RE: BBC - Hiroshima (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945



Message

madmickey -> RE: BBC - Hiroshima (8/10/2005 12:27:09 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl


quote:

ORIGINAL: madmickey

. Where would you place your air cover for your invasion fleet to prevent the thousands of kamikazes? If the US with all its naval air arms heaviled AA ships and experience in amphibious operation had so much problems with kamikazes at Okinawa what do you think the USSR would have face?



Wouldn't need any. The Kamikazes would have all trashed themselves against the Americans. That's when the Russians would make their move. Joe Stalin was an inhuman monster..., but he wasn't stupid.
Let the Allies pull the teeth of the Japanese defense, then make your move is the way I see it.

I thought we were debating relative importance of USSR involvement versus the atomic bombing in victory over Japan. Now you are giving the Soviets a similar role to Italy declaration of war against France in 1940.



madmickey -> RE: BBC - Hiroshima (8/10/2005 12:38:54 AM)

On the BBC "documentary" I wish they had realized that Uranium (Hiroshima) bomb type was not tested in New Mexico, it was the Plutonium bomb which used a much different detonating mechanism and was more powerful. I could also do with the dramatization. The actor playing Tibbet made him look ready to erupt at any second.
On a much bigger point, not much discussion was given to suffering of non-Japanese Asian due to Japanese rule. A fast end of the war saved hundreds of thousands per month.



Mike Scholl -> RE: BBC - Hiroshima (8/10/2005 6:29:14 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: madmickey
I thought we were debating relative importance of USSR involvement versus the atomic bombing in victory over Japan. Now you are giving the Soviets a similar role to Italy declaration of war against France in 1940.


YES, we were. And without the A-Bomb, we'd have had to launch "Coronet" and sucked up all those suicidal attack plans the Japs were working on. Which would leave Hokaido pretty much open to a Soviet move through the back door. The point is that once they were "in", there was no way to keep them "out" of the Post-War Occupation. And I don't think even the Japanese would call that "a good thing".



Apollo11 -> RE: BBC - Hiroshima (8/10/2005 1:44:38 PM)

Hi all,

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

YES, we were. And without the A-Bomb, we'd have had to launch "Coronet" and sucked up all those suicidal attack plans the Japs were working on. Which would leave Hokaido pretty much open to a Soviet move through the back door. The point is that once they were "in", there was no way to keep them "out" of the Post-War Occupation. And I don't think even the Japanese would call that "a good thing".


Russians never wanted to invade Japan home islands... what they wanted they took (i.e. they wanted Japanese posessions on the continent)...

BTW, with what would Russian invade Japanese home islands (their situation was even more bad ship vise than German in 1940 facing England over the channel)?


Leo "Apollo11"



witpqs -> RE: BBC - Hiroshima (8/11/2005 6:28:29 AM)

Soviets demanded to participate in the occupation of Japan. MacArthur & Truman turned them down cold.



ilovestrategy -> RE: BBC - Hiroshima (8/11/2005 7:15:57 AM)

I can't say I blame them.



Fafner -> RE: BBC - Hiroshima (8/11/2005 9:31:52 PM)

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl

YES, we were. And without the A-Bomb, we'd have had to launch "Coronet" and sucked up all those suicidal attack plans the Japs were working on. Which would leave Hokaido pretty much open to a Soviet move through the back door. The point is that once they were "in", there was no way to keep them "out" of the Post-War Occupation. And I don't think even the Japanese would call that "a good thing".



I believe Richard Franks convincingly argues that had the A-Bomb not been used, Admiral King would have "vetoed" Olympic (and by implication Coronet) given the massive Japanese military buildup on Kyushu.

US would then have just continued the next step in their strategic bombing campaign i.e. destroying the rest of Japan's railroad/road infrastructure, which would have lead to the Japanese being unable to distribute what limited rice they had (US exported 700+ tons of grain to Japan soon after their surrender), which would have lead to mass famine and the deaths of millions, if not tens of millions of Japanese. Note: there might have been a famine in Korea too given the Japanese had stolen 20-25% of their already limited rice harvest.

So, plenty of Kamizakees left for Uncle Joe had he tried to invade Hokkaido!



Fafner -> RE: BBC - Hiroshima (8/11/2005 9:38:54 PM)

Also, given Russia's very very very very limited amphibious capabilities, you would think Russians would invade Japan (if they even really seriously considered it) using the shortest, easiest route. Given the shortest point between mainland Asia and Japan is through Korea i.e. the Korean Straight (sometimes known as Tsushima Straight [;)]) which Stalin had all the reason to believe would be his shortly, one would assume he'd be invading Japan through Honshu, not Hokkaido.

Pure speculation on my part.




Fafner -> RE: BBC - Hiroshima (8/11/2005 9:42:08 PM)

woops, typo in earlier post.

700K+ tons of grain, McAurthur released around 80K tons immediately and another 600K+ tons came soonafter "fact finding."




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.65625