About Japanese industrial capacity, I heard they scattered it around. When some American generals surveyed bombed-out areas, they found machine tools in the ruins of houses.
About Japanese industrial capacity, I heard they scattered it around. When some American generals surveyed bombed-out areas, they found machine tools in the ruins of houses.
An interesting idea, one that ignores the fact that Japan had been attempting to surrender for several months before Hiroshima & Nagasaki. They were searching for a way to 'save face' and not have the Emperor subject to what they considered humiliation. The american army leadership was, I think, more anxious to test out their new atomic bomb, and given the casual racism prevalent in the day, they saw no problem in using the japanese. (This isn't to say that the japaneses weren't or aren't racist).
Gore Vidal has written extensively on the topic (along with Pearl Harbour), check it out...
The Japanese wanted to END the WAR, not surrender. Their "peace feelers" were built on them keeping their conquests in China, Manchuria, parts of the Pacific, their military forces, any accussed war criminals to be tried by Japanese military courts under Japanese rules of engagement, and lastly, allow the Emperor to remain in pre-war status (i.e. divine).
Effectively, they wanted to keep the fruits of their aggression through 12/1/41, have those conquests recognized as legitimate, and be able to rebuild their forces.
In short, they wanted to just pretend the whole war with the U.S. didn't happen, that they didn't lose the war, that they committed no war crimes (since Japanese field regulation did not forbid the treatment of PoWs as occurred), have the U.S. and the rest of the world accept that they controlled much of China & Manchuria. That isn't surrendering, that isn't even negiotiating, that is tell the side that is destroying you to %^$* off.
Can't imagine why the Allies didn't bite.
The Japanese wanted to END the WAR, not surrender. Their "peace feelers" were built on them keeping their conquests in China, Manchuria, parts of the Pacific, their military forces, any accussed war criminals to be tried by Japanese military courts under Japanese rules of engagement, and lastly, allow the Emperor to remain in pre-war status (i.e. divine).
Effectively, they wanted to keep the fruits of their aggression through 12/1/41, have those conquests recognized as legitimate, and be able to rebuild their forces.
In short, they wanted to just pretend the whole war with the U.S. didn't happen, that they didn't lose the war, that they committed no war crimes (since Japanese field regulation did not forbid the treatment of PoWs as occurred), have the U.S. and the rest of the world accept that they controlled much of China & Manchuria. That isn't surrendering, that isn't even negiotiating, that is tell the side that is destroying you to %^$* off.
Can't imagine why the Allies didn't bite.
So that justifies dropping nuclear death on civilians? Twice?
I'm not saying that the Japanese were boy scouts here, just that there could have been a negotiated solution. It may not have been pretty but it wouldn't involve large scale science experiments on the effects of radiation on humans...
Of course those people would be less dead if they had been napalmed.So that justifies dropping nuclear death on civilians? Twice?
I'm not saying that the Japanese were boy scouts here, just that there could have been a negotiated solution. It may not have been pretty but it wouldn't involve large scale science experiments on the effects of radiation on humans...
The Japanese wanted to END the WAR, not surrender. Their "peace feelers" were built on them keeping their conquests in China, Manchuria, parts of the Pacific, their military forces, any accussed war criminals to be tried by Japanese military courts under Japanese rules of engagement, and lastly, allow the Emperor to remain in pre-war status (i.e. divine).
Effectively, they wanted to keep the fruits of their aggression through 12/1/41, have those conquests recognized as legitimate, and be able to rebuild their forces.
In short, they wanted to just pretend the whole war with the U.S. didn't happen, that they didn't lose the war, that they committed no war crimes (since Japanese field regulation did not forbid the treatment of PoWs as occurred), have the U.S. and the rest of the world accept that they controlled much of China & Manchuria. That isn't surrendering, that isn't even negiotiating, that is tell the side that is destroying you to %^$* off.
Can't imagine why the Allies didn't bite.
So would you guys say there is much point in me carrying on, or is it too ASB
An interesting idea, one that ignores the fact that Japan had been attempting to surrender for several months before Hiroshima & Nagasaki. They were searching for a way to 'save face' and not have the Emperor subject to what they considered humiliation. The american army leadership was, I think, more anxious to test out their new atomic bomb, and given the casual racism prevalent in the day, they saw no problem in using the japanese. (This isn't to say that the japaneses weren't or aren't racist).
Gore Vidal has written extensively on the topic (along with Pearl Harbour), check it out...
So that justifies dropping nuclear death on civilians? Twice?
I'm not saying that the Japanese were boy scouts here, just that there could have been a negotiated solution. It may not have been pretty but it wouldn't involve large scale science experiments on the effects of radiation on humans...
The Bait
October 29 (X-3) - A huge set of ships sets sail for Kyushu. Meanwhile, the Japanese High Command is convinced this is the main attack and dispatches 1,000 kamikazes. They soon find that the ships are in fact carriers. The carrier aircraft rush up and shoot down a huge number of the Japanese aircraft, but there is still devastating damage to the US Navy which suffers the loss of 13 ships including 2 carriers.
October 30 (X-2) - The Allied Pacific War Council gives final approval to the plan for Olympic.
October 31 (X-1) - The transports set sail for Japan. Little do they know that not only will they have to fight the Japanese, but also a 'divine wind'
Could you give a more detailed account of the battle? How many transports were there - how many troops? How many ships, carriers? If I recall right, Sprague had 16 flattops with a total of 580 aircraft, and once that transport fleet arrives from the Philipines he has several more carriers.
How come the kamikazes strike so many ships? Go into detail on this. Was the cloud cover high? Kyushu has a lot of mountain ranges that could block radar, just like in Okinawa. The number of ships lost could also correspond with the positioning of the ships. Did the Allies have radar picket boats - now proved since Kwaljein to provide good CICs? OTL, these in Okinawa soaked up a lot of the Kamikazes - Because of the tendency of the inexperienced Kamikaze pilots to dive at any target they saw, thus absorbing the blows meant for the slow transport ships.
Of course those people would be less dead if they had been napalmed.
The Bait
October 29 (X-3) - A huge set of ships sets sail for Kyushu under the command of Adm. Spruance. They include several carriers from the 3rd Fleet, cruisers, destroyers and battleships, adding up to over 1,000 combat ships. Meanwhile, the Japanese High Command is convinced this is the main attack and dispatches 1,000 kamikazes. They soon find that the ships are in fact carriers and battleships. The carrier aircraft rush up and shoot down a huge number of the Japanese aircraft, but there is still devastating damage to the US Navy which suffers the loss of 23 ships including 2 carriers, most of this caused when the carrier aircraft had to return to their ships, leaving the fleets almost defenseless against air attack.
More people died in the conventional firebombings of German and Japanese cities and most of the critics of Hiroshima and Nagasaki don't care.
Methinks the real problem is "nuclear," not "death."
Actually, the real problem is "civilian". Just because your leader is war-mongering megalomaniac doesn't mean you are.
And who said I was conventional