Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: sandwich on August 14, 2009, 12:08:21 PM
-
USA! USA! USA!
:salute
-
Ok son...put down the pipe and step back two paces.
-
Your a day early.
-
He is not a day early in England. :cool:
-
He is not a day early in England. :cool:
Very true.
-
USA! USA! USA!
:salute
Did you think before you posted?
-
Did you think before you posted?
what exactly should he have thought about?
-
what exactly should he have thought about?
I dunno Mr. Devil's Advocate, indulge.
EDIT: While you're pondering. I'll remind you that the first mistake made was the Forum this was posted in.
-
ALLIES!!! ALLIES!!! ALLIES!!!
:salute
fixed that for ya! (although it doesn't have the same ring to it :/ )
:salute to all the Aussies, Brits and Kiwis who also faught in the Pacific.....
-
Atoms! Atoms! Atoms! :O
(http://i132.photobucket.com/albums/q27/syclone_2006/einstien.jpg)
-
See Rule #4
-
fixed that for ya! (although it doesn't have the same ring to it :/ )
:salute to all the Aussies, Brits and Kiwis who also faught in the Pacific.....
...and the Dutch, and most especially the Chinese, who lost at least ten million soldiers and civilians.
-
...and the Dutch, and most especially the Chinese, who lost at least ten million soldiers and civilians.
absolutely correct!
:salute
-
Commemorate you idiots. Don't celebrate the deaths of millions. :(
-
Commemorate you idiots. Don't celebrate the deaths of millions. :(
We are celebrating an end to the death of millions! Please note the term Happy Victory Over Japan Day rather than Happy World War II Day.
The allies didn't start the killing, we ENDED it! :rock
-
Where I live, there are plenty of people who will yell in your face that the USA is evil and that we are the only country that ever nuked an enemy... These people have no perspective. Thank God we got the bomb before the Germans did, and thank God our leadership had the will to use it and save the lives of our fathers and grandfathers instead of invading the Japanese home islands.
-
Commemorate you idiots. Don't celebrate the deaths of millions. :(
My point exactly. There's a way to go about it, but this was "classless" from the OP.
-
Where I live, there are plenty of people who will yell in your face that the USA is evil and that we are the only country that ever nuked an enemy... These people have no perspective. Thank God we got the bomb before the Germans did, and thank God our leadership had the will to use it and save the lives of our fathers and grandfathers instead of invading the Japanese home islands.
So if Hitler acquired the atomic bomb and used it on Britain, it would have been ok? He would have saved millions of lives too.
-
Where I live, there are plenty of people who will yell in your face that the USA is evil and that we are the only country that ever nuked an enemy... These people have no perspective. Thank God we got the bomb before the Germans did, and thank God our leadership had the will to use it and save the lives of our fathers and grandfathers instead of invading the Japanese home islands.
Out of curiosity, where do you live?
-
So if Hitler acquired the atomic bomb and used it on Britain, it would have been ok? He would have saved millions of lives too.
Come on Kermit, you know that's a straw-man.
-
Come on Kermit, you know that's a straw-man.
Why did we use the atom bomb? What did Japan do for use to reasonable think the atom bomb would be a better idea than sending our military men?
-
We are celebrating an end to the death of millions! Please note the term Happy Victory Over Japan Day rather than Happy World War II Day.
The allies didn't start the killing, we ENDED it! :rock
Damn right.
-
fixed that for ya! (although it doesn't have the same ring to it :/ )
:salute to all the Aussies, Brits and Kiwis who also faught in the Pacific.....
Don't forget the Dutch, Chinese, Indian, Burmese, etc...
ack-ack
-
Why did we use the atom bomb? What did Japan do for use to reasonable think the atom bomb would be a better idea than sending our military men?
Try this on for size. Would there be any Japanese alive today in Japan had the bomb not been used? In all likelihood the answer is no.
Towards the end of the war on islands such as Iwo Jima and Okinawa Japanese troops did not give up and were quite literally fighting to the death rather than face the shame of surrender or capture. And on Okinawa US troops were forced to watch as Japanese civillians commited mass suicide without being able to reach them in time to stop it from happening. The death toll on Japanese soldiers and civillians was higher than it was for Allied soldiers on Japanese held islands. But these weren't the home islands, and since the end of the war we've learned a lot more about what was likely to have happened had the home islands been invaded.
And they would have been invaded as Japan was not on the brink of surrender as some believe. The war had largely been lost for Japan at Midway, that was June of 1942. What was left was three years of fighting to clear the Japanese out of the islands of the Pacific they had captured (and territory in mainland Asia they'd taken as well). For three years they fought to the death with an intensity that became more ferocious not only as time went by but also as the Allied forces got closer and closer to the home islands. The estimates of an invasion of the home islands have already shown that a minimum of a quarter of a million Allied troops would have died in just the first wave of the planned invasion. Just one wave of many, and no one knows what the numbers of Japanese would have been. But it would have been far higher than the estimated 220,000 deaths combined from both Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
We know now that every man, woman, and child that could was expected to fight to the death to defend the home islands and the Emperor from the invasion. Pamphlets were given out to Japanese citizens instructing them how to use everyday emplements such as garden rakes and brooms as weapons. And what do you think the suicide total on the home islands would have been like? Far higher than Okinawa, that's for certain. Those who could not fight or who were likely to have lost their nerve would have commited suicide rather than be captured by the invaders. Over 1 or 2 million Allied lives would have have been lost in the invasion of the home islands and an untold number of Japanese lives, quite possibly every single Japanese in the home islands, would have been lost before all was said and done.
So why surrender after the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagaski if they weren't on the verge of doing so before? Fighting to repel the invaders was far more honorable and had more of a point to it than simply letting folks die pointlessly. And it would have been pointlessly as it was believed more A-bombs could have been dropped on Japanese cities with there being virtually nothing that could be done to stop it. On top of that, the Soviets were getting ready to invade Japan as well and it was expected that better terms could be achieved with the Americans and other Allies than with the Soviets.
-
All I'm saying Kermit is that going from here...
Thank God we got the bomb before the Germans did, and thank God our leadership had the will to use it and save the lives of our fathers and grandfathers instead of invading the Japanese home islands.
to here...
So if Hitler acquired the atomic bomb and used it on Britain, it would have been ok? He would have saved millions of lives too.
...is a very uncharitable interpretation of what he was trying to say.
-
Why did we use the atom bomb? What did Japan do for use to reasonable think the atom bomb would be a better idea than sending our military men?
Are you serious? Are you really that ignorant of World War II history? Oh wait, what am I thinking, you're convinced that Churchill is the one that started World War II.
Anyway, to address your rather ignorant question...
The Invasion of the Japanese Home Islands (Operation Downfall) was going to be in two parts, Operation Olympic (capturing the southern third of Kyushu, using Okinawa as a staging area. Set to begin October 1945) and Operation Coronet (invasion of the Kanto Plain near Tokyo. Set to begin Spring 1946). The geography of Japan favored the defenders because they were accurately able to figure out where the Allies were planning on invading, unlike Operation Overlord, it wasn't going to be a surprise attack.
According to the details of Operation Ketsugo (the Japanese plan for defending the Home Islands), Japan was planning an all out defense of Kyushu at the invasion beaches, including using all available civilians over the age of 10 (armed with basic weapons like spears). Japan's goal was not to defeat the Allies, it was already resigned to the fact they weren't going to win the war but rather they wanted to inflict so many casualties that the Allies were forced to the negotiating table and agree to an armistace instead of unconditional surrender.
Now, the Allies already had a taste of what was to be expected when they invaded Japan after the battles for Iwo, Saipan and Okinawa and those three bloody battles would look like a cake walk compared to the invasion of the home islands. Also, it was expected that it would take at least an additional 2 to 3 years before the total unconditional surrender of the Japanese forces on the home islands and at least a decade or more of counter-insurgency operations after their surrender.
But the major factor were the estimated casualty figures. Planners estimated that not only will all available Japanese military forces defend against an invasion, planners also figured that they would also be opposed by a fanatically hostile population. Below are some estimated casualty figures:
- A study done by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the figures of 7.45 casualties/1,000 man-days and 1.78 fatalities/1,000 man-days were developed. This implied that a 90-day Olympic campaign would cost 456,000 casualties, including 109,000 dead or missing. If Coronet took another 90 days, the combined cost would be 1,200,000 casualties, with 267,000 fatalities
- A study done by Admiral Nimitz's staff estimated 49,000 casualties in the first 30 days, including 5,000 at sea
- A study done by General MacArthur's staff estimated 23,000 in the first 30 days and 125,000 after 120 days
- In a conference with President Truman, Gen. Marshall, taking the Battle of Luzon as the best model for Olympic, thought the Americans would suffer 31,000 casualties in the first 30 days (and ultimately 20% of Japanese casualties, which implied a total of 70,000 casualties)
- Admital Leahy, more impressed by the Battle of Okinawa, thought the American forces would suffer a 35% casualty rate (implying an ultimate toll of 268,000)
- Admiral King thought that casualties in the first 30 days would fall between Luzon and Okinawa, i.e., between 31,000 and 41,000
Of these estimates, only Nimitz's included losses of the forces at sea, though kamikazes had inflicted 1.78 fatalities per kamikaze pilot in the Battle of Okinawa, and troop transports off Kyushu would have been much more exposed.
Additionally, a study done for Secretary of War Henry Stimson's staff by William Shockley estimated that conquering Japan would cost 1.7 to 4 million American casualties, including 400,000 to 800,000 fatalities, and five to ten million Japanese fatalities. The key assumption was large-scale participation by civilians in the defense of Japan.
Now, remember that Okinawa gave the Allies a taste of what was to come if they invaded the main home islands. The Battle of Okinawa ran up 72,000 casualties in 82 days, of whom 18,900 were killed or missing (this doesn't include the several thousand Allied soldiers that later died as a result of their wounds). Okinawa is 464 square miles; to take it, therefore, cost the United States 407 soldiers (killed or missing) for every 10 square miles of island. If the U.S. casualty rate during the invasion of Japan had only been 5 percent as high per square mile as it was at Okinawa, the United States would still have lost 297,000 soldiers (killed or missing).
But for the best reason why we dropped the bomb to end the war, just ask any veteran that was slated to take part in the invasion.
ack-ack
-
Are you serious? Are you really that ignorant of World War II history? Oh wait, what am I thinking, you're convinced that Churchill is the one that started World War II.
But for the best reason why we dropped the bomb to end the war, just ask any veteran that was slated to take part in the invasion.
ack-ack
Absolutely. Otherwise, I never would have spent 24 years with my Grandpa. His unit was slated to go right into Yokohama Bay. It would have been wholesale slaughter on both sides.
-
Are you all saying Japan was willing to fight with every last man, woman and child, therefore creating the possibility of millions dead or injured on both sides of the war, and that this was the biggest reason for using the atom bomb?
-
Why did we use the atom bomb? What did Japan do for use to reasonable think the atom bomb would be a better idea than sending our military men?
kamikaze and fight to the death mentality brought by the skewing of the Bushido code.
if we didn't use the atom bomb 1 million Americans would have become casualties and we would have had to kill 90% of the people in japan basically wiping out the entire Japanese nation.
that is why the bomb was used and why it is justified.
-
Are you all saying Japan was willing to fight with every last man, woman and child, therefore creating the possibility of millions dead or injured on both sides of the war, and that this was the biggest reason for using the atom bomb?
Read "The Last Great Victory" by Stanley Weintraub. Kermit, the civilians would have "bought the propaganda at first". Only a fool would believe otherwise.
But this book is perhaps the best at detailing the last months of WWII in great detail.
-
Are you all saying Japan was willing to fight with every last man, woman and child, therefore creating the possibility of millions dead or injured on both sides of the war, and that this was the biggest reason for using the atom bomb?
yes
they would have fought to the very last man, woman and child.
all non followers would have been executed which would be comparable to nazi germany executing civilians who attemped to help the allies.
and as stated by many people before the Japanese RACE would have been all but eliminated from the face of the earth.
without the bomb we would have annexed japan as the 51st state and probably have gone to war with the soviet union.
-
yes
they would have fought to the very last man, woman and child.
all non followers would have been executed which would be comparable to nazi germany executing civilians who attemped to help the allies.
and as stated by many people before the Japanese RACE would have been all but eliminated from the face of the earth.
without the bomb we would have annexed japan as the 51st state and probably have gone to war with the soviet union.
Wrong. Going to War with the Soviet Union? How? Why? Yalta sealed the Baltic states, Northern Hokkaido Islands and Poland's fate.
Your post is the first that I have EVER heard of the "Japanese Demographic being all but eliminated from the face of the Earth".
Bottom line, read more please. Don't foist off the inaccurate words of others and pass it on. But choose appropriate books, starting with the book I mentioned in my previous post. I read it when I was 15 (21 years ago).
-
I agree on using the atom bomb on Japan. The moment they said every man, woman and child would fight, they became soldiers, voluntary or not!
I say if a country is suicidal like that, then the Atom bomb and the fire bombing of the cities was legit. Those cities were no longer filled with civilians, but with soldiers willing to fight and die for their country!
-
Are you all saying Japan was willing to fight with every last man, woman and child, therefore creating the possibility of millions dead or injured on both sides of the war, and that this was the biggest reason for using the atom bomb?
Do yourself a favor and educate yourself. Read about the Battle for Saipan and then ask yourself if the Japanese civilians were willing to die than be captured.
ack-ack
-
I agree on using the atom bomb on Japan. The moment they said every man, woman and child would fight, they became soldiers, voluntary or not!
I say if a country is suicidal like that, then the Atom bomb and the fire bombing of the cities was legit. Those cities were no longer filled with civilians, but with soldiers willing to fight and die for their country!
The Civilian Population was more than adequate. But I guess cracks me up, are the one's who always scoff at "Fat Man" and Little Boy", forget about the Incendiary Raids that killed a lot more civilians than the Atom Bombs and the "fallout effects".
It's sometimes easy to mention one side and not look at the big picture. But the bottom line is that the Civilians were starting to "no longer buy into the propaganda of their Military Leaders". So, the initial Invasion of Japan would have been devastating to both sides.
-
The Civilian Population was more than adequate. But I guess cracks me up, are the one's who always scoff at "Fat Man" and Little Boy", forget about the Incendiary Raids that killed a lot more civilians than the Atom Bombs and the "fallout effects".
It's sometimes easy to mention one side and not look at the big picture. But the bottom line is that the Civilians were starting to "no longer buy into the propaganda of their Military Leaders". So, the initial Invasion of Japan would have been devastating to both sides.
Indeed....some of the fire bombing death tolls in Germany or Japan were estimated to be way above both atomic bombs.
-
Indeed....some of the fire bombing death tolls in Germany or Japan were estimated to be way above both atomic bombs.
So, did we firebomb Japanese civilians or soldiers?
-
Yep, the Japanese plan was to use the civilian population, (woman children and old ppl) in massed human wave attacks, armed with "idiot sticks"... While the military forces fought in their more conventional, meat grinder style... "Idiot sticks" are what my Pop called the sharpened Bamboo Staves, that were a common weapon of last resort on Okinawa...
On the US side, we were stockpiling TON quantities of Mustard and Phosgene gas, to be used during and after the landings... ON THE WHOLE POPULATION!!! Mortar shells, Arty shells, Bombs, arial spraying equipment,
EVERYTHING!!!!
My pop told me about the MASSIVE celebrations on the hospital ship, after the Abomb was dropped, because all the wounded marines realized that they were going to LIVE!!! (He was wounded at Shuri Castle, and knew firsthand what was coming).. He would have been in the first wave of LVT's for the Fourth time in the war...
He was a Gunny at the time, because of the death of his senior NCO's... He was wounded 4 times during the war, Bougainville, Saipan, twice on Oki.. He always said, "A guys luck only lasts so long!!!"
Because of the Atom Bomb, I was BORN, and my 2 Sons, and my 2 Grandkids.. And, My sisters and Brothers, and their kids and Grandkids... Thats 3 generations, of Americans, and Japanese, that are alive, because of the 2 A bomb blasts...
RC
-
By definition.......civilians.
However, given an invasion they would have become enemy combatants or soldiers without a doubt.
The thought was that because the war industry located in these cities they became strategic targets, hence, bombable.
-
I agree on using the atom bomb on Japan. The moment they said every man, woman and child would fight, they became soldiers, voluntary or not!
I say if a country is suicidal like that, then the Atom bomb and the fire bombing of the cities was legit. Those cities were no longer filled with civilians, but with soldiers willing to fight and die for their country!
Tokyo was filled with civilians during the fire bombing campaign, more civilians died during that time than in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. The fire bombings weren't meant to terrorize the civilian population though, the main purpose was to wipe out Japanese war making production facilities. A lot of the war production was done in cottage industy facilities, and a lot of these plants were dispersed in civilian populated areas of Tokyo. The goal of the fire bombing campaign was to wipe out these cottage industries and at the same time wipe out those that work in these factories, not to terrorize the civilian population like a lot claim.
ack-ack
-
they would have fought to the very last man, woman and child.
all non followers would have been executed which would be comparable to nazi germany executing civilians who attemped to help the allies.
and as stated by many people before the Japanese RACE would have been all but eliminated from the face of the earth.
without the bomb we would have annexed japan as the 51st state and probably have gone to war with the soviet union.
:huh :huh
-
Are you all saying Japan was willing to fight with every last man, woman and child, therefore creating the possibility of millions dead or injured on both sides of the war, and that this was the biggest reason for using the atom bomb?
Kermit, That's a good question. Please read some accounts of the battle for Saipan. Read both US and Japanese accounts. Then reconsider your question, and tell us what you think. I'm sincerely interested in your opinion.
Stalwart :salute
-
I remember being outraged once, during the first Gulf War, because a war protester told me the atomic bombing of Japan was immoral and the US was an immoral country. I knew the bombs ended the war and that this protester couldn't (or wouldn't) see that. Later, I was talking with my boss who was a veteran of the Army Air Corps. I told him about what the protester said, and how angry I was about it... He was quiet for a while, and then said, "Jim, All war is immoral, but the bomb ended that war, and we got to come home."
-
Did the Japanese feel that they should defend their Island, whatever it took, no matter the cost? Did they promise to fight on the beaches, landing grounds, fields, streets and hills? Did they say things such as never surrendering to the enemy?
How dare the government of the Japanese say such things to endanger their people. It was a tragedy and foredoomed to their failure.
-
Did the Japanese feel that they should defend their Island, whatever it took, no matter the cost? Did they promise to fight on the beaches, landing grounds, fields, streets and hills? Did they say things such as never surrendering to the enemy?
How dare the government of the Japanese say such things to endanger their people. It was a tragedy and foredoomed to their failure.
*sigh* I guess some people like to go through life with blinders on.
ack-ack
-
See Rule #4
You make light of the sacrifices other nations made?
Our soldiers died the same way yours did, you arrogant avacado.
Given the arena, I must choose my words carefully.... You are an ignorant banana and I sincerely hope that you get the slap in the face you so desperately deserve.
[edit] It seems the word filter has had its way with my post.... If you even have a brain capable of imagination, Hooch, I'm sure you can figure it out.
-
You make light of the sacrifices other nations made?
Our soldiers died the same way yours did, you arrogant avacado.
Given the arena, I must choose my words carefully.... You are an ignorant banana and I sincerely hope that you get the slap in the face you so desperately deserve.
[edit] It seems the word filter has had its way with my post.... If you even have a brain capable of imagination, Hooch, I'm sure you can figure it out.
+1
-
Are you all saying Japan was willing to fight with every last man, woman and child, therefore creating the possibility of millions dead or injured on both sides of the war, and that this was the biggest reason for using the atom bomb?
Yes and to also shorten the war. An invasion of Japan would have caused the war in the Pacific to last at least 3 more years, probably more. Some US Army studies at the time concluded that it would take at least 5 years to fully pacify the Japanese main islands and at least 3 to 5 more years for any counter-insurgency operations.
If you still doubt the fanaticism of the Japanese soldier, just look at the ones that didn't surrender until years after the war.
- Captain Sakae Ōba, who led his company of 46 men in guerrilla actions against US troops following the Battle of Saipan, did not surrender until December 1, 1945, three months after the war ended.
- Yamakage Kufuku and Matsudo Linsoki, two machine gunners, surrendered on Iwo Jima in January 1949.
- Private 1st Class Yūichi Akatsu continued to fight on Lubang Island from 1944 until surrendering in the Philippine village of Looc on March 1950
- Corporal Shōichi Shimada continued to fight on Lubang Island until he was killed in a clash with Philippine soldiers in May 1954
- Private Bunzō Minagawa held out from 1944 until May 1960 on Guam.
- Sergeant Tadashi Itō, Minagawa's superior, surrendered days later, May 23, 1960 on Guam
- Corporal Shoichi Yokoi, who served under Ito, was captured on Guam in January 1972.
- Private Kinshichi Kozuka held out with Onoda for 28 years until he was killed in a gunbattle with Philippine police in October 1972.
- Lieutenant Hiroo Onoda, who held out from December 1944 until March 1974 on Lubang Island in the Philippines with Akatsu, Shimada and Kozuka, surrendered to his former commanding officer in March 1974.
- Lieutenant Hiroo Onoda, who held out from December 1944 until March 1974 on Lubang Island in the Philippines with Akatsu, Shimada and Kozuka, surrendered to his former commanding officer in March 1974.
- Captain Fumio Nakahira reportedly surrendered in the Philippines in April 1980 [Not confirmed]
ack-ack
-
So, did we firebomb Japanese civilians or soldiers?
You want the truth? Here goes Kermit. Nagasaki and Hiroshima were deliberately left untouched by bombs so they'd know "the effectiveness of both types of Atomic Bombs". Kokura was spared because of cloud cover so Nagasaki was the "secondary target".
Were there more civilians than soldiers? Absolutely. Were some soldiers present in either blast? Absolutely, but my guess is about 5%.
The only thing I had a problem with, was the "classless" of the original post. There's a way to "go about things", but that wasn't right. Especially from a 14 year old kid who hasn't the slightest clue in life yet and won't until about 25. Sadly, someone fed him some of the BS he's already posted.
Kermit, you and I have met in person. So you know "it's all good" and no offense should be taken by any of this. :salute
-
Yes and to also shorten the war. An invasion of Japan would have caused the war in the Pacific to last at least 3 more years, probably more. Some US Army studies at the time concluded that it would take at least 5 years to fully pacify the Japanese main islands and at least 3 to 5 more years for any counter-insurgency operations.
If you still doubt the fanaticism of the Japanese soldier, just look at the ones that didn't surrender until years after the war.
- Captain Sakae Ōba, who led his company of 46 men in guerrilla actions against US troops following the Battle of Saipan, did not surrender until December 1, 1945, three months after the war ended.
- Yamakage Kufuku and Matsudo Linsoki, two machine gunners, surrendered on Iwo Jima in January 1949.
- Private 1st Class Yūichi Akatsu continued to fight on Lubang Island from 1944 until surrendering in the Philippine village of Looc on March 1950
- Corporal Shōichi Shimada continued to fight on Lubang Island until he was killed in a clash with Philippine soldiers in May 1954
- Private Bunzō Minagawa held out from 1944 until May 1960 on Guam.
- Sergeant Tadashi Itō, Minagawa's superior, surrendered days later, May 23, 1960 on Guam
- Corporal Shoichi Yokoi, who served under Ito, was captured on Guam in January 1972.
- Private Kinshichi Kozuka held out with Onoda for 28 years until he was killed in a gunbattle with Philippine police in October 1972.
- Lieutenant Hiroo Onoda, who held out from December 1944 until March 1974 on Lubang Island in the Philippines with Akatsu, Shimada and Kozuka, surrendered to his former commanding officer in March 1974.
- Lieutenant Hiroo Onoda, who held out from December 1944 until March 1974 on Lubang Island in the Philippines with Akatsu, Shimada and Kozuka, surrendered to his former commanding officer in March 1974.
- Captain Fumio Nakahira reportedly surrendered in the Philippines in April 1980 [Not confirmed]
ack-ack
Also, was it Guam or Okinawa where the civilians believed the Japanese propoganda of "the white man intent to kill them"? Which spurned the women to hold their children and jump off of 200ft cliffs. It's been a while since I've read a book on either battle, so I'm rusty. [/list]
-
You make light of the sacrifices other nations made?
Our soldiers died the same way yours did, you arrogant avacado.
Given the arena, I must choose my words carefully.... You are an ignorant banana and I sincerely hope that you get the slap in the face you so desperately deserve.
[edit] It seems the word filter has had its way with my post.... If you even have a brain capable of imagination, Hooch, I'm sure you can figure it out.
ANZAC's (and the Poles) were the "backbone" of the 8th Army. Reading "Eighth Army" by Robin Neillands showed the tenacity of their spirit in the North African Campaign to Italy.
Their advance from El Alamein to Tunisia has to be one of the greatest military logistical feats of all time.
-
ANZAC's (and the Poles) were the "backbone" of the 8th Army. Reading "Eighth Army" by Robin Neillands showed the tenacity of their spirit in the North African Campaign to Italy.
Their advance from El Alamein to Tunisia has to be one of the greatest military logistical feats of all time.
All true Mash :aok, and don't forget the Indians, (from India)!!!
Some tough guys right there!!!
Here a little souvineer of mine, GENUINE ARTICLE TOO!!! Not that Fake crap!!!
(http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv226/RipChord929/GhurkaRegimentalCrest.jpg)
I'm a DOOOFISS, had to draw the thing... Now I have to bleed myself again!!!
I wonder how many left ears, this thing Whopped off
(http://i686.photobucket.com/albums/vv226/RipChord929/GenuineGhurkaKukri.jpg)
-
Masher, non has been taken. <S>
Xasthur, your country men have given much in WWII and in also at Gallipoli in WWI. Brave men indeed.
-
It was Marpi Point on Saipan, My dad witnessed it!!! I went there myself when I was passing thru...
RC
-
Masher, non has been taken. <S>
Xasthur, your country men have given much in WWII and in also at Gallipoli in WWI. Brave men indeed.
Indeed. Also, it was not my intention to diminish the achievements and sacrifices of America...
Only to quash the ignorance of the cheerleaders who do not have the brain power to see past their own flag.
:salute
-
It was Marpi Point on Saipan, My dad witnessed it!!! I went there myself when I was passing thru...
RC
You might enjoy this read then.
Interview with Guy Gabaldon (http://www.wtj.com/articles/gabaldon/)
ack-ack
-
I'm in and out of people's homes every day working on PC's. One of my customer's was going through her mother's albums and had this out on the desk. This is what she wrote. Very simple and to the point.
(http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/9673/vjday.jpg)
-
Where I live, there are plenty of people who will yell in your face that the USA is evil and that we are the only country that ever nuked an enemy... These people have no perspective. Thank God we got the bomb before the Germans did, and thank God our leadership had the will to use it and save the lives of our fathers and grandfathers instead of invading the Japanese home islands.
No chit.
Why did we use the atom bomb? What did Japan do for use to reasonable think the atom bomb would be a better idea than sending our military men?
Kermit, as much as i respect your WWII knowledge, don't you realize our incendiaries over all of their cities, and an amphibious assault on their mainland would have only been met w/ the same result + many more deaths on both sides?
:salute for the decision to drop little boy. I'm glad we didn't have a negotiator in office with the people that attacked Pearl Harbor for that decision.
Just think of what was in store if a full on invasion had to have taken place.
The invasion plans are fascinating.
-
I don't look upon VJ Day with much joy, however I probably would of lost both of my grandfathers during the invasion. I feel the day should be looked upon as another milestone in the history of this great nation and in the history of the world. It signaled the end of an era and the start of a new one where people of all nations had to live in fear of Armageddon caused by fellow humans. I also wish the Soviet Union could of been handled differently both during WWII and afterwards, averting the Cold War altogether.
Some good came out of the war as well, like the advances in science, but the human cost was too high on all sides for military and civilians alike.
I was very surprised to see the History Channel posting 'Happy VJ Day' above their logo yesterday, the few people that have no idea what it means could of benefitted from the information but more than likely they wouldn't be watching the History Channel anyway.
-
I don't look upon VJ Day with much joy, however I probably would of lost both of my grandfathers during the invasion. I feel the day should be looked upon as another milestone in the history of this great nation and in the history of the world. It signaled the end of an era and the start of a new one where people of all nations had to live in fear of Armageddon caused by fellow humans. I also wish the Soviet Union could of been handled differently both during WWII and afterwards, averting the Cold War altogether.
Some good came out of the war as well, like the advances in science, but the human cost was too high on all sides for military and civilians alike.
I was very surprised to see the History Channel posting 'Happy VJ Day' above their logo yesterday, the few people that have no idea what it means could of benefitted from the information but more than likely they wouldn't be watching the History Channel anyway.
That was my initial comment to myself upon just reading the Thread Title.
-
I don't look upon VJ Day with much joy, however I probably would of lost both of my grandfathers during the invasion. I feel the day should be looked upon as another milestone in the history of this great nation and in the history of the world. It signaled the end of an era and the start of a new one where people of all nations had to live in fear of Armageddon caused by fellow humans. I also wish the Soviet Union could of been handled differently both during WWII and afterwards, averting the Cold War altogether.
Some good came out of the war as well, like the advances in science, but the human cost was too high on all sides for military and civilians alike.
I was very surprised to see the History Channel posting 'Happy VJ Day' above their logo yesterday, the few people that have no idea what it means could of benefitted from the information but more than likely they wouldn't be watching the History Channel anyway.
The Cold war was just that. Was our proliferation not a deterent to the great reaches of aggression by the Soviet Union? When were we attacked? I think we can claim victory.
Is it more humane to kill off your enemy completely, or show such force that they give up to survive and adapt?
That question is still alive today. How do you kill off an enemy that strengthens itself with Martyrs?
I say kill them all that already believe this. Kill all the people that train them to believe this. Kill all the people that financially support this training.
Finally, vote out the people that don't understand this is going on.
-
Why did we use the atom bomb? What did Japan do for use to reasonable think the atom bomb would be a better idea than sending our military men?
Kermit should watch this:
http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afterburner_/Jon_Stewart,_War_Criminals_&_The_True_Story_of_the_Atomic _Bombs/1808/ (http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afterburner_/Jon_Stewart,_War_Criminals_&_The_True_Story_of_the_Atomic_Bombs/1808/)
-
Kermit should watch this:
http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afterburner_/Jon_Stewart,_War_Criminals_&_The_True_Story_of_the_Atomic _Bombs/1808/ (http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afterburner_/Jon_Stewart,_War_Criminals_&_The_True_Story_of_the_Atomic_Bombs/1808/)
I know your M.O. You're adding simple ad hominem to this discussion. NO ONE is "doubting the use of the Atomic Bombs". So I guess, maybe take a reading comprehension class in your spare time?
-
Kermit should watch this:
http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afterburner_/Jon_Stewart,_War_Criminals_&_The_True_Story_of_the_Atomic _Bombs/1808/ (http://www.pjtv.com/video/Afterburner_/Jon_Stewart,_War_Criminals_&_The_True_Story_of_the_Atomic_Bombs/1808/)
Good video.
I am in favor of using the bomb on those Japanese cities.
But my original question; Was it wrong of Japan to make their civilians into soldiers by stating that every man, woman and child would defend their island?
-
I know your M.O. You're adding simple ad hominem to this discussion. NO ONE is "doubting the use of the Atomic Bombs". So I guess, maybe take a reading comprehension class in your spare time?
It has been "doubted" many times, and maybe you don't have a life, have the time and like to read through 5 pages of babble, but I don't care to do it. Kermit asked a question, maybe rhetorical, but I think it is an interesting clip to watch regardless for any who don't understand the need was there to use the bomb.
Now, get a life.
-
Good video.
I am in favor of using the bomb on those Japanese cities.
But my original question; Was it wrong of Japan to make their civilians into soldiers by stating that every man, woman and child would defend their island?
Right or wrong? Who cares. They did. We prepared to fight them with that in mind. Luckily it didn't come to that.
-
Good video.
Was it wrong of Japan to make their civilians into soldiers by stating that every man, woman and child would defend their island?
Just about every action the Japanese took during WWII was wrong, and using the whole population to fight war might be justified if your nation is attacked, but in the historical context of WWII, where Japan had been the aggressor, yes, I think it would have been wrong. If a nation has to use it's women and children to fight, it is time to surrender to save lives. Sadly the war was the desire and result of the Japanese military complex, not the citizen population.
-
Now, get a life.
Sorry Parolee, I have one.
-
Sorry Parolee, I have one.
Ohhh, ouch, that really hurts. :rolleyes: At over 14,000 posts, I can see what it is. again :rolleyes:
PS... Star Trek and Comic Book conventions isn't really having a life. :rofl
-
Just about every action the Japanese took during WWII was wrong, and using the whole population to fight war might be justified if your nation is attacked, but in the historical context of WWII, where Japan had been the aggressor, yes, I think it would have been wrong. If a nation has to use it's women and children to fight, it is time to surrender to save lives. Sadly the war was the desire and result of the Japanese military complex, not the citizen population.
You need a little cultural perspective, dago. "Saving Lives" has not been good in-itself for many great civilizations throughout history. For example, the Celts might be the first "barbarians" to be depicted nobly in Greek art, all because the Greeks were highly impressed with the Celtic custom of suicide (after murdering their own wives and children) instead of capture and enslavement. In other words, for many civilizations, life as a conquered nation is not worth living.
Rather than seeing women and children fight in Japan, it's more likely that there would have been mass suicide.
-
You need a little cultural perspective, dago. "Saving Lives" has not been good in-itself for many great civilizations throughout history. For example, the Celts might be the first "barbarians" to be depicted nobly in Greek art, all because the Greeks were highly impressed with the Celtic custom of suicide (after murdering their own wives and children) instead of capture and enslavement. In other words, for many civilizations, life as a conquered nation is not worth living.
Rather than seeing women and children fight in Japan, it's more likely that there would have been mass suicide.
Talk about perspective, you are so far off topic with a discussion about Greek perception of Celts, and Greek art that I find that absolutely irrelevant to the discussion about the Japanese behaviors, and what would constitute a wrong or acceptable practice for the Japanese in defense of homeland. We are talking such entirely different people and cultures, in two wildly separated times as to make your comparison irrelevant.
To simply make an argument that "people are people and they all act the same" is to ignore a lot of history.
Then, you decide your knowledge of the Japanese mindset of the 1940s in a time of war, with what is undoubtedly your very limited knowledge of the propaganda they are exposed to, is enough to make a judgment call on what the Japanese people would do in case of invasion and fighting on their home soil. Amazing.
:rolleyes:
-
It's just an example of cultural difference, dago. If you refrain from interpreting in the most stupid way possible you might just be struck with a thought.
-
It's just an example of cultural difference, dago. If you refrain from interpreting in the most stupid way possible you might just be struck with a thought.
Yep. :rofl
-
Call me stupid. I agree with the people that think the Japanese were off their origami rockers. :aok
-
Call me stupid. I agree with the people that think the Japanese were off their origami rockers. :aok
Absolutely no question.
-
The Cold war was just that. Was our proliferation not a deterent to the great reaches of aggression by the Soviet Union? When were we attacked? I think we can claim victory.
I take it you're not Slavic...
-
Thats 3 generations, of Americans, and Japanese, that are alive, because of the 2 A bomb blasts...
RC
Many historians , like Tsuyoshi Hasegawa have pointed out that atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not decisive, but the Soviet invasion of Manchuria. In operation "August Storm" the Soviets crushed 9 Japanese armies, together 10 times as strong as Japanese forces in Okinawa. In a week they conquered a land area bigger than all the western allies had taken together in previous three years...
-
Where I live, there are plenty of people who will yell in your face that the USA is evil and that we are the only country that ever nuked an enemy... These people have no perspective. Thank God we got the bomb before the Germans did, and thank God our leadership had the will to use it and save the lives of our fathers and grandfathers instead of invading the Japanese home islands.
Don't thank god. Thank those who invented it before the germans, and those that prevented the germans from having it. ;)
-
It's just an example of cultural difference, dago. If you refrain from interpreting in the most stupid way possible you might just be struck with a thought.
Play your little word games, pretend to be some intellectual elite, refuse to accept that comparison of very different cultures is as irrelevant as can be, I have no doubt you are the master of talking much while saying nothing.
In reality I think it is you who is losing context. I have lived is different cultures and understand a little more than you think.
-
Most of the stuff I read about in history makes me think people were off their rockers. :lol It's just important to know why it made sense to them. Sometimes I learn that circumstances or custom made things far more complicated than I had assumed, and I have to rethink my opinion. Sometimes I learn that they really were brutish, and I have no trouble condemning them from my "privileged" perspective. In the case of the Japanese in WW2, there was a lot of brutality and criminality, but fighting to the death and suicide before capture fall into the complicated category for me.
-
Many historians , like Tsuyoshi Hasegawa have pointed out that atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not decisive, but the Soviet invasion of Manchuria. In operation "August Storm" the Soviets crushed 9 Japanese armies, together 10 times as strong as Japanese forces in Okinawa. In a week they conquered a land area bigger than all the western allies had taken together in previous three years...
The soviet union also didnt care about casualties and were facing a slowly degrading japanese army.
In theory they were 10 times as strong as forces on okinawa but they didnt have any of the weapons, armor or supplies that were originally built up on okinawa.
The japanese army in manchuria was also very wrong and totally underestimated the soviet forces and such did not fortify their posistions at all.
The soviets fought like crazed dogs, but they were fighting a dying enemy.
-
Many historians , like Tsuyoshi Hasegawa have pointed out that atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not decisive, but the Soviet invasion of Manchuria. In operation "August Storm" the Soviets crushed 9 Japanese armies, together 10 times as strong as Japanese forces in Okinawa. In a week they conquered a land area bigger than all the western allies had taken together in previous three years...
On economic grounds, Manchuria was worth defending since it had the bulk of usable industry and raw materials outside of Japan and was still under Japanese control in 1945. However, the Japanese forces (Kwantung Army) were far below authorized strength; most of their heavy military equipment and all of their best military units had been transferred to the Pacific front over the previous three years. By 1945, the Kwantung Army contained a large number of raw recruits. As a result, the Kwantung Army had essentially been reduced to a light infantry counter-insurgency force with limited mobility and experience. On paper, the Japanese forces were no match for the highly mobile mechanized Red Army, with its vastly superior tanks, artillery, experience and tactics.
Hurray for the soviets, they defeated a second rate team...
[golf clap]
:rofl
-
Hurray for the soviets, they defeated a second rate team...
[golf clap]
:rofl
:rofl
-
Don't thank god.
God is real in my life.
-
God is real in my life.
Im sure he is, but he didnt invent the nuke
-
Your a day early.
actually vj day happened on the 14th of august according to north american timezones.
In japanese standard time it was on the 15th.
-
Don't thank god. Thank those who invented it before the germans, and those that prevented the germans from having it. ;)
You can thank Hitler himself for that. He never believed in a war that would last long enough to require a nuclear weapon.
The Germans had the ideas but, from what I remember, Hitler saw it as a waste of resources that were better focused on developing more convential weapons.
As I understand it, he held such weapons back in the way he held the Me 262 back as a 'bomber'.
One of my customers was 9 years old and on the eastern side of Germany when the Russians came through. He and a bunch of other kids used to roll debris off roofs onto passing Russian soldiers. He is lucky he wasn't killed on the spot.
He witnessed the lynching of a downed B-17 crew by farmers with pitch-forks and shovels, too.
He is also the most racist person I have ever met and even he is glad that Hitler held back the major weapons so that Germany did not have to suffer the same fate as Japan.