Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I see the true "never met anything good about America" crowd has now arrived. Oh well. It was fun while it lasted.

KamikazeAdmiral Matome Ugaki was recalled to Japan in February 1945 and given command of the Fifth Air Fleet on Kyūshū. The Fifth Air Fleet was assigned the task of kamikaze attacks against ships involved in the invasion of Okinawa, Operation Ten-Go, and began training pilots and assembling aircraft for the defense of Kyūshū where the Allies were likely to invade next.

The Japanese defense relied heavily on kamikaze planes. In addition to fighters and bombers, they reassigned almost all of their trainers for the mission, trying to make up in quantity what they lacked in quality. Their army and navy had more than 10,000 aircraft ready for use in July (and would have had somewhat more by October) and were planning to use almost all that could reach the invasion fleets. Ugaki also oversaw building of hundreds of small suicide boats that would also be used to attack any Allied ships that came near the shores of Kyūshū.

Fewer than 2,000 kamikaze planes launched attacks during the Battle of Okinawa, achieving approximately one hit per nine attacks. At Kyūshū, given the more favorable circumstances (such as terrain that reduced the U.S's radar advantage), they hoped to get one for six by overwhelming the U.S. defenses with large numbers of kamikaze attacks in a period of hours. The Japanese estimated that the planes would sink more than 400 ships; since they were training the pilots to target transports rather than carriers and destroyers, the casualties would be disproportionately greater than at Okinawa. One staff study estimated that the kamikazes could destroy a third to a half of the invasion force before its landings.[21]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall

Japanese nuclear program
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_nuclear_weapon_program




Automatically Appended Next Post:

Brushfire wrote:

Your ignorance is showing. American "volunteers" were indeed shooting it out with Japanese pilots in the 30s.

Yeah, the Flying Tigers. "Volunteers" who were recruited by the US State Department to ship over there with obsolete p-40s. It was a ruse, not unlike what the CIA does today. They were not pure-hearted volunteers who joined up fight for Chinas cause like those who went and fought in the Spanish American war, in Finland, or Eagle Squadron in Britain. They were Mercs being paid to shoot down Japanese planes. And I have no problems with that as long as we keep that in mind.

Er P-40s were the best plane we had at the time.

PLEASE, PLEASE tell me how they had 10,000 planes. I specifically remember that Japan had next to no navy, and their airforce was almost as bad, and all they used them for was for Kamikazi Attacks, all of their skilled pilots were dead.

Yes indeed. Please do so. Biplanes, No gas, green pilots who needed to follow a veteran pilot to navigate his way to target.
Fresh meat for experienced Navy pilots as they flew blindly on in formation. Then a curtain of steel from US warships AA guns. Good luck with that.

Here's a hint. Look up a post.

Er P-40s were the best plane we had at the time.

And that Jane's Book of WW2 aircraft fact justifies your point in what way, concerning the so-called altrustic volunteer nature of the Flying Tigers in China?

Ketara wrote:

Inquisitor Lord Bane wrote:You aren't getting it. They KNEW they couldn't win, but were gonna go down fighting by any means possible. War ends when one guy gets scared enough to drop his gun and go home. We scared them, and most of the known world, including the USSR. Two for the price of....well...two

You have the most bizare conception of warfare, and the Japanese people I have ever known. Seriously. I get what you're trying to say, but not only is it illogical, its actually mildly disturbing that someone can have such a distorted view of the world.

EDIT: And any conventional means would have resulted in much more bloodshed. These people were resorting to CANNIBALISM! You can't just starve them out that way, and they still had the ability to support themselves, unless you are talking about firebombing the entire country and a good chunk of Asia along with it

I'm not deliberately trying to be offensive here, but your portrayal of the entire Japanese people as fanatical cannibals, and using that as a reason as to why they were a danger to the US just isn't working. Please. Just leave it there.

I will just reiterate one point to you, in the hope that you will realise why even if every single Japanese person was a stark raving madman who would rip off his own arm to hit an American with it, it made no difference.

This point is that intent to do harm does not equate to capacity to do harm. Every Japanese soldier can be a frothing beserker, if the US remains in control of their supplies, the sea, and the air, there is nothing the Japanese can do to hurt them.

whitedragon wrote:
According to most...a lot.

I don't know. Honestly, I don't. I'm willing to admit when my knowledge in an area is lacking. Whilst I feel I can definitively say the Japanese had lost by that stage, I've heard several conflicting accounts about the state of the government and mood of the people, so I couldn't really comment.

Polonius wrote:
I'm not sure that's the issue. That's a judgment call, based on estimation.

I think the issue is if making they say grandad was proper, especially when they didn't know that would entail.

Extrapolation? I don't quite understand what you're getting at.

Frazzled wrote:

The numbers here are actually a mulltiple higher than I proffered, so yea, it did. I am not arguing its the only thing as the Soviet obliteration of Japanese forces in Manchuria occurred in the same three days. But it was the one two punch that did it.

Quite possibly. Like I said, I wouldn't claim to know enough to say one way or the other.

1. Distorted view? That's the way the Japanese fought, no mercy, and ask for none. They were ready to push to the absolute end. They were brave, but also proud.

2. He did not call the Japanese cannibals. If you were starving, what would you do? If a man is hungry, he will eat.

3. Of course they could harm us. You just said yourself that "Every japanese soldier can become a frothing berserker..." if you were starving me, I would do my best to tear you apart. Just need to grab the biggest rock.

Also, let's not take offense to stereotyping Japan. That's the way the did their thing. Win no matter what. I mean, c'mon, Kamikazes. That in itself proves determination.

Frazzled wrote:
Er P-40s were the best plane we had at the time.

The P-38?

Frazzled wrote:Here's a hint. Look up a post.

An uncited fact from wikipedia?

It really is true, you only question things that you don't agree with.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Kasrkai wrote:
3. Of course they could harm us. You just said yourself that "Every japanese soldier can become a frothing berserker..." if you were starving me, I would do my best to tear you apart. Just need to grab the biggest rock.

And swim the Pacific in order to eat man meat?

Frazzled wrote:Here's a hint. Look up a post.

I did, and you missed my point. Hardly any pilots, or gas. The Germans produced 40,000 planes in 1944, despite all the allied bombing at the time. But most of them sat on the ground to be destroyed, as they did not have enough fuel or pilots for them. In Operation Bodenplatte during the Battle of the Bulge the Germans expended the last of their pilots and fuel in a 800 plane raid that resulted in a an Pyrrhic victory for the Luftewaffe. Aftewards they could only manage to send a handful of planes in the air, while thousands sat grounded.

So if the Germans had that much trouble fielding an air fleet, how much less so could Japan to get the smallest fraction of a 10,000 plane force in the air? A few hundred, maybe. Would the few they got into the air have done some damage?, perhaps. But not enough to make any serious threat to the US Navy. Not unless they could swarm the US fleet with all 10,000 aircraft at once, which wasn't going to happen.

Karon wrote:[Japan was, quite literally, helpless. They were stuck on their one gakky island, and had no way of attacking us in any way.

The atomic bomb was a rushed decision, and was not fully thought through. I remember this back in my senior year of Highschool, when I took AP European History.

How were we any different from Nazi Germany when we bombed Japan? Hitler did it to quickly knock out the U.K., and not force a land invasion (which he had in mind). The only reason he stopped is because the U.K. struck back once, and he withdrawed all planes because he was stunned that they could have possibly striked him (he was...sort of insane).

We did it to quickly knock out Japan and end the war. Its not OK because our side is seen as the "good" side.

You may have attended that class, but if what you are saying about the Blitz is what you learned in that class, then that class was a waste of time.

Brushfire wrote:
So if the Germans had that much trouble fielding an air fleet, how much less so could Japan to get the smallest fraction of a 10,000 plane force in the air? Not many, I'm sure. Would the few they got into the air have done some damage?, perhaps. But not enough to make any serious threat. Not unless they could swarm the US fleet with all 10,000 aircraft at once, which was a fantasy.

There's also the issue of whether or not 10,000 planes should not be considered helpless.

If I have 30 tanks you might consider me powerful, unless you have 30,000.

It's hardly relevant how many planes the Japanese had.

While they were militarily beaten, until they surrendered there were basically three courses of action open to the Allies.

1. Let the Japanese starve to death.
2. Invade, causing and taking massive casualties, damaging infrastructure further, and causing more starvation.
3. Try to bring a quick end to the war with the atom bombs.

The atom bombs brought about the total surrender and collapse of Japanese resistance in a week. It was absolutely the right thing to do in the circumstances.

The fact that everyone used area bombing does not make area bombing right in itself.

dogma wrote:

Brushfire wrote:
So if the Germans had that much trouble fielding an air fleet, how much less so could Japan to get the smallest fraction of a 10,000 plane force in the air? Not many, I'm sure. Would the few they got into the air have done some damage?, perhaps. But not enough to make any serious threat. Not unless they could swarm the US fleet with all 10,000 aircraft at once, which was a fantasy.

There's also the issue of whether or not 10,000 planes should not be considered helpless.

If I have 30 tanks you might consider me powerful, unless you have 30,000.

Yes, but Japans wrinkle is akin to one person having 30,000 guns, and you have only 30, but also have 30 people to shoot them as well, it doesn't matter that the other guy has 30,000 guns, tanks, or planes, 'cause he only shoot 1-2 guns at the same time anyway.And if he does not have enough ammo, those 30,000 guns are just so many paperweights.

Brushfire wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Here's a hint. Look up a post.

I did, and you missed my point. Hardly any pilots, or gas. The Germans produced 40,000 planes in 1944, despite all the allied bombing at the time. But most of them sat on the ground to be destroyed, as they did not have enough fuel or pilots for them. In operation Bodenplatte during the Battle of the Bulge the Germans expended the last of their pilots and fuel in a 800 plane raid that resulted in a an Pyrrhic victory for the Luftewaffe. Aftewards they could only manage to send a handful of planes in the air, while thousands sat grounded.

So if the Germans had that much trouble fielding an air fleet, how much less so could Japan to get the smallest fraction of a 10,000 plane force in the air? Not many, I'm sure. Would the few they got into the air have done some damage?, perhaps. But not enough to make any serious threat to the US Navy. Not unless they could swarm the US fleet with all 10,000 aircraft at once, which wasn't going to happen.

Even with such things as cracking the Nazi codes, those forces tasked with investigating and retrieving Nazi technology and research in the last weeks of the war were constantly finding new technology, weaponry and techniques that were decades in advance of allied technology. Such things were a surprise to Allied Intelligence, much as many of the innovations that actually went in to service were also a surprise. Every month that Germany could stay fighting is a month when yet more potential innovations could be used in the field. And this is WITH Enigma intercepts. Even having broken all of Japan's codes, who are we to say that they could not likewise have concealed any manner of things from us?

Another important task that such retrieval units had was to find evidence of technological or knowledge-sharing with Japan. Potentially any of the innovations found in Germany could have been shared with Japan...and many were. Germany had copious chemical weapons capability and frightening research in new areas (Sarin for example). The German military and Hitler himself showed huge reluctance to deploy chemical weapons, and thus the allies never responded in kind. (Which is why the units tasked with such "looting" were often Chemical Weapons units). Can anyone say that Japan would have not resorted to such methods in a lengthened conflict? They did indeed work on delivery systems which actually reached the continental US. (Balloons surprisingly enough.) They used incendiary weapons which failed to cause a major conflagration, but there was genuine fear that they could have deployed chemical weapons, with potentially devastating effects.

So we can't even say today that Japan was no threat to the USA, and it certainly could not be claimed in 1945, when planners had no access to hindsight or google.

ArbeitsSchu wrote: Even having broken all of Japan's codes, who are we to say that they could not likewise have concealed any manner of things from us?

The same is true of England, France, China, India, and every other country in the world.

Who are we to say that France has not concealed a massive army with which it will conquer the US and enslave all God-fearing Christians?

dogma wrote:

ArbeitsSchu wrote: Even having broken all of Japan's codes, who are we to say that they could not likewise have concealed any manner of things from us?

The same is true of England, France, China, India, and every other country in the world.

Who are we to say that France has not concealed a massive army with which it will conquer the US and enslave all God-fearing Christians?

Maybe thats why France couldn't get into Nato meetings for ages?

Point is that if one aggressor nation with compromised secret communications could hide so much from the allies, why not another aggressor nation with similarly compromised communications?

ArbeitsSchu wrote:

Brushfire wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Here's a hint. Look up a post.

I did, and you missed my point. Hardly any pilots, or gas. The Germans produced 40,000 planes in 1944, despite all the allied bombing at the time. But most of them sat on the ground to be destroyed, as they did not have enough fuel or pilots for them. In operation Bodenplatte during the Battle of the Bulge the Germans expended the last of their pilots and fuel in a 800 plane raid that resulted in a an Pyrrhic victory for the Luftewaffe. Aftewards they could only manage to send a handful of planes in the air, while thousands sat grounded.

So if the Germans had that much trouble fielding an air fleet, how much less so could Japan to get the smallest fraction of a 10,000 plane force in the air? Not many, I'm sure. Would the few they got into the air have done some damage?, perhaps. But not enough to make any serious threat to the US Navy. Not unless they could swarm the US fleet with all 10,000 aircraft at once, which wasn't going to happen.

Even with such things as cracking the Nazi codes, those forces tasked with investigating and retrieving Nazi technology and research in the last weeks of the war were constantly finding new technology, weaponry and techniques that were decades in advance of allied technology. Such things were a surprise to Allied Intelligence, much as many of the innovations that actually went in to service were also a surprise. Every month that Germany could stay fighting is a month when yet more potential innovations could be used in the field. And this is WITH Enigma intercepts. Even having broken all of Japan's codes, who are we to say that they could not likewise have concealed any manner of things from us?

Another important task that such retrieval units had was to find evidence of technological or knowledge-sharing with Japan. Potentially any of the innovations found in Germany could have been shared with Japan...and many were. Germany had copious chemical weapons capability and frightening research in new areas (Sarin for example). The German military and Hitler himself showed huge reluctance to deploy chemical weapons, and thus the allies never responded in kind. (Which is why the units tasked with such "looting" were often Chemical Weapons units). Can anyone say that Japan would have not resorted to such methods in a lengthened conflict? They did indeed work on delivery systems which actually reached the continental US. (Balloons surprisingly enough.) They used incendiary weapons which failed to cause a major conflagration, but there was genuine fear that they could have deployed chemical weapons, with potentially devastating effects.

So we can't even say today that Japan was no threat to the USA, and it certainly could not be claimed in 1945, when planners had no access to hindsight or google.

None of the German wonder weapons, short of a nuke, would have changed the results. Too, late, too little, and too sophisticated for the young green operators. The Henkiel VolksJager had a bad habit of falling apart in air. Too many wonderweapons were untested and unreliable in the heat of combat. The Germans scientists were geeks working in a ivory tower with nice ideas, while Germany was going up in flames. Besides, the Germans had no fuel or enough raw materials to build them in any numbers to make a difference against the Soviet hordes.

In the end, the many wonder weapons created by the Germans actually watered down their limited resources with coming up with so many weapon systems. It was counterproductive. The Russians had the right idea. Make a decent tank like a T-34-85, and make a gazillion of them. So what if a Tiger Tank equipped with night vision takes out ten T-34-85's in a row? The other 10 will take out the Tiger.

So what if Me 262 were faster than P-51's? P-51's would just hang out over their airfields and hit them when they landed or took off.
Adolf Galland sweated bullets all the time dealing with this tactic when he flew with the JV 44 squadron.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:
Point is that if one aggressor nation with compromised secret communications could hide so much from the allies, why not another aggressor nation with similarly compromised communications?

Well right, but at that level of suspicion I should be murdering everyone that comes within three feet of me because some guy that came within three feet of another guy murdered the latter.

Brushfire wrote:

ArbeitsSchu wrote:

Brushfire wrote:

Frazzled wrote:Here's a hint. Look up a post.

I did, and you missed my point. Hardly any pilots, or gas. The Germans produced 40,000 planes in 1944, despite all the allied bombing at the time. But most of them sat on the ground to be destroyed, as they did not have enough fuel or pilots for them. In operation Bodenplatte during the Battle of the Bulge the Germans expended the last of their pilots and fuel in a 800 plane raid that resulted in a an Pyrrhic victory for the Luftewaffe. Aftewards they could only manage to send a handful of planes in the air, while thousands sat grounded.

So if the Germans had that much trouble fielding an air fleet, how much less so could Japan to get the smallest fraction of a 10,000 plane force in the air? Not many, I'm sure. Would the few they got into the air have done some damage?, perhaps. But not enough to make any serious threat to the US Navy. Not unless they could swarm the US fleet with all 10,000 aircraft at once, which wasn't going to happen.

Even with such things as cracking the Nazi codes, those forces tasked with investigating and retrieving Nazi technology and research in the last weeks of the war were constantly finding new technology, weaponry and techniques that were decades in advance of allied technology. Such things were a surprise to Allied Intelligence, much as many of the innovations that actually went in to service were also a surprise. Every month that Germany could stay fighting is a month when yet more potential innovations could be used in the field. And this is WITH Enigma intercepts. Even having broken all of Japan's codes, who are we to say that they could not likewise have concealed any manner of things from us?

Another important task that such retrieval units had was to find evidence of technological or knowledge-sharing with Japan. Potentially any of the innovations found in Germany could have been shared with Japan...and many were. Germany had copious chemical weapons capability and frightening research in new areas (Sarin for example). The German military and Hitler himself showed huge reluctance to deploy chemical weapons, and thus the allies never responded in kind. (Which is why the units tasked with such "looting" were often Chemical Weapons units). Can anyone say that Japan would have not resorted to such methods in a lengthened conflict? They did indeed work on delivery systems which actually reached the continental US. (Balloons surprisingly enough.) They used incendiary weapons which failed to cause a major conflagration, but there was genuine fear that they could have deployed chemical weapons, with potentially devastating effects.

So we can't even say today that Japan was no threat to the USA, and it certainly could not be claimed in 1945, when planners had no access to hindsight or google.

None of the German wonder weapons, short of a nuke, would have changed the results. Too, late, too little, and too sophisticated for the young green operators. The Henkiel VolksJager had a bad habit of falling apart in air. Too many wonderweapons were untested and unreliable in the heat of combat. The Germans scientists were geeks working in a ivory tower with nice ideas, while Germany was going up in flames. Besides, the Germans had no fuel or enough raw materials to build them in any numbers to make a difference against the Soviet hordes.

In the end, the many wonder weapons created by the Germans actually watered down their limited resources with coming up with so many weapon systems. It was counterproductive. The Russians had the right idea. Make a decent tank like a T-34-85, and make a gazillion of them. So what if a Tiger Tank equipped with night vision takes out ten T-34-85's in a row? The other 10 will take out the Tiger.

Because it takes loads of training to load a shell with a different coloured band around the tip into a 10.5cm gun? As opposed to the shells you were firing five minutes before? Not every "wonder-weapon" needs to be sophisticated to be potentially devastating, or even hard to use...exactly like the T-34 in fact. A peasants tractor with angled armour..its about as simple as it gets, and a wonder-weapon when it showed up. What Germany lacked in many cases was the will to use some of their most potentially devastating weapons, or the acumen to use them properly. If they hit London with a V2 full of hi-explosive, they could have done nailed the Normandy beach-heads with a payload of something far more unpleasant, for example. But thats a bit "Germany '46" and not the point.

The point is that Germany could have and in many cases DID share their ideas and technology with Japan, and allied leaders at the time had no idea what had been shared. Where Germany lacked the will or capacity, Japan may have not. From the viewpoint of an allied leader in 45, Japan is a very real threat, even without a conventional navy.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

ArbeitsSchu wrote:
Point is that if one aggressor nation with compromised secret communications could hide so much from the allies, why not another aggressor nation with similarly compromised communications?

Well right, but at that level of suspicion I should be murdering everyone that comes within three feet of me because some guy that came within three feet of another guy murdered the latter.

I think you're supposed to be suspicious of the enemy when engaged in global war.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Try it this way. Its 1945 and you are in Allied Intelligence. You KNOW that Germany has deployed new and technologically advanced weaponry against you, you KNOW that they are carrying out further research. You KNOW that they have investigated the Chemical options, and you KNOW that they have engaged in Nuclear research. Germany is on the brink of destruction, and you also now KNOW that Germany has been sharing things with Japan, a nation still engaged in war-fighting, with a degree less respect for the rules of war than even the Germans (which is saying something.) You know that the Japanese soldier will generally fight to the death regardless of situation, and has no regard for prisoners or collateral damage, and that his officers will even contemplate a suicide mission with A BATTLESHIP. You DON'T KNOW how much has been shared, or what capabilities Japan still retains, and you KNOW that Japan still retains the greater part of its land-based fighting forces. Are you worried that Japan might still be a threat?

Oh this is a touchy subject but I'm going to say it was wrong.

Not A-bombs,that kills people after wars like minefields and leaves the area uninhabitible for years.Normal bombs are bad enough.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:
I think you're supposed to be suspicious of the enemy when engaged in global war.

Sure, but when you are suspicious to a level which is equivalent to stupidity then you should be told as much, and probably mocked in order to drive the point home.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:
Try it this way. Its 1945 and you are in Allied Intelligence. You KNOW that Germany has deployed new and technologically advanced weaponry against you, you KNOW that they are carrying out further research. You KNOW that they have investigated the Chemical options, and you KNOW that they have engaged in Nuclear research. Germany is on the brink of destruction, and you also now KNOW that Germany has been sharing things with Japan, a nation still engaged in war-fighting, with a degree less respect for the rules of war than even the Germans (which is saying something.) You know that the Japanese soldier will generally fight to the death regardless of situation, and has no regard for prisoners or collateral damage, and that his officers will even contemplate a suicide mission with A BATTLESHIP. You DON'T KNOW how much has been shared, or what capabilities Japan still retains, and you KNOW that Japan still retains the greater part of its land-based fighting forces. Are you worried that Japan might still be a threat?

No. Considering Japan a threat of note (because if things exist, then they are threats) in 1946 is like considering Iran a threat now. Its something idiots do.

That land based fighting force cannot swim across the Pacific Ocean.

dogma wrote:

ArbeitsSchu wrote:
I think you're supposed to be suspicious of the enemy when engaged in global war.

Sure, but when you are suspicious to a level which is equivalent to stupidity then you should be told as much, and probably mocked in order to drive the point home.

ArbeitsSchu wrote:
Try it this way. Its 1945 and you are in Allied Intelligence. You KNOW that Germany has deployed new and technologically advanced weaponry against you, you KNOW that they are carrying out further research. You KNOW that they have investigated the Chemical options, and you KNOW that they have engaged in Nuclear research. Germany is on the brink of destruction, and you also now KNOW that Germany has been sharing things with Japan, a nation still engaged in war-fighting, with a degree less respect for the rules of war than even the Germans (which is saying something.) You know that the Japanese soldier will generally fight to the death regardless of situation, and has no regard for prisoners or collateral damage, and that his officers will even contemplate a suicide mission with A BATTLESHIP. You DON'T KNOW how much has been shared, or what capabilities Japan still retains, and you KNOW that Japan still retains the greater part of its land-based fighting forces. Are you worried that Japan might still be a threat?

No. Considering Japan a threat of note (because if things exist, then they are threats) in 1946 is like considering Iran a threat now. Its something idiots do.

And if I had said 1946 you would be right..them having lost the war by then...

ArbeitsSchu wrote:
And if I had said 1946 you would be right..them having lost the war by then...

Shockingly, the 6 and the 5 are very close together on the keyboard.

Was Hiroshima a civilian city or Military place?

You seem to be missing some very pertinent points that are really very obvious. German had chemical weapons stocks and a suspected nuclear program, and a proven delivery system. These are all facts. Germany had provably shared intelligence with Japan. Also fact. From the viewpoint of the allies In 1944/5 its very easy to see the obvious conclusion to that: Germany may have shared its chemical weapons/nuclear research/proven delivery systems with Japan. Thus Japan is a threat. I'm not talking about with hindsight or information found since then. I'm talking about at the time, with information known at the time.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

LunaHound wrote:Was Hiroshima a civilian city or Military place?

Its a city. By definition its a civilian, filled with civilians. A city may contain targets of military interest, but in and of itself is not a "military" place.

A total of 200,000 people, if I'm remembering correctly, were killed due to the use of atomic weapons in WW II. By the time that we used fat man and little boy, we had already killed 500,000 civilians (and plenty of property) in Tokyo through conventional and incendiary bombing methods. Our outlook suggested that this would be necessary for most large cities.

Additionally, if we had not dropped said bombs, we would have had to invade the Japanese mainland. we expected to lose at least 250,000 American lives (that's not counting Japanese casualties) in the initial invasion of Japan, with around 200,000 more (once again, only American) deaths throughout. It was most likely that Japanese citizens would fight back and aid the military, as was the culture at the time, meaning more civilian casualties as well.

So all in all, it was the lesser two evils that we chose when we dropped the fission bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima. Here's to hoping that we never have to use them ever again.

Also, Russia would have joined in the fight. Did we really want to have a Berlin- style situation in Tokyo?

I think it might been for nothing as Japan surrendered 6 days after the nukes felll because Russia was preparing Invade the north and was about to deploy 1.5 million troops on the North Island.

The Japanese knowing that if Russia manage to capture Japan mean't an end to thier way of life while if they sided with the Allies thier contry would stay much the same.

So in a sence the Nukes were for nothing although it may have helped with thier surrender it might have done more damage then good.

Its a city. By definition its a civilian, filled with civilians. A city may contain targets of military interest, but in and of itself is not a "military" place.

In that case , i vote for Bad Idea.

Desperate or not , killing civilians is no better than terrorist doing 9-11

It boggles the mind that people can ever defend specific targetting of civilians as a humanitarian move.

Unlike the European front, the war in the East was heavily based on race issues. Would the US have ever used Nukes on Germany, even before D-Day? No.

Why is Dresden condemned as a war crime, but the annhilation of two cities in Japan is supported? Take a guess.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Do_I_Not_Like_It posted a ripping article on page 3 BTW.

Yes, it was necessary and resulted in less casualties than the expected casualties for the other proposed methods.

The bombings would use normal bombs first to destroy the buildings which were made out of wood and other nice bits of flammable materials, this bombing created kindling which was easier to ignite when fire bombs were used afterwards.

The government also toyed around with using bats with small napalm filled explosives. The bats would be knocked out with a gas and have a small explosive attached to them. The explosive would be attached to a metal tray and several metal trays would be attached to each other with a metal cover going over it. The bombs would've been dropped during the daylight and the trays would fall apart until a string that tied each tray together stopped them from falling apart(like an accordian) and the sudden stop would've been enough to wake the bats who would then fly off to find shelter from the sunlight. When the bats flew off of the trays another string pulled from the xplosive and started a timer. After the bats found a nice dark hiding spot(like under a roof or in an attic) the napalm bombs would go off.

An all out invasion would've been far worse as we would've had to taken all of Japan inch by inch. Couple that with the propaganda the Japanese were giving to its citizens and you have Japanese and American soldiers dyeing along with Japanese citizens comitting suicide if the area was captured by the Americans.

Emperors Faithful wrote:It boggles the mind that people can ever defend specific targetting of civilians as a humanitarian move.

Unlike the European front, the war in the East was heavily based on race issues. Would the US have ever used Nukes on Germany, even before D-Day? No.

Why is Dresden condemned as a war crime, but the annhilation of two cities in Japan is supported? Take a guess.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Do_I_Not_Like_It posted a ripping article on page 3 BTW.

Before their abrupt surrender, Germany was our main nuclear target. It was a horrible thing to do, but as I previously showed, it was the lesser of two evils. Many civilians died, but many, many more would have died in the other option.

Also, Hiroshima and Nagasaki at least had some military assets in them, which is why they were on our nuclear hit list.