RE: BBC - Hiroshima

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: BBC - Hiroshima

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

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

Page: << < prev 1 2 3 [4]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: BBC - Hiroshima - 8/10/2005 12:27:09 AM

madmickey

Posts: 1336
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 91

RE: BBC - Hiroshima - 8/10/2005 12:38:54 AM

madmickey

Posts: 1336
Joined: 2/11/2004
From: Calgary, Alberta
Status: offline

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.

< Message edited by madmickey -- 8/10/2005 1:09:02 AM >

(in reply to madmickey)

Post #: 92

RE: BBC - Hiroshima - 8/10/2005 6:29:14 AM

Mike Scholl

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline

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".

_____________________________

(in reply to madmickey)

Post #: 93

RE: BBC - Hiroshima - 8/10/2005 1:44:38 PM

Apollo11

Posts: 24082
Joined: 6/7/2001
From: Zagreb, Croatia
Status: offline

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"

_____________________________

Prior Preparation & Planning Prevents Pathetically Poor Performance!

A & B: WitW, WitE, WbtS, GGWaW, GGWaW2-AWD, HttR, CotA, BftB, CF
P: UV, WitP, WitP-AE

(in reply to Mike Scholl)

Post #: 94

RE: BBC - Hiroshima - 8/11/2005 6:28:29 AM

witpqs

Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline

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

(in reply to Apollo11)

Post #: 95

RE: BBC - Hiroshima - 8/11/2005 7:15:57 AM

ilovestrategy

Posts: 3611
Joined: 6/11/2005
From: San Diego
Status: offline

I can't say I blame them.

_____________________________

After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!

(in reply to witpqs)

Post #: 96

RE: BBC - Hiroshima - 8/11/2005 9:31:52 PM

Fafner

Posts: 31
Joined: 6/2/2005
Status: offline

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!

(in reply to ilovestrategy)

Post #: 97

RE: BBC - Hiroshima - 8/11/2005 9:38:54 PM

Fafner

Posts: 31
Joined: 6/2/2005
Status: offline

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.

(in reply to Fafner)

Post #: 98

RE: BBC - Hiroshima - 8/11/2005 9:42:08 PM

Fafner

Posts: 31
Joined: 6/2/2005
Status: offline

woops, typo in earlier post.

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

(in reply to Fafner)

Post #: 99