PDA

View Full Version : Remember Pearl Harbor


Bishadi
7th December 2010, 06:24 AM
December 7, 1941
Never forget.

http://webrevolutionary.com/price/img-large/wwii-remember-pearl-harbor-repro-2-1-4-pinback-button_220536472939.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Infamy-address-1.gif





That line item to congress about America and Japanese were at peace prior to Dec 7 1941 is bull.

Look up the Hell's Angels and the Flying Tigers. The USA had been kicking the butts of Japanese planes for almost 5 years in china, before japan retaliated (pearl harbor)


The majority of americans do no know, the japanese did not randomly attack.

it is one of the nasties of how our government works; lack of responsibility!

I will always remember pearl harbor as the day our government declared war on an enemy that 'we the people' created. (kind of like how 'we the people' created Osama bin laden)

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 06:29 AM
Pearl Harbor Attack Hearings (http://ibiblio.org/pha/pha)

twinstead
7th December 2010, 06:32 AM
So what was Japan retaliating against when they invaded China and began brutalizing them?

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 06:32 AM
That line item to congress about America and Japanese were at peace prior to Dec 7 1941 is bull.
There was no declared war prior to that date.
Look up the Hell's Angels and the Flying Tigers. The USA had been kicking the butts of Japanese planes for almost 5 years in china, before japan retaliated (pearl harbor)
When did the AVG go into operation? Google it.
The majority of americans do no know, the japanese did not randomly attack.
Nope, they thought those six carriers were just wandering around and bumped into Hawaii and Nagumo said, "Hey! I've got an idea."

it is one of the nasties of how our government works; lack of responsibility!

I will always remember pearl harbor as the day our government declared war on an enemy that 'we the people' created. (kind of like how 'we the people' created Osama bin laden)
Japan was intent on creating a Japanese Empire in East Asia while the rest of the world was occupied with the Great Depression and fascism. The invasion of Manchuria in 1932 started the ball rolling.

dtugg
7th December 2010, 06:35 AM
The Flying Tigers didn't go into combat until a couple weeks after Pearl Harbor. You fail, troll.

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 06:36 AM
The Flying Tigers didn't go into combat until a couple weeks after Pearl Harbor. You fail, troll.

And the Hell's Angels, 303rd Bombing Group, was stationed in England. Double fail.

TubbaBlubba
7th December 2010, 06:40 AM
All hail Emperor Hirohito!

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 06:42 AM
All hail Emperor Hirohito!

He's "Showa" now.

dtugg
7th December 2010, 06:44 AM
And the Hell's Angels, 303rd Bombing Group, was stationed in England. Double fail.

Well, Hell's Angels was also the name of a squadron within the Flying Tigers.

TubbaBlubba
7th December 2010, 06:44 AM
He's "Showa" now.

Yeah, but I'm not a Shintoist so it's okay.

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 06:49 AM
Well, Hell's Angels was also the name of a squadron within the Flying Tigers.

So he was just being redundant. I should have allowed for that, considering.

Skwinty
7th December 2010, 06:51 AM
That line item to congress about America and Japanese were at peace prior to Dec 7 1941 is bull.

Look up the Hell's Angels and the Flying Tigers. The USA had been kicking the butts of Japanese planes for almost 5 years in china, before japan retaliated (pearl harbor)


The majority of americans do no know, the japanese did not randomly attack.

it is one of the nasties of how our government works; lack of responsibility!

I will always remember pearl harbor as the day our government declared war on an enemy that 'we the people' created. (kind of like how 'we the people' created Osama bin laden)


WTF: Why don't you start on the Alamo next...:rolleyes:

caniswalensis
7th December 2010, 06:55 AM
Yeah, trying to paint Imperial Japan as having the moral high ground in WWII is completely laughable.

Guys, let's turn this thread around and remember Pearl Harbor for the right reasons. Remember Pearl Harbor for the brave service & sacrifice rendered by those who fought & died there.

If you don't know much about what went on there, I encourage you to do a little reading on the subject today. The events are fascinating, and the stories of personal heroism are quite inspiring.

It wouldn't hurt to give a thought to the Japanese servicemen who died on that day either. Caught up in a time and place that made them our enemies, many served with great courage and a devotion to duty that led them to make the ultimate sacrifice.

Remember Pearl harbor. Remember it for the heroism, the personal sacrifice, and that it was a pivotal event in world history. Dec. 7th, 1941, the day a sleeping giant was awakened.

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 06:57 AM
The Flying Tigers didn't go into combat until a couple weeks after Pearl Harbor. You fail, troll.

Gen. Claire Chennault


Read kid!

He retired for one purpose!

And it was 1937.


ie...... few actually care to comprehend just how rude history is to reality and apparently you are another victim.

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 07:01 AM
There was no declared war prior to that date.

so what.......

covert is covert and if americans are getting paid to provide training and weapons, then the business and people had a reason to be there in china (in 1937)

When did the AVG go into operation? Google it. irrelevant

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 07:03 AM
Gen. Claire Chennault


Read kid!

He retired for one purpose!

And it was 1937.


ie...... few actually care to comprehend just how rude history is to reality and apparently you are another victim.



this is basic wiki



Chennault arrived in China on June 1937, after retiring from the United States Army Air Corps with the rank of captain. He had a three-month contract at a salary of $1,000 per month, with the mission of making a survey of the Chinese Air Force. Soong May-ling, or "Madame Chiang" as she was known to Americans, was in charge of the Aeronautical Commission and thus became Chennault's immediate supervisor. Upon the outbreak of the Second Sino-Japanese War that August, Chennault became Chiang Kai-shek's chief air adviser, helping to train Chinese Air Force bomber and fighter pilots, sometimes flying scouting missions in an export Curtiss H-75 fighter, and organizing the "International Squadron" of mercenary pilots

dtugg
7th December 2010, 07:05 AM
Gen. Claire Chennault


Read kid!

He retired for one purpose!

And it was 1937.


ie...... few actually care to comprehend just how rude history is to reality and apparently you are another victim.

I know who he is. Yes he retired from the Army in 1937 (as a Captain). The Flying Tigers still did not see any action until after Pearl Harbor.

Spindrift
7th December 2010, 07:06 AM
December 7, 1941
Never forget.

http://webrevolutionary.com/price/img-large/wwii-remember-pearl-harbor-repro-2-1-4-pinback-button_220536472939.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Infamy-address-1.gif





That line item to congress about America and Japanese were at peace prior to Dec 7 1941 is bull.

Look up the Hell's Angels and the Flying Tigers. The USA had been kicking the butts of Japanese planes for almost 5 years in china, before japan retaliated (pearl harbor)


The majority of americans do no know, the japanese did not randomly attack.

it is one of the nasties of how our government works; lack of responsibility!

I will always remember pearl harbor as the day our government declared war on an enemy that 'we the people' created. (kind of like how 'we the people' created Osama bin laden)

Of course the Japanese did not randomly attack. The USA was a stumbling block in their plan to take over the Pacific and they hoped they would be able to take the USA out for long enough for them to consolidate their conquered lands.

Japan had just spent the 1930's invading China, Manchuria and Korea and then subjugating those people to unspeakable atrocities, but 'we the people' created them?

BTW: You do know the Japanese declared war on the USA first.

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 07:08 AM
so what.......

covert is covert and if americans are getting paid to provide training and weapons, then the business and people had a reason to be there in china (in 1937)
irrelevant

Irrelevant is totally correct and makes me wonder why you even started this thread.

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 07:10 AM
This needs to be in Conspiracy Theories so I can bust a cap on this nonsense.

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 07:11 AM
I know who he is. Yes he retired from the Army in 1937 (as a Captain). The Flying Tigers still did not see any action until after Pearl Harbor.



perhaps OFFICIALLY

but the US was kicking japanese butts well before ww2 even started.

that be the facts few ever knew.

ie.... most of all chinese air defense was US, their planes, personnel and tactics.

dtugg
7th December 2010, 07:11 AM
this is basic wiki



Chennault arrived in China on June 1937, after retiring from the United States Army Air Corps with the rank of captain. He had a three-month contract at a salary of $1,000 per month, with the mission of making a survey of the Chinese Air Force. Soong May-ling, or "Madame Chiang" as she was known to Americans, was in charge of the Aeronautical Commission and thus became Chennault's immediate supervisor. Upon the outbreak of the Second Sino-Japanese War that August, Chennault became Chiang Kai-shek's chief air adviser, helping to train Chinese Air Force bomber and fighter pilots, sometimes flying scouting missions in an export Curtiss H-75 fighter, and organizing the "International Squadron" of mercenary pilots

Since we are quoting Wikipedia now, from the same article on Chennault:

Immediately following the Japanese air Attack on Pearl Harbor (Sunday morning, December 7, 1941), the first news reports released to the public pertaining to Claire Chennault's war exploits occurred on December 20, 1941 when senior Chinese officials in Chungking that Saturday evening released his name to United Press International reporters to commemorate the first aerial attack made by the international air force called the American Volunteer Group (AVG).[13]

You fail.

Cuddles
7th December 2010, 07:14 AM
WTF: Why don't you start on the Alamo next...:rolleyes:

The Japanese invasion of the Alamo was perfectly justified because they were being attacked by tigers. This only happened because Osama bin Laden's policies as president of the USA prevented biker gangs from doing it themselves.

I will always remember pearl harbor as the day our government declared war on an enemy that 'we the people' created. (kind of like how 'we the people' created Osama bin laden)

Our? We? Didn't you say you're Polish?

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 07:15 AM
Of course the Japanese did not randomly attack.

that is the point of the thread.

remembering the truth, not that the american label was just innocent and attacked for doing nothing.



Japan had just spent the 1930's invading China, Manchuria and Korea and then subjugating those people to unspeakable atrocities, but 'we the people' created them? no.......

'we the people' gave them a target (pearl harbor) because of kicking their butts in them lands they were trying to conquer

BTW: You do know the Japanese declared war on the USA first.

sure............ because the US militia was not recognized by congress ('we the people')

but be certain, americans were killing japanese well before the japanese declared war (or even hitler declared war).

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 07:18 AM
Since we are quoting Wikipedia now, from the same article on Chennault:



You fail.



Sorry................... i did not fail, you have.


Ie..... you are observing the corrected (politically correct) version.


There are books on how grateful the chinese have always been for americans protecting them well before ww2.

You just dont know anything about it.

dtugg
7th December 2010, 07:19 AM
perhaps OFFICIALLY

but the US was kicking japanese butts well before ww2 even started.

Nope.

that be the facts few ever knew.

Because they're are not facts. They are lies.

ie.... most of all chinese air defense was US, their planes, personnel and tactics.

Nope.

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 07:21 AM
but be certain, americans were killing japanese well before the japanese declared war (or even hitler declared war).

They invaded China, killing, raping, looting. We found that to be a problem, for some reason. You don't, obviously. And remember, Japanese killed Americans before Americans killed Japanese. Of course, you've never heard of USS Panay, have you?

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 07:22 AM
Nope.



Because they're are not facts. They are lies.



Nope.

denial comes from many

i am not concerned with your lack of material information. If you dont want the truth, then i am not of care to make you read it.

You are reminding me of a religious wingnut; all the material in the world to actually do your own homework but not willing because it may ruin your whole scope of what you believe.

dtugg
7th December 2010, 07:22 AM
Sorry................... i did not fail, you have.


Ie..... you are observing the corrected (politically correct) version.


There are books on how grateful the chinese have always been for americans protecting them well before ww2.

You just dont know anything about it.

Which books are these? The ones in your imagination?

caniswalensis
7th December 2010, 07:22 AM
Here are some images in remembrance of the day that I hope people will enjoy...http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/Morning-Thunder-by-Robert-T.jpg

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/remember_pearl_harbor.jpg

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/h72273k.jpg

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/24-pearl-harbor-memorial-hawaii-9-8-2001.jpg



This is a truly inspiring article about the veterans of Pearl Harbor.
http://www.pacifichistoricparks.org/blog/?p=547#1

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 07:24 AM
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. (http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/myths/)

Spindrift
7th December 2010, 07:31 AM
that is the point of the thread.

remembering the truth, not that the american label was just innocent and attacked for doing nothing.

no.......

'we the people' gave them a target (pearl harbor) because of kicking their butts in them lands they were trying to conquer

sure............ because the US militia was not recognized by congress ('we the people')

but be certain, americans were killing japanese well before the japanese declared war (or even hitler declared war).
Kicking their butts? Please list the incidents prior to Pearl Harbor where this happened.

caniswalensis
7th December 2010, 07:34 AM
Hey Guys, Don't try to argue with this troll. Just ignore him and flood this thread with your own thoughts on Pearl Harbor and its significance.

dtugg
7th December 2010, 07:34 AM
It is actually too bad that the US wasn't killing Japanese before Pearl Harbor. Because they needed killing.

twinstead
7th December 2010, 07:34 AM
perhaps OFFICIALLY

but the US was kicking japanese butts well before ww2 even started.

that be the facts few ever knew.

ie.... most of all chinese air defense was US, their planes, personnel and tactics.

So, are you suggesting that the US was covertly interfering in China prior to Pearl Harbor and keeping those delightful Imperial Japanese guests from making China a better place? Awful Americans, interfering in The Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere.

If only we would have left well enough alone...

twinstead
7th December 2010, 07:39 AM
Yea, this needs to be in the conspiracy section.

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 09:28 AM
It is actually too bad that the US wasn't killing Japanese before Pearl Harbor. Because they needed killing.

One of my profs at Purdue, a veteran of the Jewish Brigade of the Royal Army, once said, "Killing Nazis was a good idea back then. And it's still a good idea."

KingMerv00
7th December 2010, 09:50 AM
perhaps OFFICIALLY

but the US was kicking japanese butts well before ww2 even started.



How do you know?

TubbaBlubba
7th December 2010, 09:51 AM
How do you know?

By proxy through Guomindang cash? I dunno.

Skwinty
7th December 2010, 09:53 AM
How do you know?

Astral travelling works forwards and backwards in time.

Lobsang Rampa and Bishadi are fellow travellers.:rolleyes:

fuelair
7th December 2010, 11:52 AM
One of my profs at Purdue, a veteran of the Jewish Brigade of the Royal Army, once said, "Killing Nazis was a good idea back then. And it's still a good idea."Smart prof!!:)

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 02:48 PM
Smart prof!!:)

i think the material information provided for this article came from a professor.



Among the American Pilots in China, 1932-*40

James W.M. Allison
Art Chen
Claire L. Chennault
Jimmy Doolittle
E.D. Dorsey
Cecil Folmar
Franklyn G. Gay
Elwyn H. Gibbon
Harvey Greenlaw
L. Roy Holbrook
John H. Jouett
W.C. "Foxy" Kent
M.R. Knight
William C. MacDonald
Christopher Mathewson
John May
George E.A. Reinburg
Harry T. Rowland
Ronald L. Sansbury
John Schweitzer
Vincent Schmidt
Ellis D. Shannon
Robert Short
Sterling Tatum
Thomas Taylor
John "Luke" Williamson
George H. Weigle
Lyman Woelpel


The first American aviator to die in combat against the Japanese, Robert Short, was killed Feb. 22, 1932.



http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/1999/June%201999/0699before.aspx

they have items written like

The greatest influx of American*made aircraft into the CAF came as a result of a 1936 fund drive in celebration of the 50th birthday of Chiang. The fund drive raised almost $1 million; it was used, in part, to acquire 10 Boeing P-26As based at Nanking. These aircraft were divided into two squadrons and were flown by a mix of Chinese and mercenary pilots. The P-26s scored a success Aug. 20, 1937, when they shot down six bombers attacking Nanking.



now i see why few even comprehend this line of a thread....


The combat history of the 14th is described only in pilot diaries. One surviving account records that the 14th was in heavy action during the winter of 1938. On Feb. 27, 1938, Vultee and Northrop bombers attacked Japanese troops and convoys in the vicinity of Loyang on the Yellow River




yep


Robert E. van Patten is assistant clinical professor at Wright State University School of Medicine, Dayton, Ohio. Until 1989, he was chief of the Acceleration Effects Branch of the Biodynamics and Bioengineering Division of Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory. He is a consultant in aerospace medicine, life sciences, and accident reconstruction


accident reconstruction?


i guess finding a causal description is part of his intent as well.


Remember Pearl Harbor! (but now comprehend why they attacked)

I Ratant
7th December 2010, 03:03 PM
The Japanese invasion of the Alamo was perfectly justified because they were being attacked by tigers. This only happened because Osama bin Laden's policies as president of the USA prevented biker gangs from doing it themselves.
Our? We? Didn't you say you're Polish?
.
As a long-time history buff, I appreciate this hither-to-fore unknown contribution to the Mexican war.
I'd been taught that Bush did it.

I Ratant
7th December 2010, 03:07 PM
Here are some images in remembrance of the day that I hope people will enjoy...http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/Morning-Thunder-by-Robert-T.jpg

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/remember_pearl_harbor.jpg

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/h72273k.jpg

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/24-pearl-harbor-memorial-hawaii-9-8-2001.jpg



This is a truly inspiring article about the veterans of Pearl Harbor.
http://www.pacifichistoricparks.org/blog/?p=547#1
.
When the movie "Tora,Tora,Tora" came out in 1967?.. one of our electronic techs was a survivor, and he got tickets to the debut at Grauman's in Hollywood for everyone in the office.
The theater was packed, and routinely noisy during the film from the audience.... and then the attack began.
INSTANT silence in the theater.
Awesome to be there with those guys.

Garrette
7th December 2010, 03:08 PM
i think the material information provided for this article came from a professor.



Among the American Pilots in China, 1932-*40

James W.M. Allison
Art Chen
Claire L. Chennault
Jimmy Doolittle
E.D. Dorsey
Cecil Folmar
Franklyn G. Gay
Elwyn H. Gibbon
Harvey Greenlaw
L. Roy Holbrook
John H. Jouett
W.C. "Foxy" Kent
M.R. Knight
William C. MacDonald
Christopher Mathewson
John May
George E.A. Reinburg
Harry T. Rowland
Ronald L. Sansbury
John Schweitzer
Vincent Schmidt
Ellis D. Shannon
Robert Short
Sterling Tatum
Thomas Taylor
John "Luke" Williamson
George H. Weigle
Lyman Woelpel


The first American aviator to die in combat against the Japanese, Robert Short, was killed Feb. 22, 1932.



http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/1999/June%201999/0699before.aspx

they have items written like

The greatest influx of American*made aircraft into the CAF came as a result of a 1936 fund drive in celebration of the 50th birthday of Chiang. The fund drive raised almost $1 million; it was used, in part, to acquire 10 Boeing P-26As based at Nanking. These aircraft were divided into two squadrons and were flown by a mix of Chinese and mercenary pilots. The P-26s scored a success Aug. 20, 1937, when they shot down six bombers attacking Nanking.



now i see why few even comprehend this line of a thread....


The combat history of the 14th is described only in pilot diaries. One surviving account records that the 14th was in heavy action during the winter of 1938. On Feb. 27, 1938, Vultee and Northrop bombers attacked Japanese troops and convoys in the vicinity of Loyang on the Yellow River




yep


Robert E. van Patten is assistant clinical professor at Wright State University School of Medicine, Dayton, Ohio. Until 1989, he was chief of the Acceleration Effects Branch of the Biodynamics and Bioengineering Division of Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory. He is a consultant in aerospace medicine, life sciences, and accident reconstruction


accident reconstruction?


i guess finding a causal description is part of his intent as well.


Remember Pearl Harbor! (but now comprehend why they attacked)
For others here: This is my last response to Bishadi who isn't worth the time.

For Bishadi, though again you will miscomprehend and ignore as suits you:
Check out what Germany and the Soviet Union provided to China post 1932 and pre 1939.

I Ratant
7th December 2010, 03:08 PM
One of my profs at Purdue, a veteran of the Jewish Brigade of the Royal Army, once said, "Killing Nazis was a good idea back then. And it's still a good idea."
.
Yup!

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 03:34 PM
. Originally Posted by Gawdzilla
One of my profs at Purdue, a veteran of the Jewish Brigade of the Royal Army, once said, "Killing Nazis was a good idea back then. And it's still a good idea.
Yup!



does that mean, we can kill the people who maintain a 1.3 million soul concentration camp (gaza) (and even fire phosphorus weapons upon civilians)?


Would that mean, a nazi is a nazi no matter the religious adherance?

PhantomWolf
7th December 2010, 03:39 PM
Hang on, so your claim is that the Japanese attacked Pearl Habor because a handful of American Mercenaries were helping defend the Chinese against the Japanese invasion?

Gawdzilla
7th December 2010, 03:45 PM
does that mean, we can kill the people who maintain a 1.3 million soul concentration camp (gaza) (and even fire phosphorus weapons upon civilians)?


Would that mean, a nazi is a nazi no matter the religious adherance?

You're free to try, Bishadi. http://rationalia.com/z/Ratz%20Smilies%20Mk%203/index2_files/popcorn.gif

Garrette
7th December 2010, 03:45 PM
Hang on, so your claim is that the Japanese attacked Pearl Habor because a handful of American Mercenaries were helping defend the Chinese against the Japanese invasion?And by extension the Japanese joined the Axis because Germany supplied China with war materiel to help defend against the Japanese invasion.

See? It all fits nicely when you ignore the parts you don't like.

I Ratant
7th December 2010, 04:12 PM
does that mean, we can kill the people who maintain a 1.3 million soul concentration camp (gaza) (and even fire phosphorus weapons upon civilians)?


Would that mean, a nazi is a nazi no matter the religious adherance?
.
A National Socialist would be an adherent to the theories of Adolph Hitler.
You might look that up, in addition to all the other things you get wrong all the time in all your threads.

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 04:15 PM
Hang on, so your claim is that the Japanese attacked Pearl Habor because a handful of American Mercenaries were helping defend the Chinese against the Japanese invasion?


more chinese died in the sino war than all of japanese in all of ww2.


2 you, that was a little war.

And yes..................... Japan attacked the US for it.


And we the people, dropped 2 nuclear weapons on civilians for no reason except HATE.


The american public had no idea that 'we the people' had been kicking japanese butts for years prior to 12/7/41.




I think the aniversary is a great day to render this information.

Bishadi
7th December 2010, 04:20 PM
.
A National Socialist would be an adherent to the theories of Adolph Hitler.

SO 'no loyalty, no citizenship' is not "national socialist" of jews requiring all citizens to submit to the 'religious state'. That slogan was the PM's campaign theme, before being elected to office.

ie..... israel is a religious state, not a democracy and gaza is a concentration camp of people based on their religious belief, not that the widows and children committed a crime.





You might look that up, in addition to all the other things you get wrong all the time in all your threads.


Any state that supports a concentration camp based on a religious belief, is a nazi state. In this case, what is funny is german born people are involved, again!

twinstead
7th December 2010, 04:34 PM
more chinese died in the sino war than all of japanese in all of ww2.


2 you, that was a little war.

And yes..................... Japan attacked the US for it.


And we the people, dropped 2 nuclear weapons on civilians for no reason except HATE.


The american public had no idea that 'we the people' had been kicking japanese butts for years prior to 12/7/41.




I think the aniversary is a great day to render this information.

Ideologues make TERRIBLE historians. I think the anniversary is a great day to render THAT information.

Ladewig
7th December 2010, 04:35 PM
Japan had just spent the 1930's invading China, Manchuria and Korea and then subjugating those people to unspeakable atrocities,


and Japan had used poison gas against these people in violation of treaties that Japan had signed. Japan's justification for attacking these other countries was that the whole world should have one ruler and that one ruler should be the Emperor.

PhantomWolf
7th December 2010, 04:47 PM
And yes..................... Japan attacked the US for it.

So you don't think that the refusal by the US to sell Japan more raw materials after the rape of Nanking, and their desire to force the US to restore that supply, along with the Japanese fear that the US would oppose them in their attempt to further their goals in the control of Pacific had anything to do with it? It was all over a handful of pilots that weren't even representing the US?

dtugg
7th December 2010, 04:57 PM
And we the people, dropped 2 nuclear weapons on civilians for no reason except HATE.

Nope. Truman decided to do it because he thought using the bomb was the best way to stop an evil empire which needed to be stopped at any cost. He was right.

PhantomWolf
7th December 2010, 04:59 PM
Nope. Truman decided to do it because he thought using the bomb was the best way to stop an evil empire which needed to be stopped at any cost. He was right.

Better than losing thousands of more American, British, Australian, Kiwi, Russian, and Japanse lives by invading mainland Japan?

Jack by the hedge
7th December 2010, 05:00 PM
Hang on, so your claim is that the Japanese attacked Pearl Habor because a handful of American Mercenaries were helping defend the Chinese against the Japanese invasion?

It seems to be, though I struggle to imagine a stupider interpretation of the events.

Wait a minute - didn't American volunteers also fight in the International Brigades in the Spanish Civil War? Why then by Bishadi's logic, Pearl Harbor was probably a false flag operation by the Spanish Navy. The bell tolls for Cuba and the Philippenes. Finally we have the true explanation for why Hitler so precipitately declared war on the US - he thought he was supporting his fellow fascist Franco, little realising the ruse would succeed and the innocent Japanese would take the blame.

OK. I struggled. I found a stupider interpretation. But not much stupider.

dtugg
7th December 2010, 05:03 PM
Better than losing thousands of more American, British, Australian, Kiwi, Russian, and Japanse lives by invading mainland Japan?

Um, yeah.

twinstead
7th December 2010, 05:03 PM
I found a stupider interpretation. But not much stupider.

Indeed. Not much stupider at all

PhantomWolf
7th December 2010, 05:06 PM
Um, yeah.

Bishadi appears to disagree.

John Jones
7th December 2010, 05:09 PM
and Japan had used poison gas against these people in violation of treaties that Japan had signed. Japan's justification for attacking these other countries was that the whole world should have one ruler and that one ruler should be the Emperor.

Germ warfare too, If what I have read is correct. Specifically, ceramic bombs full of plague were dropped on civilians.

MG1962
7th December 2010, 05:12 PM
Better than losing thousands of more American, British, Australian, Kiwi, Russian, and Japanse lives by invading mainland Japan?

During the develope of the bomb at Los Alamos, there was a huge sign that used to give the hourly death rate for the allies. It had a sign above it that said something to the effect. "Hurry, these men were counting on you"

Chris L
7th December 2010, 05:31 PM
To the historians in this group I have a question. What did the Japanese say was their reason for the attack?

dtugg
7th December 2010, 05:43 PM
To the historians in this group I have a question. What did the Japanese say was their reason for the attack?

They wanted to destroy the Pacific Fleet in order to prevent it from interfering with their fun and also give them time to strengthen their fleet before the USN would come to full strength. It was a miscalculation of epic proportions.

John Jones
7th December 2010, 05:48 PM
They wanted to destroy the Pacific Fleet in order to prevent it from interfering with their fun and also give them time to strengthen their fleet before the USN would come to full strength. It was a miscalculation of epic proportions.

But surely they didn't say that out loud?

Garrette
7th December 2010, 05:49 PM
To the historians in this group I have a question. What did the Japanese say was their reason for the attack?Pretty much what dtugg said. They didn't want to conquer the US or even have a prolonged war with us or the UK; they figured that we (the US) would eventually intervene, though, and wanted to remove that threat.

Garrette
7th December 2010, 05:52 PM
But surely they didn't say that out loud?What they most assuredly did not say was

Damn the American dogs! We must attack them for their insufferable assistance to the Chinese in the form of one aviator designing Chinese training and a few non-sanctioned US citizens flying on behalf of the Chinese. Whome we attacked. And pillaged. Damn Americans.

dtugg
7th December 2010, 05:58 PM
But surely they didn't say that out loud?

Here is the text of Japan's declaration of war, dated Dec 8 1941.



By the grace of Heaven, Emperor of Japan [Emperor Shōwa], seated on the throne occupied by the same dynasty from time immemorial, enjoin upon ye, Our loyal and brave subjects:

We hereby declare War on the United States of America and the British Empire. The men and officers of Our Army and Navy shall do their utmost in prosecuting the war. Our public servants of various departments shall perform faithfully and diligently their respective duties; the entire nation with a united will shall mobilize their total strength so that nothing will miscarry in the attainment of Our war aims.

To insure the stability of East Asia and to contribute to world peace is the far-sighted policy which was formulated by Our Great Illustrious Imperial Grandsire [Emperor Meiji] and Our Great Imperial Sire succeeding Him [Emperor Taishō], and which We lay constantly to heart. To cultivate friendship among nations and to enjoy prosperity in common with all nations, has always been the guiding principle of Our Empire's foreign policy. It has been truly unavoidable and far from Our wishes that Our Empire has been brought to cross swords with America and Britain. More than four years have passed since China, failing to comprehend the true intentions of Our Empire, and recklessly courting trouble, disturbed the peace of East Asia and compelled Our Empire to take up arms. Although there has been reestablished the National Government of China, with which Japan had effected neighborly intercourse and cooperation, the regime which has survived in Chungking, relying upon American and British protection, still continues its fratricidal opposition. Eager for the realization of their inordinate ambition to dominate the Orient, both America and Britain, giving support to the Chungking regime, have aggravated the disturbances in East Asia. Moreover these two Powers, inducing other countries to follow suit, increased military preparations on all sides of Our Empire to challenge Us. They have obstructed by every means Our peaceful commerce and finally resorted to a direct severance of economic relations, menacing gravely the existence of Our Empire. Patiently have We waited and long have We endured, in the hope that Our government might retrieve the situation in peace. But Our adversaries, showing not the least spirit of conciliation, have unduly delayed a settlement; and in the meantime they have intensified the economic and political pressure to compel thereby Our Empire to submission. This trend of affairs, would, if left unchecked, not only nullify Our Empire's efforts of many years for the sake of the stabilization of East Asia, but also endanger the very existence of Our nation. The situation being such as it is, Our Empire, for its existence and self-defense has no other recourse but to appeal to arms and to crush every obstacle in its path.

The hallowed spirits of Our Imperial Ancestors guarding Us from above, We rely upon the loyalty and courage of Our subjects in Our confident expectation that the task bequeathed by Our forefathers will be carried forward and that the sources of evil will be speedily eradicated and an enduring peace immutably established in East Asia, preserving thereby the glory of Our Empire.

In witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hand and caused the Grand Seal of the Empire to be affixed at the Imperial Palace, Tokyo, this seventh day of the 12th month of the 15th year of Shōwa, corresponding to the 2,652nd year from the accession to the throne of Emperor Jimmu.

Of course, it is a bunch of BS.

caniswalensis
7th December 2010, 06:00 PM
and Japan had used poison gas against these people in violation of treaties that Japan had signed. Japan's justification for attacking these other countries was that the whole world should have one ruler and that one ruler should be the Emperor.

Not to mention that the japanese set up camps in china that rivaled any horror that the Nazis ever thought up.

Experiments with chemical and biological weapons on live human civilians.

Weapons testing on live human civilians.

Vivisections without anesthesia on live human civilians.

Some other stuff I don't care to mention here. Google "Unit 731" if you want to get rid of your dinner.

It's a truly shameful chapter in the history of a nation that has a rich, fascinating culture.

It is also one of the all-time darkest episodes in the history of the human race.

PhantomWolf
7th December 2010, 06:14 PM
Here is the text of Japan's declaration of war, dated Dec 8 1941.



Of course, it is a bunch of BS.

Not really, you just have to read between the lines a little.

For instance:

To insure the stability of East Asia and to contribute to world peace

means :

To take over all of East Asia so it is under our control and kill anyone thast dares oppose or question or look at us sideways.

More than four years have passed since China, failing to comprehend the true intentions of Our Empire, and recklessly courting trouble, disturbed the peace of East Asia and compelled Our Empire to take up arms.

means:

More than four years have passed since China refused to lie down and die, proving us to be the superior race and deserving to be in total control and dominace of East Asia.

Although there has been reestablished the National Government of China, with which Japan had effected neighborly intercourse and cooperation, the regime which has survived in Chungking, relying upon American and British protection, still continues its fratricidal opposition.

means:

Although we have established a puppet government, the darn chinese won't do what we tell them rather listing to their real government whom the Birtish and Americans keep supplying.

Moreover these two Powers, inducing other countries to follow suit, increased military preparations on all sides of Our Empire to challenge Us. They have obstructed by every means Our peaceful commerce and finally resorted to a direct severance of economic relations, menacing gravely the existence of Our Empire.

means:

Putting up defences again our army taking over and limiting trade is just not on mates and we're a might piffed about that.

But Our adversaries, showing not the least spirit of conciliation, have unduly delayed a settlement; and in the meantime they have intensified the economic and political pressure to compel thereby Our Empire to submission.

means:

And then you had the nerve to totally put an embargo on us stopping all trade thinking you could stop us from killing more people.

This trend of affairs, would, if left unchecked, not only nullify Our Empire's efforts of many years for the sake of the stabilization of East Asia, but also endanger the very existence of Our nation. The situation being such as it is, Our Empire, for its existence and self-defense has no other recourse but to appeal to arms and to crush every obstacle in its path.

means:

Screw you, we're going to just darn well take whatever we want and if you get in our way any more we're going to crush you like a bug.

Travis
8th December 2010, 12:18 AM
On the bright side at least he isn't claiming that American's were piloting the Japanese planes that attacked Pearl Harbor.

Puppycow
8th December 2010, 01:07 AM
Here are some images in remembrance of the day that I hope people will enjoy...http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/Morning-Thunder-by-Robert-T.jpg

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/remember_pearl_harbor.jpg

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/h72273k.jpg

http://i249.photobucket.com/albums/gg206/caniswalensis/24-pearl-harbor-memorial-hawaii-9-8-2001.jpg



This is a truly inspiring article about the veterans of Pearl Harbor.
http://www.pacifichistoricparks.org/blog/?p=547#1

Thanks for sharing those. :)



As for the OP, :dl:

pipelineaudio
8th December 2010, 02:20 AM
Of course there's always the issue of WTF the haoles were doing in the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1941, but who knows

dtugg
8th December 2010, 02:37 AM
The Kingdom of Hawaii hadn't existed for decades. Besides, it is irrelevant. It is not as if the Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor in order to save the Hawaiians from the evil American imperialists.

pipelineaudio
8th December 2010, 02:54 AM
It is not as if the Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor in order to save the Hawaiians from the evil American imperialists.

That's true, and well born out by the number of Hawaiians and hawaiian born japanese that went off to fight the axis hoping for some retaliation

Carnivore
8th December 2010, 03:33 AM
Hang on, so your claim is that the Japanese attacked Pearl Habor because a handful of American Mercenaries were helping defend the Chinese against the Japanese invasion?

more chinese died in the sino war than all of japanese in all of ww2.


2 you, that was a little war.

And yes..................... Japan attacked the US for it.


And we the people, dropped 2 nuclear weapons on civilians for no reason except HATE.


The american public had no idea that 'we the people' had been kicking japanese butts for years prior to 12/7/41.




I think the aniversary is a great day to render this information.


Just out of curiosity, what did Burma, India, Thailand, Indochina, Malaya, the Solomon Islands,the Philippines, the Dutch East Indies, Singapore or Australia do to Japan to make Japan attack them?

Lukraak_Sisser
8th December 2010, 03:46 AM
The americans and the europeans had colonial empires in the pacific, the japanese wanted one. And the american fleet was the biggest obstacle in the plan, so they made a very good attempt at removing it.
In the process a large number of brave men and women died.

But to say that the minor pinpricks given by both sides in the pre-war posturing was the same as an open declaration of war just shows your utter lack of understanding of international diplomacy. If any americans killed japanese before pearl harbor they did so as private citizens without official consent of the government. Sure, maybe the american government quietly supported them, but the japanese did the same. Nations always have and most likely always will do this.

To suggest pearl harbor was provoked however is just idiocy and frankly insulting to the japanese planning that went into the attack and follow up. After declaring war they obtained most of their war aims within a few months, and only (bad) luck prevented them from taking out all the carriers at pearl harbor.

If the US government would have provoked the attack they would have had dummies sitting in the harbor and retaliated against the carrier fleet with their full combat strength, destroying the japanese threat in one stroke. I always wonder why its necessary to blame the US for everything. Sure, they played their part in preparing for the pacific war, the same as the english, the dutch, the french and the japanese. But initiating the war happened by the japanese, to obtain japanese goals on their timetable for their gain. The other nations could only respond.

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 04:36 AM
Nope. Truman decided to do it because he thought using the bomb was the best way to stop an evil empire which needed to be stopped at any cost. He was right.

The atomic bomb was originally intended for use in the European Theater of Operations, Japan just had the bad luck to hold out longer than Germany.

dtugg
8th December 2010, 04:59 AM
The atomic bomb was originally intended for use in the European Theater of Operations, Japan just had the bad luck to hold out longer than Germany.

Oh, I know. I've had morons ask me why the bomb wasn't used on Germany.

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 05:01 AM
Oh, I know. I've had morons ask me why the bomb wasn't used on Germany.

Because the Allies were racist bastards, of course!

ETA: One Japanese guy says that "maybe if the attack (on Pearl Harbor) hadn't been a surprise the bombs wouldn't have been dropped.) ("World at War")

Sorry, sir, but until the war was over we were going to use everything we could find on Japan, within the confines of the rules of war. We could have, and were ready to, use massed poison gas attacks, but that would have happened only in retaliation for the same kind of attack. Both sides knew this and both sides avoided using them.

caniswalensis
8th December 2010, 06:03 AM
Thanks for sharing those. :)



It was my pleasure. :)

Bishadi
8th December 2010, 06:04 AM
So you don't think that the refusal by the US to sell Japan more raw materials after the rape of Nanking, and their desire to force the US to restore that supply, along with the Japanese fear that the US would oppose them in their attempt to further their goals in the control of Pacific had anything to do with it? It was all over a handful of pilots that weren't even representing the US?

that is like asking if the US is at war for 911. (a handful of rogues)

Bishadi
8th December 2010, 06:05 AM
Nope. Truman decided to do it because he thought using the bomb was the best way to stop an evil empire which needed to be stopped at any cost. He was right.

Evil empire?

who is shaking the invisible hand?

Bishadi
8th December 2010, 06:09 AM
Germ warfare too, If what I have read is correct. Specifically, ceramic bombs full of plague were dropped on civilians.


that is what the occupiers did to the indians (millions died)

but then again in gaza, phosphorus weapons were used that just melt flesh from bone (the occupiers thereof literally fired them things above the civilians)

Bishadi
8th December 2010, 06:17 AM
During the develope of the bomb at Los Alamos, there was a huge sign that used to give the hourly death rate for the allies. It had a sign above it that said something to the effect. "Hurry, these men were counting on you"


evidence.


From what i understand, the scientist signed a petition asking the government not to detonate the weapon on civilians but to detonate one to show how powerful it is.

But that didnt happen.

The US was pissed at japan for pearl but few if any realized Americans killed more japanese in the sino war, than we lost in pearl by a huge margin.


Ever read up on the old project.

Here is a quote....


"I am become Death," he said, "the destroyer of worlds." Ken Bainbridge, the test director, told Oppenheimer, "Now we're all sons of b_tches."

dtugg
8th December 2010, 06:20 AM
Evil empire?

who is shaking the invisible hand?

Evil empire is apt. Or perhaps you deny that they waged a war of conquest which killed millions of people.

Bishadi
8th December 2010, 06:28 AM
The Kingdom of Hawaii hadn't existed for decades. Besides, it is irrelevant. It is not as if the Japanese Navy attacked Pearl Harbor in order to save the Hawaiians from the evil American imperialists.


Hawaii was not even a state in 41'.


And i would bet the blood lines of hawaiins are closer to pacific islanders than children of the invisible hand.

Bishadi
8th December 2010, 06:30 AM
Evil empire is apt. Or perhaps you deny that they waged a war of conquest which killed millions of people.



and what is carpet bombing of cities but evil?

Foolmewunz
8th December 2010, 06:34 AM
Invisible hand? Is there some conspiradroid interpretation of that term that I'm not aware of? Isn't it a term used to describe free market forces?

dtugg
8th December 2010, 06:35 AM
Hawaii was not even a state in 41'.

Really? I had no idea. :rolleyes:

Jack by the hedge
8th December 2010, 07:34 AM
...It was all over a handful of pilots that weren't even representing the US?

that is like asking if the US is at war for 911. (a handful of rogues)

No. It would be like the US declaring war on Saudi Arabia over a "handful of rogues", as that's where the 9/11 attackers came from. Which you may have noticed it didn't. Just like Japan didn't declare war on the US because of a few freelance American fighter pilots in China.

twinstead
8th December 2010, 09:07 AM
and what is carpet bombing of cities but evil?

Are you comparing the US with Imperial Japan concerning their respective conduct during WWII? Isn't there a logical fallacy for what you just did? Instead of answering the question, you simply thought of the worst thing the US did and submitted that.

Like I said: Irrational ideologues make TERRIBLE historians.

ReverendClog
8th December 2010, 09:52 AM
Now, as an aside and since this is one of Mr.Bishadi's horrid little streaks of Faff, I thought I should contribute somewhat.

During the war, as some of you may know, I had the misfortune to be shown the door by the Army and it was only after several weeks kicking around Whitehall, and visiting little Meggie in Whitechapel, (a wonderful girl who had been born with a prehensile aperture - and charged accordingly alas.), I managed to inveigle an appointment as the Commander of a destroyer lying down at Chatham, whose crew had murdered their previous Captain.

As the vessel was still besieged by the Royal Marines with nary a quarter given, I hatched an artful plan to take the ship, by distracting the matelots and allowing the marines to gain the upper hand.
Later that evening I had myself made up into a rather beguiling facsimile of Gracie Fields, (the OSS experts said I was their finest work), and ordering the Marines into hiding I strode out onto the dock illuminated only by a twenty two million power searchlight from a circling Wellington.
The guns fell silent as I - a shimmering angel in filmy chiffon and d'rap d'or, my Chanel no.5 a halo around me - began the first haunting line of 'Sally', cries of gladness and astonishment came from the ship and my voice soared up in to night sky, its pureness an exquisite counter point to the ribaldry of the sailors, and I knew that I had them.
Slowly as I swayed I began to divest myself of my clothing, edging ever nearer the gangplank and how it pained me to leave those silky french knickers, (a present from Monty), upon the bullet strewn dock, but, seductive step by lacivious shimmer I gained the fore deck, my modesty artfully covered by two ostrich fans.
The crew - mutiny forgotten - formed around me in a circle as I reached the end of my song and I prepared to signal the Royal marines, when suddenly the circling Wellington, its captain distracted by my glorious form struck a barrage balloon and fell earthward. The last thing I saw before the dying of the light was two hundred and sixty sailors beginning to advancing lustfully upon me as I frantically signalled, (unseen alas), for the attack to begin.

Would that I could relate all that followed during the next three hours, but modesty as well as several legal obstacles exist to bar my recollection, and so all I may say is that just after the third hour had passed I strode down the gangplank, tired but happy, leaving behind me a ship full of contented and largely unconscious sailors - to a man sexually satiated almost to the point of coma - and handed over control of the ship to a stunned Royal Marine Captain, who informed me that even had I given the signal the attack would have failed - as behind me on the quiescent destroyer were all his men, who had similarly followed their 'little men' to ravage my helpless, mouth-watering body.

Two days later, dressed in my whites and bearing top secret orders I went aboard to meet my new crew formally and I am pleased to relate that to a man this recently mutinous company stiffened to attention at the sight of me.

P.s. In the privacy of my a cabin I unsealed the orders and read them with trepidation, 'With all speed and dispatch, make to Pearl Harbour U.S., (Pacific), and await further instructions'.
Of course that will have to be another story.

I Ratant
8th December 2010, 09:57 AM
The atomic bomb was originally intended for use in the European Theater of Operations, Japan just had the bad luck to hold out longer than Germany.
.
I wonder what would have occurred had we drop the bomb in Europe.
I consider not doing that a blunder.

dtugg
8th December 2010, 09:59 AM
.
I wonder what would have occurred had we drop the bomb in Europe.
I consider not doing that a blunder.

Are you serious?

I Ratant
8th December 2010, 10:00 AM
No. It would be like the US declaring war on Saudi Arabia over a "handful of rogues", as that's where the 9/11 attackers came from. Which you may have noticed it didn't. Just like Japan didn't declare war on the US because of a few freelance American fighter pilots in China.
.
And the Americans fighting for Britain in the Battle of Britain (I met one of them) didn't drag us into the European war.

I Ratant
8th December 2010, 10:03 AM
....
LO****ingL!
P.s. In the privacy of my a cabin I unsealed the orders a read them with trepidation, 'With all speed and dispatch, make to Pearl Harbour U.S., (Pacific), and await further instructions'.
Of course that will have to be another story.
.
Can't wait!

I Ratant
8th December 2010, 10:04 AM
Are you serious?
.
Yup.
After 3 years living and traveling in Germany, 1950 to '53, I kinda thought we'd screwed up.

dtugg
8th December 2010, 10:11 AM
.
Yup.
After 3 years living and traveling in Germany, 1950 to '53, I kinda thought we'd screwed up.

Dropping the bomb on Germany would have been nothing less than mass murder seeing as how it didn't exist until after they had surrendered.

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 10:18 AM
.
I wonder what would have occurred had we drop the bomb in Europe.

The Greens would have gotten an even earlier start?
I consider not doing that a blunder.
It wasn't ready in time. So there's no blunder if the scenario is impossible.

Skwinty
8th December 2010, 10:19 AM
Dropping the bomb on Germany would have been nothing less than mass murder seeing as how it didn't exist until after they had surrendered.

So dropping two bombs on Japanese civilians not equate to mass murder.:confused:

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 10:20 AM
So dropping two bombs on Japanese civilians not equate to mass murder.:confused:

In war people get killed. Until we stop doing that silly **** it will keep on happening.

dtugg
8th December 2010, 10:24 AM
So dropping two bombs on Japanese civilians not equate to mass murder.:confused:

Nope. The US was at war with Japan and both cities contained military targets, thus bombing them was legidimate according the rules of war. And besides, many more people would have died during an invasion.

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 10:28 AM
Nope. The US was at war with Japan and both cities contained military targets, thus bombing them was legidimate according the rules of war. And besides, many more people would have died during an invasion.

More people died in the fire bombing of certain cities. The atomic bomb was not unique in the number of casualties.

dtugg
8th December 2010, 10:30 AM
MMore people died in the fire bombing of certain cities. The atomic bomb was not unique in the number of casualties.


Yep. For some reason you never see people crying about the firebombing of Tokyo.

Skwinty
8th December 2010, 10:40 AM
More people died in the fire bombing of certain cities. The atomic bomb was not unique in the number of casualties.

Within the first two to four months of the bombings, the acute effects killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki,[1] (http://forums.randi.org/#cite_note-rerf-deaths-0) with roughly half of the deaths in each city occurring on the first day. The Hiroshima prefectural health department estimates that, of the people who died on the day of the explosion, 60% died from flash or flame burns, 30% from falling debris and 10% from other causes. During the following months, large numbers died from the effect of burns, radiation sickness (http://forums.randi.org/wiki/Radiation_sickness), and other injuries, compounded by illness. In a US estimate of the total immediate and short term cause of death, 15–20% died from radiation sickness, 20–30% from flash burns (http://forums.randi.org/wiki/Effects_of_nuclear_explosions#Thermal_radiation), and 50–60% from other injuries, compounded by illness.[6] (http://forums.randi.org/#cite_note-Truman-5) In both cities, most of the dead were civilians.

Not bad for 2 bombs as opposed to 6 months of extensive fire bombing of 67 cities.

What viable military targets were in Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 10:44 AM
Within the first two to four months of the bombings, the acute effects killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki,[1] (http://forums.randi.org/#cite_note-rerf-deaths-0) with roughly half of the deaths in each city occurring on the first day. The Hiroshima prefectural health department estimates that, of the people who died on the day of the explosion, 60% died from flash or flame burns, 30% from falling debris and 10% from other causes. During the following months, large numbers died from the effect of burns, radiation sickness (http://forums.randi.org/wiki/Radiation_sickness), and other injuries, compounded by illness. In a US estimate of the total immediate and short term cause of death, 15–20% died from radiation sickness, 20–30% from flash burns (http://forums.randi.org/wiki/Effects_of_nuclear_explosions#Thermal_radiation), and 50–60% from other injuries, compounded by illness.[6] (http://forums.randi.org/#cite_note-Truman-5) In both cities, most of the dead were civilians.

Not bad for 2 bombs as opposed to 6 months of extensive fire bombing of 67 cities.

What viable military targets were in Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

Cottage industry in support of the war effort. That effectively ceased by August 10th, latest. The Japanese government made the deliberate decision to move certain industries into decentralized facilities. They determined that Nagasaki and Hiroshima would be bombed.

dtugg
8th December 2010, 10:53 AM
Not bad for 2 bombs as opposed to 6 months of extensive fire bombing of 67 cities.

Yes. We are aware that a lot of people died. That is sort of what happens when you drop an atomic bomb on a city. The point still stans that the number of causalties was comparable to the firebombing of Tokyo.

What viable military targets were in Nagasaki and Hiroshima?

Off the top of my head, the headquarters of the Second Army was in Hiroshima. If you want more info than that, look it up yourself, I am typing this on my cell phone.

twinstead
8th December 2010, 11:12 AM
More people, and more civilians, would have died during an invasion of Japan than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.

caniswalensis
8th December 2010, 11:30 AM
More people, and more civilians, would have died during an invasion of Japan than Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined.


Yep, that's really true. They were holing up and preparing for a final invasion, determined to make it as costly as possible in hopes of breaking the allies will to continue and getting a favorable cessation of hostilities.

Cainkane1
8th December 2010, 11:33 AM
We whipped them in 4 years. We fought both them and germany and we still beat them. The Japanese I know are great folks and I dated a Japanese woman for awhile. Sorry our two countries ever fought.

Skwinty
8th December 2010, 11:36 AM
There are no winners after a world war.

Scootch
8th December 2010, 12:05 PM
The reason why we didnt drop the bomb in Germany was because the bomb wasn't tested until august of 45 and germany surrendered in may of 45, so for that reason alone we wouldn't have dropped it. But even if the bomb was ready before Germany surrendered I don't believe they would have because there were allied troops in Germany (and Stalin may have felt the bomb was dropped to attack not only Germany but of Soviet troops as well)

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 12:30 PM
We whipped them in 4 years. We fought both them and germany and we still beat them. The Japanese I know are great folks and I dated a Japanese woman for awhile. Sorry our two countries ever fought.

3 years, 8 months.

I Ratant
8th December 2010, 02:10 PM
There are no winners after a world war.
.
Oh yes there were!
Japan went from a dictatorship/feudal society to world leaders in technology.
Germany got modern.
Vietnam is now a capitalist country market wise, while still having a communist tendency.
Just show people the way to the money, and oppressions tend to be lost in the scramble.

PhantomWolf
8th December 2010, 06:25 PM
3 years, 8 months.

3 years 2 months and 8 days, before that the Japanese were kicking the US all over the pacfic.

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 06:27 PM
3 years 2 months and 8 days, before that the Japanese were kicking the US all over the pacfic.

I was gate-to-gate.

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 06:28 PM
.
Oh yes there were!
Japan went from a dictatorship/feudal society to world leaders in technology.
Germany got modern.
Vietnam is now a capitalist country market wise, while still having a communist tendency.
Just show people the way to the money, and oppressions tend to be lost in the scramble.

Burma is still a hell-hole.
Singapore has the death penalty for chewing gum in public.
India has to go it alone.
Australia still has to make Fosters.
New Zealand has Peter Jackson. (Somebody call that one.)

PhantomWolf
8th December 2010, 06:51 PM
I was gate-to-gate.

I knew that, my response was sort of a response to Cainkane1's that the US whipped the Japanese by pointing out that in the first six months the ones being whipped were the US.

If not for some staggering luck by the US and rather poor managament from the Japanese which resulted in the same Aircraft Carrier (the USS Yorktown) being reported as sunk 3 times, as well as the destroying of the all four Japanese carriers, that whipping would likely have continued.

The loss of the Hiryū, Sōryū, Kaga, and Akagi as well as the heavy cruisers Mikuma and sevre damage to Mogami, Arashio, Asashio, and planes and men lost (including Vice Admiral Yamaguchi who was considered Japan's best carrier sailor) was a blow that Japan never was able to recover from.

For the US, while they lost a lot of planes, the only ships lost were well after the main battle, with the seriously damaged and likely written off Yorktown (finally) being sunk by a submarine, along with her escort, the USS Hammann.

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 06:55 PM
Re Yorktown, I used to make the point that if she'd had an armored flight deck, like the Brits, she'd had less damage. Then I pointed out that if she'd had an armored flight deck she might not have been repaired in time for Midway. Pluses and minuses, give and take.

PhantomWolf
8th December 2010, 06:56 PM
Burma is still a hell-hole.
Singapore has the death penalty for chewing gum in public.
India has to go it alone.
Australia still has to make Fosters.
New Zealand has Peter Jackson. (Somebody call that one.)

My Grandfather (father's side) was in Burma with the RAF during WW2

As for Peter, he's bringing at least US$1.5 Billion into the country with the Hobbit, so we'll keep him thanks.

PhantomWolf
8th December 2010, 06:57 PM
Re Yorktown, I used to make the point that if she'd had an armored flight deck, like the Brits, she'd had less damage. Then I pointed out that if she'd had an armored flight deck she might not have been repaired in time for Midway. Pluses and minuses, give and take.

I'm not sure that repaired is quite the right word. Patched up and operational perhaps, lol

ETA: Of course had she had an armoured deck, she might not have been as damaged in Coral as she was, so....

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 06:59 PM
I'm not sure that repaired is quite the right word. Patched up and opperational perhaps, lol

She still had yard birds on board when she arrived at Point Luck. They kept working right up to the end. One guy was screaming mad that his hard work has survived for little time.

Garrette
8th December 2010, 07:01 PM
The US definitely got lucky at Midway, but it was luck they set themselves up for. Fortune favors the bold and all that.

I've often idly wondered what course the Pacific war would have taken if

(a) The American carriers had been at Pearl

or

(b) Japan had gotten the lucky breaks at Midway

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 07:12 PM
The US definitely got lucky at Midway, but it was luck they set themselves up for. Fortune favors the bold and all that.

I've often idly wondered what course the Pacific war would have taken if

(a) The American carriers had been at Pearl

or

(b) Japan had gotten the lucky breaks at Midway

Loosing two carriers in the Pacific wouldn't have been fatal, but the hit-and-run raids prior to Coral Sea kept Japanese forces tied up.

More serious of we lost 2-3 carriers at Midway without gain. But the new carriers were absolute top priority in American yards, so it would have been a delay, nothing more.

Garrette
8th December 2010, 07:17 PM
Loosing two carriers in the Pacific wouldn't have been fatal, but the hit-and-run raids prior to Coral Sea kept Japanese forces tied up.

More serious of we lost 2-3 carriers at Midway without gain. But the new carriers were absolute top priority in American yards, so it would have been a delay, nothing more.That mirrors my idle thoughts, too, though I think a catastrophic loss at Midway would have made it a very long delay indeed.

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 07:18 PM
That mirrors my idle thoughts, too, though I think a catastrophic loss at Midway would have made it a very long delay indeed.

The USN had over 110 flight decks in the Pacific 3 years and 2 months after Midway.

PhantomWolf
8th December 2010, 07:20 PM
Loosing two carriers in the Pacific wouldn't have been fatal, but the hit-and-run raids prior to Coral Sea kept Japanese forces tied up.

More serious of we lost 2-3 carriers at Midway without gain. But the new carriers were absolute top priority in American yards, so it would have been a delay, nothing more.

I suspect that had it been 3-0 to the japanese at midway and not 4-1 to the US, things might have gone rather different. The loss of those carriers was a crippling blow to the Japanese fleet, in terms of manpower, equipment, and morale.

dtugg
8th December 2010, 07:24 PM
I suspect that had it been 3-0 to the japanese at midway and not 4-1 to the US, things might have gone rather different. The loss of those carriers was a crippling blow to the Japanese fleet, in terms of manpower, equipment, and morale.

I tend to agree with Gawdzilla. The Japanese would have simply started getting their ass whooping at a later date.

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 07:27 PM
8 Dec 1944, Ulithi Atoll. (http://mysite.verizon.net/resttsdu/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/1944_12_08_Murderers_Row_Ulithi_Atoll_1280x.jpg)

Garrette
8th December 2010, 07:37 PM
The USN had over 110 flight decks in the Pacific 3 years and 2 months after Midway.So you're asking me to define "very long delay indeed?"

Without wanting to get into a long discussion for which I am unprepared, I venture that the Solomon Islands campaign would have been pushed back several months at least and subsequently made far more difficult. I venture that a loss at Midway could have added a year to the Pacific war (ignoring the impact of the A bomb).

Zep
8th December 2010, 07:39 PM
3 years, 8 months.Wrong. 5 years, 11 months. ;)

Gawdzilla
8th December 2010, 07:40 PM
Wrong. 5 years, 11 months. ;)

Wrong side of the planet.

MG1962
8th December 2010, 07:50 PM
Burma is still a hell-hole.
Singapore has the death penalty for chewing gum in public.
India has to go it alone.
Australia still has to make Fosters.
New Zealand has Peter Jackson. (Somebody call that one.)

Foster is brewed in the US - Texas and Georgia, prior to that it was made Canada and had been since the late 1980's

back to the topic

Regardless of how many carriers the US lost at Pearl, Coral Sea or Midway, not much would have changed. The carriers often get the kudos, and the actions of flight crews and saliors are beyond reproach, however the real heavy lifters of WW2 were the subs

By the end of the war the entire Japanese merchant fleet was reduced to one blue water vessel and 2 coastal. Because of Japanese doctrinal training nothing was ever going to stop American subs. As a Japanese sailor being put on anti sub patrol was either a mark you were a screw up, or a mark of dishonor. And the sailors themselves knew this, so you can imagine the moral

John Jones
8th December 2010, 07:53 PM
So dropping two bombs on Japanese civilians not equate to mass murder.:confused:


No more so than USAAF General Curtis LeMay's firebombing of Tokyo in March, 1945. More Japanese died in that raid than in the Hiroshima atom bomb attack.

If you claim that the Hiroshima Atom Bomb was mass murder, then you need to consider other wartime attacks mass-murder as well.

Perhaps Curtis LeMay is a topic for another thread.

PhantomWolf
8th December 2010, 08:03 PM
The USN had over 110 flight decks in the Pacific 3 years and 2 months after Midway.

I note that most of these apear to have been the Escort Carriers. How many did they have as of the attack on Pearl?

MG1962
8th December 2010, 08:07 PM
I note that most of these apear to have been the Escort Carriers. How many did they have as of the attack on Pearl?

Here is a complete list of US carriers and where they were as of Dec 7 1941

http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq66-9.htm

blobru
8th December 2010, 09:22 PM
Now, as an aside and since this is one of Mr.Bishadi's horrid little streaks of Faff, I thought I should contribute somewhat.

During the war, as some of you may know, I had the misfortune to be shown the door by the Army and it was only after several weeks kicking around Whitehall, and visiting little Meggie in Whitechapel, (a wonderful girl who had been born with a prehensile aperture - and charged accordingly alas.), I managed to inveigle an appointment as the Commander of a destroyer lying down at Chatham, whose crew had murdered their previous Captain.

As the vessel was still besieged by the Royal Marines with nary a quarter given, I hatched an artful plan to take the ship, by distracting the matelots and allowing the marines to gain the upper hand.
Later that evening I had myself made up into a rather beguiling facsimile of Gracie Fields, (the OSS experts said I was their finest work), and ordering the Marines into hiding I strode out onto the dock illuminated only by a twenty two million power searchlight from a circling Wellington.
The guns fell silent as I - a shimmering angel in filmy chiffon and d'rap d'or, my Chanel no.5 a halo around me - began the first haunting line of 'Sally', cries of gladness and astonishment came from the ship and my voice soared up in to night sky, its pureness an exquisite counter point to the ribaldry of the sailors, and I knew that I had them.
Slowly as I swayed I began to divest myself of my clothing, edging ever nearer the gangplank and how it pained me to leave those silky french knickers, (a present from Monty), upon the bullet strewn dock, but, seductive step by lacivious shimmer I gained the fore deck, my modesty artfully covered by two ostrich fans.
The crew - mutiny forgotten - formed around me in a circle as I reached the end of my song and I prepared to signal the Royal marines, when suddenly the circling Wellington, its captain distracted by my glorious form struck a barrage balloon and fell earthward. The last thing I saw before the dying of the light was two hundred and sixty sailors beginning to advancing lustfully upon me as I frantically signalled, (unseen alas), for the attack to begin.

Would that I could relate all that followed during the next three hours, but modesty as well as several legal obstacles exist to bar my recollection, and so all I may say is that just after the third hour had passed I strode down the gangplank, tired but happy, leaving behind me a ship full of contented and largely unconscious sailors - to a man sexually satiated almost to the point of coma - and handed over control of the ship to a stunned Royal Marine Captain, who informed me that even had I given the signal the attack would have failed - as behind me on the quiescent destroyer were all his men, who had similarly followed their 'little men' to ravage my helpless, mouth-watering body.

Two days later, dressed in my whites and bearing top secret orders I went aboard to meet my new crew formally and I am pleased to relate that to a man this recently mutinous company stiffened to attention at the sight of me.

P.s. In the privacy of my a cabin I unsealed the orders and read them with trepidation, 'With all speed and dispatch, make to Pearl Harbour U.S., (Pacific), and await further instructions'.
Of course that will have to be another story.


:pedant In my capacities both as skeptic and sceptic, I confess I was somewhat sckeptical of the Reverend's story, but copious googling reveals that: the search [or leigh] light with which the RAF's Wellington fighter was outfitted was indeed twenty two million candela in luminosity; there is indeed a song called 'Sally' (which was sung by a Gracie Fields); and there is a Pearl Harbour (or "Harbor"), apparently a US naval installation somewhere in the Pacific. On other details Google is silent; one can only assume due to they're still being classified.

Corsair 115
8th December 2010, 10:05 PM
Just out of curiosity, what did Burma, India, Thailand, Indochina, Malaya, the Solomon Islands,the Philippines, the Dutch East Indies, Singapore or Australia do to Japan to make Japan attack them?


Most of those countries had resources the Japanese wanted. Japan attacked the U.S. fleet in Pearl Harbor to knock it out with the first punch so its invasion of the territories you listed could proceed without having to worry about the U.S. fleet interfering with its plans.

However, as Admiral Yamamoto himself realized from the outset, Japan was doomed in any long war with the U.S. since it simply had nowhere near the production capacity that the U.S. had. That Japan managed to last as long as it did is mostly a testament to the U.S. having to fight a two-front war (with the defeat of Germany taking precedence) and to Japan's incredible stubbornness in accepting the hopeless situation it found itself in.


and what is carpet bombing of cities but evil?


Considering the technology of the time, you pretty much had to flatten a large chunk of a city in order to knock out the important factories and other targets located within a city. In Japan's case, flattening the entire city was often necessary due to operational problems which made conventional strategic bombing difficult and due to the nature of Japanese industry which was often dispersed in small locations throughout the city, frequently in otherwise residential areas.

There is also the fact that industrialized nation-states do not conduct total war without the support of the civilian population and its economic efforts. No civilians, no economy; no economy, no military; no military, no war. Armoured vehicles, artillery, firearms, munitions, warships, combat aircraft, explosives, and all the resources needed to build these, don't magically create themselves. It takes the effort of the civilians in the economy to produce the weapons and supplies of war.


The US definitely got lucky at Midway, but it was luck they set themselves up for.


Luck worked both ways. Yes, the half-hour delay in launching a Japanese scout aircraft early in the battle, and the breakdown of the radio of another Japanese scout later in the battle, didn't help the Japanese. But as long as the U.S. got its strike into the air first, it gave itself a good chance to win. Had Nagumo steered the IJN carriers southwards instead of north, while McCluskey's dive bombers would likely have not found the carriers, the Hornet's dive bomber squadron would have found the Japanese flattops since those SBDs took a course which assumed the Japanese fleet had turned south. (Historically, the Hornet's 35 dive bombers never found the Japanese carriers during that first strike; most managed to make it back to either Midway or the Hornet; the fighter escort, however, all ditched in the ocean.)

Luck also worked against the U.S. in that the American torpedoes were uniformly awful. The USS Nautilus hit the Kaga with a torpedo but it failed to detonate. It also worked against the U.S. when the Japanese submarine I-168 managed to slip through the escorts and torpedo the Yorktown as it was being towed. Change that, and the U.S. loses no carriers in the battle.

RussDill
9th December 2010, 12:50 AM
Did you actually read the petition? Apparently not, because then you would have read:

The war has to be brought speedily to a successful conclusion and attacks by atomic bombs may very well be an effective method of warfare. We feel, however, that such attacks on Japan could not be justified, at least not unless the terms which will be imposed after the war on Japan were made public in detail and Japan were given an opportunity to surrender.

and

In view of the foregoing, we, the undersigned, respectfully petition: first, that you exercise your power as Commander-in-Chief, to rule that the United States shall not resort to the use of atomic bombs in this war unless the terms which will be imposed upon Japan have been made public in detail and Japan knowing these terms has refused to surrender; second, that in such an event the question whether or not to use atomic bombs be decided by you in light of the considerations presented in this petition as well as all the other moral responsibilities which are involved.

Either that, or you aren't aware of the Potsdam declaration and its promise of "prompt and utter destruction". Note the words "prompt" and "utter", they are not accidental.

PhantomWolf
9th December 2010, 01:26 AM
Interestingly it was demonstrated, rather pointedly and the Japanese didn't surrender, resulting in the need for a second demonstration. Bishadi, do you really believe that when they didn't surrender after the first bomb was dropped, showing them that not only did the Americans have it, but were willing to use it, that merely dropping it on some uninhabited island and saying "next time it'll be you" would have worked?

Corsair 115
9th December 2010, 01:58 AM
Interestingly it was demonstrated, rather pointedly and the Japanese didn't surrender, resulting in the need for a second demonstration.


Not just two atomic bombs. Also a Russian declaration of war and assault on Manchuria, along with continued American conventional bombing raids. In spite of all of this, in the meetings on Aug. 13th the Japanese cabinet was still split on the issue of surrendering. Were it not for the Emperor personally intervening (a highly unusual act since he had not interfered in political matters previously) the war would have continued past Aug. 15th.

It seems curious to me to criticize the U.S. when the blame for the war dragging on clearly lies with the Japanese government. Anyone with even a shred of intelligence knew Japan had long since lost the war—that was blatantly evident when Okinawa was taken, clearly obvious when Iwo Jima was taken, quite obvious after the Battle of Leyte Gulf in October of 1944, which finished off nearly all of what little was left of the Japanese navy. Hell, it was obvious after the decimation of the Japanese aerial forces in the 'Great Marianas Turkey Shoot' of June 1944, that Japan had no hope of winning.

So it seems to me the real blame lies with the Japanese leadership and the Emperor for needlessly and stupidly prolonging the war for many months, sentencing huge numbers of Japanese citizens to their deaths for no good reason.

Gawdzilla
9th December 2010, 04:32 AM
I note that most of these apear to have been the Escort Carriers. How many did they have as of the attack on Pearl?
The escort carrier wasn't invented then. The CVEs were important in keeping the CVs and CVLs at full plane strenghten, ferrying replacement aircraft to the big boys, and for relieving them from the shore bombardment and convoy escort/ASW roles. As they were cheap and quick to build we built a lot of them. The high numbers in the Pacific at the end reflex transfers from the Atlantic, so the usual number was maybe 30%-40% lower while the U-boats still prowled.

I note that your specific question has already been covered.

Damien Evans
9th December 2010, 04:58 AM
So dropping two bombs on Japanese civilians not equate to mass murder.:confused:

Given the nature of WW2, no. Had it been in the Napoleonic Wars, sure, but warfare had changed greatly as had the role of a civilian in war since then.

Damien Evans
9th December 2010, 05:02 AM
Burma is still a hell-hole.
Singapore has the death penalty for chewing gum in public.
India has to go it alone.
Australia still has to make Fosters.
New Zealand has Peter Jackson. (Somebody call that one.)

What do you mean by "India has to go it alone"?

Peter Jackson is awesome, and almost all Fosters is made and drunk outside Australia.

Skwinty
9th December 2010, 05:19 AM
Given the nature of WW2, no. Had it been in the Napoleonic Wars, sure, but warfare had changed greatly as had the role of a civilian in war since then.

The concept of state-sponsored mass murder covers a range of potential killings. It is defined as the intentional and indiscriminate murder of a large number of people by government agents. Examples are shooting of unarmed protestors, carpet bombing of cities, lobbing of grenades into prison cells and random execution of civilians.

This definition includes:
Mass killing of civilians during total war, especially via strategic bombing, such as the Bombing of Chongqing, the Blitz, the bombing of Dresden and Hamburg, or the Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Gawdzilla
9th December 2010, 05:25 AM
What do you mean by "India has to go it alone"?
They gained their independence from the UK, so they have no one to blame but themselves for any future problems. We hit that back in 1781. ;)

Damien Evans
9th December 2010, 05:36 AM
They gained their independence from the UK, so they have no one to blame but themselves for any future problems. We hit that back in 1781. ;)

Oh, I thought you were implying some sort of cutoff from the international community.

Gawdzilla
9th December 2010, 05:39 AM
Oh, I thought you were implying some sort of cutoff from the international community.

Hard to that in that area, no? It was actually just a backhanded way of saying they got their independence, of course. The teething troubles of a new nation are "interesting" in the same way as the Chinese curse that wishes you live an "interesting" life.

dtugg
9th December 2010, 05:47 AM
This definition includes:
Mass killing of civilians during total war, especially via strategic bombing, such as the Bombing of Chongqing, the Blitz, the bombing of Dresden and Hamburg, or the Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Wrong. Strategic bombing by the Allies during WW2 was to destroy legitimate targets. But since accuracy was measured in miles, civilian deaths were unavoidable.

What would you have done if you were President during the end of WW2?

A) Use atomic weapons against legitimate targets, causing lots of casualties, but perhaps bringing a swift end to the war and saving many more people.
B) Proceed with Operation Downfall, almost certainly causing millions of casualties.
C) Proceed with a blockade in an attempt to force the Japanese to surrender by starving it.
D) Walk away from the war.
E) Other.

Damien Evans
9th December 2010, 05:48 AM
Hard to that in that area, no? It was actually just a backhanded way of saying they got their independence, of course. The teething troubles of a new nation are "interesting" in the same way as the Chinese curse that wishes you live an "interesting" life.

Hard to in any British area except the USA, we're still all linked in the Commonwealth after all.

Skwinty
9th December 2010, 05:52 AM
So, Dresden and Hamburg were legitimate military targets.

How do you describe the deaths inflicted by allied bombing?

Euthanasia?

The point is, mass murders were committed by all participants in the war.

No country can claim exemption, not even the good old US of A.

ETA: I would not have done anything different, other than to admit that war is nothing short of mass murder.

dtugg
9th December 2010, 05:59 AM
So, Dresden and Hamburg were legitimate military targets.

Within them, yes.

How do you describe the deaths inflicted by allied bombing?

Euthanasia?

An unfortunate, unavoidable reality of the war.

The point is, mass murders were committed by all participants in the war.

Nope. It is only murder if it is illegal. Causing incidental casualties while targeting legitimate targets is not.

No country can claim exemption, not even the good old US of A.

Sure it can.

Skwinty
9th December 2010, 06:04 AM
Winston Churchill was very impressed with Portal's performance as head of Bomber Command and described him as "the accepted star of the Air Force". He was knighted in July 1940 and three months later was promoted to the rank of air chief marshal and appointed as chief of the air staff.
With the new head of Bomber Command, Arthur Harris, he developed the policy of area bombing (known in Germany as terror bombing) where entire cities and towns were targeted. Portal and Harris argued that the main objectives of night-time blanket bombing of urban areas was to undermine the morale of the civilian population and attacks were launched on Hamburg, Nuremberg, Cologne, Dresden and other German cities. This air campaign killed an estimated 600,000 civilians and destroyed or seriously damaged some six million homes. It was a highly dangerous strategy and during the war Bomber Command had 57,143 men killed.
As a member of the Chiefs of Staff Committee, Portal had a significant influence on Allied strategy and other important matters of military policy. Winston Churchill valued Portal advice but in March, 1945, he gave instructions to bring an end to area bombing. As he explained: "It seems to me that the moment has come when the question of bombing of German cities simply for the sake of increasing the terror, should be reviewed. Otherwise we shall come into control of an utterly ruined land."

Gawdzilla
9th December 2010, 06:21 AM
It has always struck me as interesting that England was staunchly "We can take it!" during the Blitz, and then Bomber Harris told them that they could bomb Germany into submission.

kookbreaker
9th December 2010, 07:07 AM
Re Yorktown, I used to make the point that if she'd had an armored flight deck, like the Brits, she'd had less damage. Then I pointed out that if she'd had an armored flight deck she might not have been repaired in time for Midway. Pluses and minuses, give and take.

I tend to side away from armored flight decks as:

1) They take a long time to build/repair as you pointed out.
2) They use a lot of resources
3) They slow the Carriers down because they are heavy
4) They couldn't carry as many planes.

I think there was a study not long after the war (when HM Navy was looking down their noses at the US Navy) that found the down time of armored carriers was much greater than unarmored carriers.

kookbreaker
9th December 2010, 07:12 AM
(b) Japan had gotten the lucky breaks at Midway

I've stated before that while there were a few lucky breaks for the US at Midway, much of the luck was in the form of Japanese Naval arrogance. Arrogance not only in their strategy and tactics, but in other crucial areas such as damage control.

I also like to point out that if not for some extreme examples of being lucky prior to Midway, the Japanese wouldn't have been in shape to be there. I suspect they had played out their lucky cards by then. :D

Even then, the Japanese had some 'lucky breaks' at Midway. I mean, how many Torpedoes from the USS Nautilus failed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nautilus_%28SS-168%29#First_patrol_.E2.80.94_the_Battle_of_Midway )?

Gawdzilla
9th December 2010, 07:13 AM
I tend to side away from armored flight decks as:

1) They take a long time to build/repair as you pointed out.
2) They use a lot of resources
3) They slow the Carriers down because they are heavy
4) They couldn't carry as many planes.

I think there was a study not long after the war (when HM Navy was looking down their noses at the US Navy) that found the down time of armored carriers was much greater than unarmored carriers.

How many decks did that study compare?

MG1962
9th December 2010, 07:32 AM
So it seems to me the real blame lies with the Japanese leadership and the Emperor for needlessly and stupidly prolonging the war for many months, sentencing huge numbers of Japanese citizens to their deaths for no good reason.

However at this point we have to consider what the Japanese were actually fighting for. To win the war? clearly not, but to stop the occupation of the home islands by allied forces.

This more than anything was their greatest fear. Thats why they fought on in a hopeless war

Dave Rogers
9th December 2010, 07:54 AM
I tend to side away from armored flight decks as:

1) They take a long time to build/repair as you pointed out.
2) They use a lot of resources
3) They slow the Carriers down because they are heavy
4) They couldn't carry as many planes.

OTOH, the armoured (I insist on the 'u'; they were British, after all) deck carriers were designed for service close to the European coast, where they were more likely to encounter land-based opposition and hence needed the protection. They couldn't rely on the American approach of carrying large air wings and sinking the enemy carriers first, because they weren't expected to engage in carrier-vs-carrier battle. Illustrious and Formidable both survived damage in the Mediterranean that would quite likely have sunk a Yorktown.

Dave

kookbreaker
9th December 2010, 08:08 AM
How many decks did that study compare?

I honestly do not remember. It has been ages.

Skwinty
9th December 2010, 08:14 AM
What surprised me about Pearl Harbour was that the Japanese never came back for a second attack. The carriers were all at sea, the ships in the harbour were sunk, but they never came back to finish off the oil storage facilities.

They would have had quite an advantage if the carriers came back to no fuel. Such are the decisions in war.

kookbreaker
9th December 2010, 08:58 AM
What surprised me about Pearl Harbour was that the Japanese never came back for a second attack. The carriers were all at sea, the ships in the harbour were sunk, but they never came back to finish off the oil storage facilities.

They would have had quite an advantage if the carriers came back to no fuel. Such are the decisions in war.

Another attack might have done some more damage, but the Japanese casualties would have been much higher. The element of surprise was gone, and they had no idea where the carriers would be.

Also remember that the Japanese had a habit of overlooking logistical details that they decided were not worthy of a warrior. Things like attacking fuel or concealing their latrines on islands just did not occur to them.

MG1962
9th December 2010, 09:02 AM
What surprised me about Pearl Harbour was that the Japanese never came back for a second attack. The carriers were all at sea, the ships in the harbour were sunk, but they never came back to finish off the oil storage facilities.

They would have had quite an advantage if the carriers came back to no fuel. Such are the decisions in war.

Actually the first and second attacks were completed. It was the third attack that got cancelled. There were two reasons for this. One, the commander thought the Americans, now having time to regroup would mount stiffening resistence. The second, he really thought he'd played his luck as far he could, and considered it prudent to withdraw

The Japanese had projected something like 33% losses during the attack. At the point they withdrew they were sitting pretty close to zero. Personally I think he should have gone for it, but then again I was not there.

What makes the decison funnier, the original Japanese plans had always played greater importance on the facilities and ships would be a bonus. In the end, the reverse became the plan that was executed.

Gawdzilla
9th December 2010, 09:10 AM
Actually the first and second attacks were completed. It was the third attack that got cancelled. There were two reasons for this. One, the commander thought the Americans, now having time to regroup would mount stiffening resistence. The second, he really thought he'd played his luck as far he could, and considered it prudent to withdraw

The Japanese had projected something like 33% losses during the attack. At the point they withdrew they were sitting pretty close to zero. Personally I think he should have gone for it, but then again I was not there.

What makes the decison funnier, the original Japanese plans had always played greater importance on the facilities and ships would be a bonus. In the end, the reverse became the plan that was executed.

There was one attack in two waves. The second attack was canceled when the damage reports showed that the majority of the BBs were in bad shape and the carriers weren't there.


Pearl Harbor Operations: General Outline of Orders and Plans (http://ibiblio.org/pha/monos/097/index.html)

I Ratant
9th December 2010, 09:13 AM
It has always struck me as interesting that England was staunchly "We can take it!" during the Blitz, and then Bomber Harris told them that they could bomb Germany into submission.
.
Yes.
"we" can take it.
"They" will panic and give up.
Not the only time the Brits have got it wrong.

I Ratant
9th December 2010, 09:15 AM
However at this point we have to consider what the Japanese were actually fighting for. To win the war? clearly not, but to stop the occupation of the home islands by allied forces.

This more than anything was their greatest fear. Thats why they fought on in a hopeless war
.
There's a correlation here to Harris's terror bombing of Germany.

Bishadi
9th December 2010, 01:16 PM
Yes, but you are not making any point by asking this question.

You can not compare uniformed soldiers making an attack against legitimate military targets between two nations in a state of war, to private terrorists making an attack against a solely civilian target in peacetime.

so let's compare;

US civilians were in china, kicking japanese butts, no war declared then

The japanese, hit pearl harbor (no war declared), military targets and kicked our butts.

Then US, after declaration of war, wipes out civilians with carbet firing bombings and then 2 nuclear detonations over japanese 'civilians'.



It is not a valid comparison. I suggest you do some research on the conventions of warfare.


uhhhh....


is that enough to compare?

maybe not. So let's add; The osama gang dont hate 'we the people' (the men and women of america), they hate the 'invisible hand' (our business having no virtues)

hence, to hit the wtc, they thought they hit the headquarters. (a military target to the 'utter guys' that oppose the "business rules" model of the west)


kind of weird how reality is a little bit opposite what many believe!

caniswalensis
9th December 2010, 02:25 PM
so let's compare;

US civilians were in china, kicking japanese butts, no war declared then

The japanese, hit pearl harbor (no war declared), military targets and kicked our butts.

Then US, after declaration of war, wipes out civilians with carbet firing bombings and then 2 nuclear detonations over japanese 'civilians'.




uhhhh....


is that enough to compare?

maybe not. So let's add; The osama gang dont hate 'we the people' (the men and women of america), they hate the 'invisible hand' (our business having no virtues)

hence, to hit the wtc, they thought they hit the headquarters. (a military target to the 'utter guys' that oppose the "business rules" model of the west)


kind of weird how reality is a little bit opposite what many believe!

Sorry, friend, but what point are you trying to make? You are not really making any sense here. There is no comparison between the 911 attack and any military operation.

The AVF was a uniformed military force operating under the sanction of the Chinese air forces.

Yes the Japanese bombed pearl harbor before declaring war. that is why we refer to it as a "sneak attack." What is your point with this?

The targets of the US bombings on the Japanese mainland were legitimate military targets. The Japanese chose to interweave those targets into the civilian population.

No matter how much you and Osama would like to spin it, the WTC was not a military target by any agreed upon definition of the term.

You are pretty much just spitting out a stream of misstatements. If you have a point, it is lost on me.

NWO Sentryman
9th December 2010, 02:40 PM
This reminds me on SpaceBattles of a troll who whitewashed Imperial Japan and denied the atrocities such as nanjing etc.

dudalb
9th December 2010, 04:16 PM
Re Yorktown, I used to make the point that if she'd had an armored flight deck, like the Brits, she'd had less damage. Then I pointed out that if she'd had an armored flight deck she might not have been repaired in time for Midway. Pluses and minuses, give and take.

And Yorktown would have carried quite a few less planes if she had a armored deck.
THe US Navy seriously considered armored decks, but when they found out the weight of the Armored Deck would have meant a drastic reduction in the number of planes a carrier could carry, they decided having more planes in the air would be a better defense then an armored deck.
The Brit carriers were handicapped in their operations because of the lesser number of planes they could carry.

dudalb
9th December 2010, 04:21 PM
I note that most of these apear to have been the Escort Carriers. How many did they have as of the attack on Pearl?

None. Escort carriers did not start coming into service until late 1942.
And even then the Atlantic had first call on them. They were designed primarily to give air cover against Submarines to Convoys to cover the huge gaps in Land based air coverage in the Atlantic;the Pacific got them a little later.

dudalb
9th December 2010, 04:23 PM
Interestingly it was demonstrated, rather pointedly and the Japanese didn't surrender, resulting in the need for a second demonstration. Bishadi, do you really believe that when they didn't surrender after the first bomb was dropped, showing them that not only did the Americans have it, but were willing to use it, that merely dropping it on some uninhabited island and saying "next time it'll be you" would have worked?

And after the Emperor made the decision to surrender, there was a coup attempt by the die hard military leaders to overthrow the Government and continue the war that damn near suceeded.

caniswalensis
9th December 2010, 04:25 PM
t

I am remembering Pearl Harbor and the brave who fought and died.

Sorry, but you have botched the job rather badly. In fact, I don't think you can retrieve it at this point.

See ya.

dudalb
9th December 2010, 04:41 PM
This reminds me on SpaceBattles of a troll who whitewashed Imperial Japan and denied the atrocities such as nanjing etc.

I have encountered those also. A sort of Pacific War equivilent of Holocaust Denial.
BTW if you mention the topic of Pearl Harbor, the overwhelming majority of the Holocaust Deniers I have encountered are also Pearl Harbor Conspiracy Believers.

RussDill
9th December 2010, 06:38 PM
you dont see much of anything you dont want too.

I'm sorry, let me be more clear. The computer I'm currently using is not capable of displaying the video. Can you please tell me if it is Emir making that statement in the video

the point of the thread was to provide evidence for anyone to read up on their own, then pearl harbor was not attacked just because they had nothing to do.

I really don't think any educated person believes that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor because they were bored. I also don't think that is the thesis you are trying to disprove. I think several people in this thread have pointed out several plausible strategic reasons for Japan attacking the US Pacific fleet.

why do you post on threads and conversations you cant understand?

go lay by your dish and take care of your own needs, by yourself!

Wow, yes, how dare I ask you to clarify.

Bishadi
9th December 2010, 06:41 PM
I'm sorry, let me be more clear. The computer I'm currently using is not capable of displaying the video. Can you please tell me if it is Emir making that statement in the video



I really don't think any educated person believes that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor because they were bored. I also don't think that is the thesis you are trying to disprove. I think several people in this thread have pointed out several plausible strategic reasons for Japan attacking the US Pacific fleet.



Wow, yes, how dare I ask you to clarify.

some forget when they forgive; i dont

Corsair 115
9th December 2010, 07:47 PM
So, Dresden and Hamburg were legitimate military targets.


Yes, there were. In regards to Hamburg, quoting from Reap the Whirlwind by Spencer Dunmore and William Carter:

Germany's major port and its second largest city, Hamburg was the centre of U-Boat construction. This fact alone justified the most strenuous efforts by Bomber Command. But Hamburg offered more plum targets: oil refineries and an enticing selection of factories and chemical plants.


In regards to Dresden in 1945, quoting again from the same book:

Pre-war Dresden could hardly have been described as a major industrial centre. But the war had changed the city's industrial face. By early 1945, Dresden had two companies engaged in aircraft and engine repairs plus twenty-four engineering and armaments firms. Products included small arms and ammunition, machine tools, electric gauges and measuring instruments, radio receivers and transmitters for ships and aircraft, electric generators and motors for U-Boats, gear wheels and differentials for vehicles, firefighting equipment, grinding wheels, small steam turbines for minesweepers, camera and lenses for U-Boat periscopes, anti-aircraft and artillery weapons, tank landing and assault craft, chemicals, and explosives. The city had long been an important railway centre with many repair shops and years. Through Dresden passed the lines that connected Berlin with Prague and Vienna and that linked eastern and southern Germany. The city was also a freshwater port, the Elbe being a much-used artery for freight traffic.



Note that the reasons for the high number of casualties in both those raids was due to the creation of a firestorm. Firestorms were rare events (there were only perhaps a dozen during the entire war) and could not be created on command. Had Bomber Command been able to create firestorms at will, they would have, shortly after Hamburg, burned to the ground another half-dozen German cities and quite possibly have knocked Germany out of the war.


How do you describe the deaths inflicted by allied bombing?


The civilian population was not detached and separate from the war effort. The civilian population was in fact indispensable to the war effort. No civilians, no economy; no economy, no military; no military, no war. Civilians may not have fought the war directly, but they did fight it indirectly.


With the new head of Bomber Command, Arthur Harris, he developed the policy of area bombing (known in Germany as terror bombing) where entire cities and towns were targeted.


Bomber Command was driven to area bombing because of technological and operational limitations. Bombing by daylight with unescorted bombers was simply unsustainable; the losses in the attacking force were far too high. (It's worth noting even a 5% loss rate, which seems quite small, is actually substantial. Assuming a starting force of 100 bombers and a constant 5% loss rate per mission, after just nine missions you are down to 63 bombers. That's 37% of the total starting force lost in just nine raids. It wasn't much better for the crews: at a 5% average loss rate per operation, a crew stood just a 60% chance of surviving 10 missions; a 37% chance of surviving 20 missions, and a 22% chance of surviving 30 operations. Not very good odds if you were a member of a bomber crew.)

So, bombing by daylight isn't feasible, so they opted for night bombing. But, contrary to pre-war expectations, even finding entire cities at night was difficult, let alone targetting specific structures within those cities. Early on, British bombing efforts were dismal—most bombs fell far away from the aiming points, and often outside cities entirely. Later, as technology improved and operational techniques progressed, finding cities became easier and targetting got better. The standard measure of accuracy was the percentage of bombs landing within three miles of the aiming point. That percentage varied greatly: excluding raids on Berlin, through April of 1943 it was typically below 30% (which means 70% of bombs were falling more than three miles away from the aiming point); from mid-1943 to early 1944 it was about 55%; from then on to the end of the war it steadily rose, reaching some 90% by early 1945. A circle with a radius of three miles equals an area of just over 28 square miles, and the bombs may fall anywhere within that area (and still others outside it).


Portal and Harris argued that the main objectives of night-time blanket bombing of urban areas was to undermine the morale of the civilian population and attacks were launched on Hamburg, Nuremberg, Cologne, Dresden and other German cities.


There are also many indirect effects of such raids. While the economic effect of area raids is not a specific one such as when targetting an industrial complex, there are nonetheless effects. Area bombing caused general economic dislocation: streets were blocked with debris, railway stations and rail lines damaged, both of which inhibited the movement of people, goods, and supplies; power grids and water mains were damaged and disrupted; workers left homeless need new shelter and accommodation. All of this siphons away economic activity that would otherwise be involved in direct war production. (Then of course there the factories and workshops directly involved in war production damaged or destroyed by an area raid.)

Quoting from The Crucible of War 1939-1945 by Brereton Greenhous, Stephen J. Harris, William C. Johnston, and William G.P. Rawling:

Of much greater significance... was the extent to which the bomber offensive against Germany constituted a 'Second Front' long before the Allied invasion of Northwest Europe, and even when only Bomber Command was heavily involved in it. In terms of manpower alone, Germany used between 500,000 to 800,000 workers to repair bomb damage and organize the dispersal of vital industries, labourers who could otherwise have been involved in the direct production of war materiel, while the Flak arm required some 900,000 men in 1943 and was still 656,000 strong in April 1945 — many of whom might otherwise have played a significant part in the ground war.


Note too that Germany did not simply let the RAF fly uncontested over its skies—Germany put much effort into the defence of its airspace. It had an extensive radar network, a good-sized night-fighter force, and large numbers of anti-aircraft artillery. Quoting again from The Crucible of War 1939-1945:

The enemy was also forced to allocate considerable equipment to air defence. In March 1942, as the German army was fighting crucial battles in Russia and Bomber Command had not yet launched its first 'thousand' raid or its initial battle of the Ruhr, there were already 3970 heavy Flak guns deployed around German cities which could have been made into mobile artillery or bolstered anti-tank defences in the east. By September 1944 that number had grown to 10,225. Indeed, according to Albert Speer, of the 19,713 88-millimetre and 128-millimetre dual-purpose Flak/anti-tank artillery pieces produced between 1942 and 1944, only 3172 could be allocated to the army for use in the anti-armour role because of the pressure from air attack. Similarly, the threat posed by Bomber Command's night raids meant that the German night-fighter force accounted for a consistently increasing percentage of Luftwaffe front-line strength — more than 20 per cent of the total by December 1944. Several hundred of those on strength in late 1943 and 1944 were machines which could have been used to great advantage in other roles and other fronts.


The above illustrates the interconnected nature of military operations. Actions in one sphere have an influence in another. Just 16% of Germany's dual-purpose artillery production from 1942-44 was pointing towards Allied tanks and soldiers—what would it have meant for the ground forces and their operations had another 5,000 or 10,000 or more very capable artillery pieces been aimed at them?

In terms of the daylight operations by the U.S., it went after specific targets when possible. It produced more easily measured direct effects on the Germany war economy. The Oil and Transportation Plans were critical components in crippling the German economy; by the time of Germany's surrender its economy was already in tatters, and faced complete collapse within perhaps another month or two.


What surprised me about Pearl Harbour was that the Japanese never came back for a second attack. The carriers were all at sea, the ships in the harbour were sunk, but they never came back to finish off the oil storage facilities.


Actually, only two U.S. battleships were permanent losses: the Oklahoma and Arizona. The California and West Virginia were sunk during the raid, but were later raised, repaired, extensively upgraded, and returned to service. The Nevada was beached to prevent it sinking in the channel; it too was later repaired and returned to service. The Maryland and Tennessee received relatively light damage, but were trapped by their sunken comrades outboard of them. The Pennsylvania, in drydock, was only slightly damaged.

Several commanders urged Nagumo to fly a third strike against Pearl but he declined, feeling the risk was not justified and because the carriers were going to be needed intact for future operations elsewhere.

Fortunately for the U.S., the Japanese often did not consider logistical and support facilities to be worthwhile targets (their submarines were never sent after Allied merchant shipping in the Pacific for example). So not only were the oil tank farms not attacked, neither were the docks, drydocks, repair and maintenance facilities, and the supply depots. The submarine pens were also ignored. Had all these targets been the focus of a third wave, it would have all but eliminated Pearl Harbor as a functional naval base for months.


.There's a correlation here to Harris's terror bombing of Germany.


Calling it 'terror bombing' ignores the many direct and indirect effects the nighttime area raids had on the German war economy. This is not to say that Harris was always right; he made mistakes and was an obstinate ideologue who refused to accept that 'precision' bombing could produce meaningful economic results, even when presented with evidence demonstrating it. But in terms of turning Bomber Command into a potent striking force with the capacity to do serious damage to German industry and the wider German economy, he was vital. (If only he had been less dogmatic—had he accepted that, by the end of 1944, his force had the ability to bomb quite accurately at night, its efforts would have been more directly effective.)
.

Dave Rogers
10th December 2010, 03:05 AM
so let's compare;

US civilians were in china, kicking japanese butts, no war declared then

The japanese, hit pearl harbor (no war declared), military targets and kicked our butts.

Did you choose to ignore the bit where you were told that the AVG didn't start fighting the Japanese until after Pearl Harbor? So, when you say "no war declared then", that's actually not true.

kind of weird how reality is a little bit opposite what many believe!

:i:

Dave

Dave Rogers
10th December 2010, 07:21 AM
Most people are not aware that in March, 1933, long before Hitler became the undisputed leader of Germany and began restricting the rights of German Jews, the American Jewish Congress announced a massive protest at Madison Square Garden and called for an American boycott of German goods


(1) Hitler became Chancellor in January 1933. At no time afterwards was it in dispute that he was the German Head of Government.
(2) The Nazi party had been campaigning for a boycott of Jewish-owned businesses since the 1920's, and had instigated intimidation and violence against Jewish businesses in 1931. It was clear by March 1933 that widespread anti-Semitic policies would be enacted by the Nazi-dominated government.
(3) It is the right of anyone in a free society to decide what they will buy and what they will not buy, to communicate to others their reasons for making those decisions, and to encourage others to do likewise.
(4) Describing a request for a trade boycott as equivalent to a declaration of war, as neo-Nazis like to do in this instance, is a classic example of the Fallacy of Equivocation.

So, Jewish people took perfectly legal action in response to deliberate intimidation, violence and economic discrimination. That's your justification for killing five and a half million different Jewish people?

Dave

paiute
10th December 2010, 07:29 AM
The Flying Tigers didn't go into combat until a couple weeks after Pearl Harbor. You fail, troll.

If you are interested in the history of the AVG, a fictional treatment is available here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13622413/Tigress-an-original-screenplay

Skeptic
10th December 2010, 11:03 AM
How do you describe the deaths inflicted by allied bombing?

How many Jews were killed in Dresden's bombing? None, since they were all expelled and murdered long before? Can you recall any protests from the residents of Dresden about that? Resistance? Me neither (specific brave individuals excepted).

How many foreign workers were killed in Dresden's bombing? Lots, since a lot of them were brought to Germany to be used as slave labor? Anybody in Dresden was against that? No? Didn't think so.

What would the Dresdenites do had Germany won the war? Demand justice to the foreign worker slaves and murdered Jews, since -- they all claimed after the war -- they weren't really Nazis and always opposed such abuses?

No? You don't think they would have done that? It's more likely they would have been quite glad to accept their place as the new master race lording over their new Slav slaves in the new Jew-free world?

I have absolutely zero sympathy for would-be world dominators, who were 100% content to go along with the dictator who promised them the #1 place in a world based on mass murder and enslavement of the "inferiors", so long as they were winning the war -- but when the inferiors turned the tables, and started hitting back, suddenly concerns about humanity and justice began to matter.

If I ever meet one of the pilots who bombed Dresden, or any other German or Japanese city (the Japanese tried to do precisely what Germany tried to do, only in the far east) in WWII, I'd buy him a beer and congratulate him on a job well done.

What would I describe those deaths as? As justice to the tens of millions murdered by the Germans and Japanese in their mad quest for world domination. A world where nations did what the Germans and Japanese did and did not suffer terrible retribution for it, a world where "gee, sorry about those 40,000,000-or-so dead, but thanks for not hurting our cities, we promise not to do it again, can we have peace now?" was listened to, would be a far less just world than is the case.

dudalb
10th December 2010, 11:17 AM
If you are interested in the history of the AVG, a fictional treatment is available here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/13622413/Tigress-an-original-screenplay

ANd there are several easily availalbe Histories of the AVG. I recommend "The Maverick War" by Duane Schutz in particular.

BTW John Woo wants to do a film about the AVG, with Liam Neeson as Chennault.

Giz
10th December 2010, 11:28 AM
What would I describe those deaths as? As justice to the tens of millions murdered by the Germans and Japanese in their mad quest for world domination. A world where nations did what the Germans and Japanese did and did not suffer terrible retribution for it, a world where "gee, sorry about those 40,000,000-or-so dead, but thanks for not hurting our cities, we promise not to do it again, can we have peace now?" was listened to, would be a far less just world than is the case.

It might also have been a less peaceful world. During WW1, the German home front was spared direct participation in the war and led to myths like the "we weren't really defeated, just stabbed in back" and grew into a desire to try again.

In WW2, the whole of Germany got to experience losing a war... and it finally appears to have knocked the militarism out of them.

Sabretooth
10th December 2010, 12:47 PM
and what is carpet bombing of cities but evil?

...and the Japanese sending over Jet Stream balloon bombs over to US soil with no specific or designated military target identified (ie: only to create havoc and kill whoever happens to be in the area) is cool with you?

Doubt
10th December 2010, 02:52 PM
Just to get back to the misguided assertions about why Japan attacked the US. Adult humans and human societies rarely take actions beyond eating and sleeping for a single reason. Complex behavior such as war almost always has multiple causes. Stating that a war happened for a single reason is an over simplification. Although there is often one key reason.

Was Japan unhappy with the US prior to WWII? Yes. Was the AVG the primary reason? No. It was just one reason of many.

The US was unhappy with Japan because of it's actions in China. The most critical issue occurring just before the war was that the US cut off Japans oil supply and other raw materials. The Pearl Harbor attack was not the main thrust of the initial attacks. British territory in southeast Asia was where the bulk of the force was committed in the opening effort of the war. There was oil there.

http://www.japan-guide.com/e/e2129.html


In 1940, Japan occupied French Indochina (Vietnam) upon agreement with the French Vichy government, and joined the Axis powers Germany and Italy. These actions intensified Japan's conflict with the United States and Great Britain which reacted with an oil boycott. The resulting oil shortage and failures to solve the conflict diplomatically made Japan decide to capture the oil rich Dutch East Indies (Indonesia) and to start a war with the US and Great Britain.

In December 1941, Japan attacked the Allied powers at Pearl Harbour and several other points throughout the Pacific. Japan was able to expand her control over a large territory that expanded to the border of India in the West and New Guinea in the South within the following six months.


See the economic issues cited in Japan's declaration of war:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_declaration_of_war_on_the_United_States_a nd_the_British_Empire


IMPERIAL RESCRIPT


By the grace of Heaven, Emperor of Japan [Emperor Shōwa], seated on the throne occupied by the same dynasty from time immemorial, enjoin upon ye, Our loyal and brave subjects:

We hereby declare War on the United States of America and the British Empire. The men and officers of Our Army and Navy shall do their utmost in prosecuting the war. Our public servants of various departments shall perform faithfully and diligently their respective duties; the entire nation with a united will shall mobilize their total strength so that nothing will miscarry in the attainment of Our war aims.

To insure the stability of East Asia and to contribute to world peace is the far-sighted policy which was formulated by Our Great Illustrious Imperial Grandsire [Emperor Meiji] and Our Great Imperial Sire succeeding Him [Emperor Taishō], and which We lay constantly to heart. To cultivate friendship among nations and to enjoy prosperity in common with all nations, has always been the guiding principle of Our Empire's foreign policy. It has been truly unavoidable and far from Our wishes that Our Empire has been brought to cross swords with America and Britain. More than four years have passed since China, failing to comprehend the true intentions of Our Empire, and recklessly courting trouble, disturbed the peace of East Asia and compelled Our Empire to take up arms. Although there has been reestablished the National Government of China, with which Japan had effected neighborly intercourse and cooperation, the regime which has survived in Chungking, relying upon American and British protection, still continues its fratricidal opposition. Eager for the realization of their inordinate ambition to dominate the Orient, both America and Britain, giving support to the Chungking regime, have aggravated the disturbances in East Asia. Moreover these two Powers, inducing other countries to follow suit, increased military preparations on all sides of Our Empire to challenge Us. They have obstructed by every means Our peaceful commerce and finally resorted to a direct severance of economic relations, menacing gravely the existence of Our Empire. Patiently have We waited and long have We endured, in the hope that Our government might retrieve the situation in peace. But Our adversaries, showing not the least spirit of conciliation, have unduly delayed a settlement; and in the meantime they have intensified the economic and political pressure to compel thereby Our Empire to submission. This trend of affairs, would, if left unchecked, not only nullify Our Empire's efforts of many years for the sake of the stabilization of East Asia, but also endanger the very existence of Our nation. The situation being such as it is, Our Empire, for its existence and self-defense has no other recourse but to appeal to arms and to crush every obstacle in its path.

The hallowed spirits of Our Imperial Ancestors guarding Us from above, We rely upon the loyalty and courage of Our subjects in Our confident expectation that the task bequeathed by Our forefathers will be carried forward and that the sources of evil will be speedily eradicated and an enduring peace immutably established in East Asia, preserving thereby the glory of Our Empire.

In witness whereof, we have hereunto set our hand and caused the Grand Seal of the Empire to be affixed at the Imperial Palace, Tokyo, this seventh day of the 12th month of the 15th year of Shōwa, corresponding to the 2,652nd year from the accession to the throne of Emperor Jimmu.
(Released by the Board of Information, December 8, 1941. Japan Times & Advertiser)

Travis
11th December 2010, 01:38 AM
So, Dresden and Hamburg were legitimate military targets.

They sure were. Hamburg was a major port and Dresden was a railroad hub.

How do you describe the deaths inflicted by allied bombing?

Euthanasia?

Unfortunate. If an end could have come about without them then the allies would have pursued it but not at the expense of military capability or aims.

The point is, mass murders were committed by all participants in the war.

There is a difference between causing a mass amount of death and a "mass murder." Babi Yar (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babi_Yar) was a mass murder because it's victims were prisoners, unarmed and helpless.

Gawdzilla
11th December 2010, 05:15 AM
Can we change the subject line on the OP to "Remember what we were talking about?"