This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Intelligence / Asian / Japanese / North America / United States / World War II This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion not met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met Associated task forces: /  Intelligence task force Asian military history task force Japanese military history task force North American military history task force United States military history task force World War II task force

Is it really necessary to add "CYA" to the end of the article. It makes it look so much less professional, too bad I can't think of anything better to say.

Agreed. Reads better. Apologies to the author, but taken the liberty of removing that comment. an attempt at CYA. ^{citation needed} Ruairi lynch ( talk) 17:01, 22 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Much of the content here is supported in The American Century. Harold Evans. Jonathan Cape 1998 pp312-313 - more in connection with the concept that the attacks on Pearl Harbor were the result of widespread Roosevelt administration & Defence blunders rather than a conspiracy. Ruairi lynch ( talk) 16:57, 22 August 2010 (UTC) reply