Source is about the Japanese fleet capturing three American pilots that crashed into the Pacific, and interrogating information out of the pilots that help the Japanese escape a more devastating defeat in the battle of Midway.  The reason this source fits into my research is because it shows the battle of Midway through the point of view of the Japanese so it helps to give a different view of the battle of Midway.

 

Bates, Richard., W.  “ The Battle of Midway: Including the Aleutian Phase June 3 to

June 14 1942.   Washington: U.S. Navel War College, 1948.

This Source is a very detailed book about the Battle of Midway it describes the battle plan that the Japanese were going to use to take over the island of Midway.  The book also looks at the Japanese plan to attack the Aleutian Islands in order to get the U.S. Pacific fleet to divide to defend the Aleutian Islands from Japanese attack.  This book also gives very precise details of people who were involved in the battle of Midway it even gives the weather conditions during the time of the battle. This source will be helpful for my research because it gives detailed data on the battle and the Japanese plan to confuse the Americans by attacking the Aleutian Islands then actually attack the island of Midway.

 

“Flying Boats at Midway”. The Negro Star (Wichita), August 21, 1942.  Accessed

September 26, 2014.

This source was a newspaper from August of 1942 that spoke about the Flying Boats that were patrolling the island of Midway in order to keep a watch for the Japanese task force that was heading to attack the U. S. airstrips on the island.  This source fits into my research because it is newspaper from the same time period as the battle of Midway, and it explains what kind of equipment the Americans used to patrol the of Midway and keep it safe from Japanese attacks.

 

 

 

 

 

Lambert, Andrew. “The Battle of Midway.” Enschool.org, last modified February 17,

2011, accessed September 29, 2014.     

http://morganparkcps.enschool.org/ourpages/auto/2013/5/2/40637177/Preview%20of%20_BBC%20-%20History%20-%20World%20Wars-%20The%20Battle%20of%20Midway_.pdf.

This source is a scholarly article from Enschool.org the article is about the battle of Midway that explains battle tactics from both sides of the battle.  This source is useful because it explains important dates of the battle, and the source explains the details of the battle from the American attacks on the Japanese ships and the Japanese attacks on the American airfields on the island of Midway.

This source fits into my research because it takes time to explain small details and tactics that help to swing the battle in the favor of the United States.

 

Levy, James P. “WAS THERE SOMETHING UNIQUE TO THE JAPANESE THAT LOST

THEM THE BATTLE OF MIDWAY?.” Naval War College Review 67, no. 1

(Winter2014 2014): 119-124. America: History and Life with Full Text,

EBSCOhost (accessed September 29, 2014).

This Source is a academic paper written by James P Levy that questions the reason that the Japanese Navy lost the battle of Midway.  Levy uses his own research and some research from other historians to get from and understanding of why the Japanese lost the battle of Midway.  This source will be good because it helps to have multiple points of view when trying to explain the defeat of the Japanese Navy at the battle of Midway.

 

 

 

 

Porch, Douglas, and James J. Wirtz. The Battle of Midway. NAVAL

POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY CA DEPT OF NATIONAL

SECURITY AFFAIRS.  Last modified June 4, 2002.

http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a485176.pdf.

This source is mostly about how the battle of Midway was the turning point of the war in the Pacific.  This source explains the motives behind the Japanese attack on Midway. The source will be useful because it helps better explains way the Japanese were not able to win the battle at Midway despite the fact that they had a more powerful fleet in the Pacific and the United States had a crippled fleet after the attack on Pearl Harbor.  This source will be helpful in shaping my argument because it shows how the Americans were able to use better tactics and shear luck to defeat the Japanese at Midway.

 

Sears, Stephen W.  Carrier War In The Pacific.  New York: American Heritage, 1966.

 

The Carrier War in The Pacific is about the Pacific theater in World War II. The book covers many of the sea battles between the United States and Japan.  The book covers the American point of view of the Pacific theater.  This book on only covers the battle of Midway but it gives a more broad view of the events in the Pacific.  The reason that this source is useful is because it gives a overview of the war in the Pacific but at the same time it also has chapters that focus just on the of Midway which will be helpful in writing my paper about the battle of Midway.  The source is helpful with my argument because it helps to explain how the United States was able to Succeed in the battle of Midway.  This source fits into my paper because it explains some of the battle tactics the Americans used in the battle of Midway.

 

 

 

United States Office of Navel Intelligence, The Battle Of Midway

Washington: Government Printing Office, 1943.

 

This Source is book from the United States Office of Navel Intelligence about the battle of midway it tells about the preparation for the battle with the Japanese, and it also gives a little background of the battle.   This source will be useful because it gives data on the preparations for the battle, and also gives data on the losses during the battle on both sides that were involved in the battle.  This source will help with argument because it explains why the United States was successful in the Battle of Midway.

 

Wendt, Lloyd. “The First Complete Story Of The Battle of Midway” Chicago Tribune

(Chicago), June 5, 1949.  Accessed September 27, 2014.  This source was about the battle of Midway told by people who were apart of the battle.  The reason that this source is important is because the facts of the article are coming from people who lived through the battle.  The source also gives a overview of the battle from both sides that were fighting in the battle.  The way that this source fits into my research is by explaining the Japanese plan to attack Alaska as a diversion to the true objective of attacking the Island of Midway, and also explains how the Americans cracked the Japanese codes and knew that they were headed for Midway.

 

Werstein, Irving. The Battle of Midway.  New York:  Thomas Y. Crowell Company,

1961.

This Book is about the events that lead up to the Battle was well as the battle itself.  The reason this source is useful is because it focuses more on the battle of Midway, and also focuses on the aviation power of the United States.  This source fits into research because it helps to explain the battle of Midway and the aviation power used during the battle.

 

 

Expository Essay Sample: What Is History?

Dillon Rauchholz

Expository Essay Sample: What is History?

In History 200 Historical Methods the questions was asked to the students what is history?  This question is difficult to answer because there are so many different answers to the question.  History is a detailed look at the past that can be seen through many different perspectives.  The three points of view that will be covered in this essay are the scientific view of positivism, the philosophical view of historicism, and the skeptic’s view of history known as postmodernism.   Along with help from Michael J. Galgano’s textbook “Doing History” this essay will explain that history can be different depending what kind of viewpoint is taken to look at history.

The first perspective that will be looked at is the scientific perspective of positivism.  Historians that use positivism to examine history try to use the scientific method to help prove what is truth, and what is fiction in history.   Michael Galgano says that “positivists use the scientific method to help prove what is true using evidence, which helps to eliminate bias perspectives” (Galgano 3,4).  Being able to eliminate personal bias is important in determining what is fact or fiction. If a historian has a biased opinion on a historical event then it might be hard to determine if what the historian is saying is true or just a made up opinion.

The next perspective that historians use to look at history is the philosophical perspective of historicism.  Galgano says that “some historians use this perspective to determine what history is because they believe there are just too many variables to look at history using science” (Galgano 4).  However historicists still need to back up their historic claims with evidence that supports their theory.  So on one hand there maybe are bias perspectives with historicism however it is still a viable way to look at history, and answer question what is history?

The final perspective to look at is the skeptical look at history through the eyes of the postmodern historian.  According to Galgano “postmodernism was made popular by the French philosopher Jacques Derrida”.  “Postmodernism was not widely used until after World War II” (Galgano 12).  Postmodern historians tend to believe that there is no accurate way to find the truth in history.  Therefore postmodernists also tend to reject what other types of historians find to be the truth.  Postmodernists take apart texts to look for evidence because they believe there is no one truth (Galgano 13).  This perspective of history is useful for going back and looking historical events and taking them apart to find a deeper meaning.

As stated before history is a detailed look at the past that can be viewed through many different perspectives.  The perspective of positivism is a detailed look at the past involving use of science to help eliminate the personal bias of the historian.  Historicism is a look at the past using philosophical reasoning to determine the truth in history because historicists believe it is too hard to look at history using scientific methods.  The last perspective is that of the postmodernist who believes that there is no absolute truth in history.  The postmodernist takes apart texts to help gain a deeper understanding of history.  Therefore history cannot have just one overall definition because there is just too many ways to look at history.  So history can mean different things to different people based on what perspective they use to look at history.

 

 

Work Cited

Galgano Michael, Chris Arndt, and Raymond Hyser.  Doing History.  Boston:

2013.  Print.