Politics & Policy

Where Does Admiral Yamamoto Go to Get His Apology?

Japanese Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto in the early 1940s (U.S. Naval History and Heritage Command)
By Colin Kaepernick’s logic, the operation to kill the Japanese commander was racist and illegitimate.

Before there was Qasem Soleimani, there was Admiral Yamamoto.

In 1943, the U.S. targeted the exceptionally skilled Japanese commander and killed him in what constituted a precision attack for the time — with the P-38G Lightnings that intercepted him midair playing the role of the MQ-9 Reaper.

If it was wrong to kill Soleimani, it was wrong to kill Yamamoto — just as barbaric and illegal, just as damnable an “assassination.”

Of course, no celebrities back in World War II apologized to Imperial Japan, as actress Rose McGowan did to Iran after the killing of Soleimani in a now-semi-retracted sentiment. There wasn’t a debate about the operation’s legality. Members of the opposition party didn’t call it an assassination. No former sports star — and corporate brand ambassador — condemned it as a lamentable instance of American militarism.

Indeed, if he’s being consistent, Colin Kaepernick must view the killing of Yamamoto as yet another example of American authorities seeking to control and destroy the bodies of nonwhite men.

Obviously, the targeted killings of Soleimani and Yamamoto aren’t exactly parallel. We were in a declared war with Japan, a conflict on a much larger scale than that with Iran. But both men were commanders of enemy forces actively engaged in killing Americans, and both were taken out in a combat theater. Both of the targeted killings were fully justified legally and morally.

What were considered the advantages of going after Yamamoto resemble those of hitting Soleimani.

Like Soleimani, Yamamoto was vulnerable because he was on the move, on a visit to Japanese units. We intercepted a Japanese signal revealing his imminent whereabouts, on the periphery of the range of U.S. aircraft. Admiral Chester Nimitz made the call to target him.

As Donald A. Davis notes in his book Lightning Strike, the fact that Yamamoto, who carried out the Pearl Harbor attack, was responsible for the deaths of so many Americans motivated us to go after him. “The blood of thousands of American and Allied soldiers, sailors, and airmen had been spilled because of Yamamoto,” he writes, “and here was an opportunity to eliminate him.”

The motive here wasn’t subtle. The strike at Yamamoto was dubbed Operation Vengeance.

The centrality of Yamamoto to the enemy war effort also played a role. “Yamamoto was the beating heart of the Japanese navy,” Davis continues. “In his own country, he was seen as embodying the unwavering Bushido fighting spirit.”

It was hoped that his loss would stagger Tokyo, and so it did — after an amazing feat of U.S. airmanship downed Yamamoto’s plane, which crashed in the jungle on the island of Bougainville.

There was some worry when considering whether to kill him that Yamamoto’s successor might be even more formidable. But it was brushed aside. Nimitz asked his exceptional intelligence officer, Edwin Layton, if he was confident that were none better who could replace Yamamoto. “Absolutely none,” Layton replied, according to his later account. “Absolutely none.”

A comment at the outset of the Yamamoto operation could just as easily have applied to the Soleimani operation:“TALLYHO X LET’S GET THE BASTARD.”

 

Most Popular

Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
Law & the Courts

The March for Life Is a March for Truth

Pro-lifers are marching today, as they do every year, to commemorate a great evil that was done in January 1973 and to express solidarity with its innocent victims. The Supreme Court’s decision in Roe v. Wade eliminated legal protections for unborn children in all 50 states, and did so without any ... Read More
White House

On the Bidens, Schiff Opened the Door

You opened the door. Trial lawyers live in fear of that phrase. When a trial starts, both sides know what the allegations are. Both have had enough discovery to know what the adversary will try to prove. Just as significantly, both know what their own vulnerabilities are. A litigator spends his pretrial ... Read More
White House

On the Bidens, Schiff Opened the Door

You opened the door. Trial lawyers live in fear of that phrase. When a trial starts, both sides know what the allegations are. Both have had enough discovery to know what the adversary will try to prove. Just as significantly, both know what their own vulnerabilities are. A litigator spends his pretrial ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More
Law & the Courts

Clarence Thomas Speaks

Those who know Justice Clarence Thomas say that any perception of him as dour or phlegmatic couldn't be more off-base. He's a charming, gracious, jovial man, full of bonhomie and easy with a laugh, or so I'm told by people who know him well. On summer breaks he likes to roam around the country in an RV and stay ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More
U.S.

Nadler’s Folly

Jerry Nadler must have missed the day in law school where they teach you about persuasion. The House Democrat made a critical error early in the trial of President Trump. He didn’t just say that Republican senators, who voted to begin the proceedings without calling witnesses, were part of a cover-up. He said ... Read More