US neutrality (D)
Lend-lease (D)
Sanctions/ embargo on JAP (E)
Declaration of War: armed conflict on the competition continuum (D)
Strike back, but how? (M)
To conduct a bombing raid on mainland Japan using USAAF B25 medium bombers launched from a USN aircraft carrier. approved by POTUS
-strained relations US/JPN relations due to JAP aggression in pacific
-Failed following Pearl Harbor
-Lend lease with china/russia
-Perception and propaganda
-Strong Japan, weak/vulnerable US
-US shifting narrative
-Direct military intervention
-Strategic strike
-innovative approach
sanctions and embargo on Japan oil and steel
-Retaliate against Japan
-Boost US morale
-Demonstrate US resolve and capability following setback (I)
-Innovative military approach (M)
-Element of surprise
-Joint operation with USAAF and USN
-Utilizing highly modified aircraft (B-25 was eventually chosen)
-Skilled personnel selected from 17th Bombardment Group (Meritocracy)
-High risk for crew safety and potential for escalation
Accomplishes the strategic objective
The bombing raid, yes. The crew’s safety, questionable.
Strategic benefit outweighed the tactical risk
operational art (creative solutions) and science (known tactics)
BONUS Clausewitz trinity
Passion
Politics
Chance
PMESIIPT
POLITICAL- allianced, diplomatic relations in pacific, political willingness
INFORMATION- intelligence on targets, maintaining secrecy
PHYSICAL TERRAIN- Pacific distances, weather, ocean conditions
How do we retaliate against Japan after Pearl Harbor to boost US morale and demonstrate US strength and resolve and ability to strike back while minimizing risk to crews and resources?
-Capability to execute
-Element of Surprise
- minimal Japanese defense of homeland
JPP because of the missions Joint nature for complex multifaceted environments
-Strategic bombing
-Naval operations
-Intelligence and recon
-Logistics and Sustainment
-Surprise and deception
-Interservice coordination
- morale and psychological effect
-range
-payload