The Pacific War started in Kota Bharu!

[Alexandru H.]

I was just reading a book on the Pacific Battles and I came across something very interesting....

It seems that the Pacific conflict started not in Hawaii, as most of us know (at least, me ), but on the shores of Malayesia, in a certain british-defended zone called Kota Bharu. The Japanese fleet was preparing for the attack against Singapore, but a few ships arrived earlier and were met by the british coast artillery at 12.45, the Singapore hour, which corresponded with 5.55 in the morning, the Hawaii hour. Two hours later (7.50), the Japanese airfleet began its attack on Pearl Harbour....

Is this true?

[HisMajestyBOB]

Its probable, but it wouldn't really start the Pacific War as we know it, since the US wouldn't fight Japan over British Singapore.

[Hulaoguan]

Originally posted by Alexandru H.
I was just reading a book on the Pacific Battles and I came across something very interesting....

It seems that the Pacific conflict started not in Hawaii, as most of us know (at least, me ), but on the shores of Malayesia, in a certain british-defended zone called Kota Bharu. The Japanese fleet was preparing for the attack against Singapore, but a few ships arrived earlier and were met by the british coast artillery at 12.45, the Singapore hour, which corresponded with 5.55 in the morning, the Hawaii hour. Two hours later (7.50), the Japanese airfleet began its attack on Pearl Harbour....

Is this true?

Kota Bahru was a coastal town in northeastern part of the state of Kelantan in British Malaya. The landings at Kota Bahru, and those on the towns of Singora and Patani ( both in Thailand) on the early hours of 8 Dec 1941 (Singapore time) were the opening moves in the Japanese attack on British Malaya and Singapore. Those at Kota Bahru took place at 12 15 am, while those at Singora and Patani took place at 4 am or so.

Whether this qualifies as the start of the Pacific war depends also on what you mean by the term " The Pacific War."

Singapore itself was first bombed by Japanese planes at 4 30 am 8 Dec Singapore time. But if I am not mistaken, Manila (and Pearl Harbour of course) were also bombed at more or less the same time.

[LazyFresh]

Whether this qualifies as the start of the Pacific war depends also on what you mean by the term " The Pacific War."

I certainly started the Pacific War as far as the British were concerned

[Alexandru H.]

Well, the pacific theatre was a pretty big battlefield and it's interesting to see how time zones influenced the conduct of the war. Like the famous Japanese declaration of War, presented after Pearl Harbour.

Well, that specific action did saw the first real engagement in the Pacific. Whether the Americans were involved or not.... It was afterall an Allied conflict.....

[Hulaoguan]

Originally posted by Alexandru H.
Well, the pacific theatre was a pretty big battlefield and it's interesting to see how time zones influenced the conduct of the war. Like the famous Japanese declaration of War, presented after Pearl Harbour.

I always believed ( though I can't confirm it), that the Japanese timed the attacks on Pearl Habour, Manila and Singapore to be more or less at the same time in order to obtain strategic surprise over the vast battlefield.

[Alexandru H.]

Yes, it's true, but the funny thing it's that Malayasia and not Pearl Harbour saw the first gunfire....

[Hulaoguan]

Originally posted by Alexandru H.
Yes, it's true, but the funny thing it's that Malayasia and not Pearl Harbour saw the first gunfire....

You mean Malaysia.
It was called Malaya then.

I am not sure why the landing at Kota Bahru was a few hours earlier than those at Singora and Patani. Perhaps, as you mentioned, the transport reached their target area earlier than expected.

[Hannibal Barca]

Originally posted by Hulaoguan
You mean Malaysia.
It was called Malaya then.

I am not sure why the landing at Kota Bahru was a few hours earlier than those at Singora and Patani. Perhaps, as you mentioned, the transport reached their target area earlier than expected.

Tidal conditions( for landing), along with first light mean that even on day there was 45 mins difference between the beaches being hit on H Hour, the same could be applied here.Kota Bahru and Singora and Patani are how far apart?, without going to look id say the answers as given.

HB

[Hulaoguan]

Originally posted by Hannibal Barca
Tidal conditions( for landing), along with first light mean that even on day there was 45 mins difference between the beaches being hit on H Hour, the same could be applied here.Kota Bahru and Singora and Patani are how far apart?, without going to look id say the answers as given.

HB

They were a LONG way apart.

Singora and Patani, both in southern Thailand, were at least 40 miles apart, with Patani being southeast of Singora.

Kota Bahru ( in northern Malaya) was at least 120 miles away southeast from Singora.

Morover, the start point of the Japanese invasion fleet was even further away, at Samah Harbour, Hainan Island in south China. The fleet set off on Dec 3.

[Meiji-Tenno]

Originally posted by Alexandru H.
I was just reading a book on the Pacific Battles and I came across something very interesting....

It seems that the Pacific conflict started not in Hawaii, as most of us know (at least, me ), but on the shores of Malayesia, in a certain british-defended zone called Kota Bharu. The Japanese fleet was preparing for the attack against Singapore, but a few ships arrived earlier and were met by the british coast artillery at 12.45, the Singapore hour, which corresponded with 5.55 in the morning, the Hawaii hour. Two hours later (7.50), the Japanese airfleet began its attack on Pearl Harbour....

Is this true?

I remember reading similar information in a history book that I bought several months ago, so it is probably true that the fighting began in Malaya, as you've said. If you are interested I can find the book later and quote what it says about this.


Meiji-Tenno

[Alexandru H.]

Nice.....I have only a Romanian book that talks about this incident!

[Hardu]

Originally posted by HisMajestyBOB
Its probable, but it wouldn't really start the Pacific War as we know it, since the US wouldn't fight Japan over British Singapore.

You are somewhat misinformed. Read Volume III in Morrison's History of United Sattes Naval Operations in Wolrd War II.

The attack on Malaya was what the US knew was coming, preparing for and expecting. It was in fact to be Roosevelt's desired casus bellum against the Axis.

In fact, the expectation of an attack in SE Asia blinded the US naval and military command as well as the political eladership to the possibility of a Japanese attck on Pearl Harbour.