Turning point of the War.

[Nemisis]

99% sure japan detonated a nuke. Maybe they were building one but never detonated one. I just may talk to my history teacher though...

[Ack-Ack]

99% sure japan detonated a nuke. Maybe they were building one but never detonated one. I just may talk to my history teacher though...

You can be 99% sure that the Japanese exploded an atomic bomb but you'd still be 100% incorrect.  The United States was the first country to detonate an atomic device.  Japan and Germany, while both conducted research into atomic bombs, never got to the point of actually building one.


ack-ack

[Nemisis]

Like I said, maybe I'm wrong. you say I am. But I remember reading that Japan had detonated a nuke with Germanys help (uranium, research, equipment, data, etc). I'll have a talk with my history teacher about our text books then...

[68Hawk]

Yeah, have that talk.

The Japanese did experiment with chemical, and I believe also biological weapons, but they never got far enough with nuclear technology to put it into practice.

[Nemisis]

I can see it now, the japanese invented aids as a biological weapon, and bomb the U.S. the virus fails to have any effect, laying dormant in humans untill it mutates into its current form...

[Ack-Ack]

I can see it now, the japanese invented aids as a biological weapon, and bomb the U.S. the virus fails to have any effect, laying dormant in humans untill it mutates into its current form...

You should read about Unit 731 and the 'research' they did on Chinese civilians and POWs during the war.  What they did was just as terrible as anything the Nazi's did to the Jews. 

ack-ack

[alskahawk]

 Germans were actually farther ahead with a nuke than Japan. Supposedly there was a German sub otw to Japan that was sunk with some nuclear components.

[RufusLeaking]

If one defines "turning point" as the furthest point of advance of the eventual losers, every theater should have one.

El Alemein in North Africa.
Battle of Britain in the West.
Stalingrad in Russia.
The Battle of the Coral Sea in the Pacific.
Gettysburg in the US Civil War.

With the simplified definition, these seem pretty obvious.

I was trying to come up with an example of a weaker aggressor actually winning over a stronger one, i.e. if Japan had won against the US.  I came up blank.  Maybe Japan over Russia, 1905.

Also, I have never heard of Japan detonating a nuclear bomb. 

[RufusLeaking]

If one defines "turning point" as the furthest point of advance of the eventual losers, every theater should have one.

El Alemein in North Africa.
Battle of Britain in the West.
Stalingrad in Russia.
The Battle of the Coral Sea in the Pacific.
Gettysburg in the US Civil War.

With the simplified definition, these seem pretty obvious.

I was trying to come up with an example of a weaker aggressor actually winning over a stronger one, i.e. if Japan had won against the US.  I came up blank.  Maybe Japan over Russia, 1905.

Also, I have never heard of Japan detonating a nuclear bomb. 

[oakranger]

You should read about Unit 731 and the 'research' they did on Chinese civilians and POWs during the war.  What they did was just as terrible as anything the Nazi's did to the Jews. 

ack-ack

Thank you ack-ack, i was trying to think of that unit.  Unit 731 makes Germany experiment look like grade school science class. 

[-tronski-]

I was trying to come up with an example of a weaker aggressor actually winning over a stronger one, i.e. if Japan had won against the US.  I came up blank.  Maybe Japan over Russia, 1905.

Japan in that example was only perceived as weaker, but in fact in 1905 the Japanese were far superior than the Russians (as the results prove). A "weaker" opponent can still land punches and win battles ie. Isandlwana...The Little Big Horn etc but almost in every case, eventually the side with superior forces, logistics and or the capacity to wage war will prevail...exceptions could be The American War of Independence, Afghanistan or the Vietnam conflict

 Tronsky 

[Angus]

USA didn't need the UK to outweigh Japan + Germany.

While it comes to my mind that you must be trolling there, could you explain this a tad better?

[Anaxogoras]

Here you go:

Pearl Harbor WW2 (Pacific)-with the U.S. entry into the war, the tide was turned. Japan could have kicked the U.S. of the Hawaiian Islands if they'd screwed up bad enough, but they couldn't have beaten the U.S. And U.S. forces fought in Africa, and the Western front. Lets face it, the U.S. and England out weighed Japan, AND Germany together. There is almost no way the U.S. could have lost the war unless Germany had continued, and beaten the U.S. to the A-bomb, or if Japan had had built another nuke, and had long range bombers.

Maybe I should have said that the USA didn't need the UK to successfully fulfill its war aims.  If you look at the industrial capacity of the United States vs nearly all other players in WW2, its strategic advantage that is bound to build up over a few years is inexorable.  In comparison the UK was a drop in the bucket.

What bothers me is that directly after this he says "if Japan had built another nuke," and none of us noticed the myth until later.

[Angus]

Your claim is almost too silly to deal with. A point in time would be good, but this is really for another thread.
I'll give you my view though.
-Without the Brits and the French in 1939, the USSR would have had an invasion much earlier.
-With the Brits making peace with Hitler in June 1940, the USSR would have fallen.
-Without the Brits, the USA would never even have entered the European campaign.
-Without the Americans, most of Europe would probably have fallen to the USSR.

All of those were about decisions that were made, so, - sort of- , turnpoints in the war.

[druski85]

In most cases, I think too much emphasis is placed on so-called turning points.  The result of most wars I have studied is a process of initial strategic advantage winning out over whatever tactical variance might have made things interesting at the beginning.

Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win.