And now you're doing it too. And I have more respect for you than JB, especially since you've never indulged in blatant personal attacks and jackassitry like he has.
Operation Downfall 1945:US invasion of Japan
- Thread starter nova2010
- Start date
And now you're doing it too. And I have more respect for you than JB, especially since you've never indulged in blatant personal attacks and jackassitry like he has.
Please, point out where I called people racist. You'll find, if you actually bother to read my post, that I have not changed my position at all.
Now either you're lying to save face, or you're not paying attention. I really don't care which. I said exactly what I meant: the standard narrative is only supportable with old fashioned Yellow Horde style racism, and that uncritically advancing that narrative makes one complicit. No more, no less.
So you think having a temper tantrum, and accusing me of things that are blatantly not true is going to make me run up the white flag? Not going to happen.
I'd take your assessment that my arguments "aren't very good" a bit more seriously if you showed any understanding of them. But since you're still fighting the same straw man, I'm just going to say that this conversation is over, as I see absolutely no point in even making an attempt after this display.
And let the record state I'm quite willing to believe the United States was in the wrong about various things, so it's not some brittle refusal to believe my country isn't perfect.
(The expulsion of the Five Civilized Tribes, for example, was a seriously dick move, especially given how integrated they were with white society. And the backstabbing of the Filipino rebels was even worse, given the number of dead and the massive hypocrisy involved.)
(The expulsion of the Five Civilized Tribes, for example, was a seriously dick move, especially given how integrated they were with white society. And the backstabbing of the Filipino rebels was even worse, given the number of dead and the massive hypocrisy involved.)
Having a temper tantrum? You came in here making very nasty claims and not providing sources for alleged facts, while I provided links to support my arguments.
Furthermore, I even conceded some points to you by describing how the Japanese had stripped their country bare to prepare for Downfall and consequently wouldn't be very strong elsewhere.
Even if you didn't explicitly call anyone in particular a racist, you said the argument that the atomic bombings were necessarily is solely and completely racist, which is flat-out wrong, and then you called me a moral coward.
No, I'm just counting more long term deaths as well. For Hiroshima, the estimated death toll directly attributable to the bombing after five-years is around 200,000.
Cook
Banned
We know from the records of the discussions prior to the use of the atomic bombs that there were no doubts in the allied command as to the expected casualty rates.
As to the targeting of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, both were major militray targets; Hiroshima was the headquarters of the Imperial Japanese Navy’s Combined Fleet and the Japanese Second Army’s headquarters, commanding all of southern Japan, was also located there, while Nagasaki was the main military port of Kyushu. Nagasaki hadn’t been the primary target on the 9th of August, that had been Kokua, which was one of the largest arsenals in Japan.
You're lying again. And reversing your position. First I called people racist. Then I didn't. Which is it?
So now you say I said the whole argument was racist. Another lie. I said it relied on racism. These are two completely different things.
You should probably quit while you're ahead.
Here's the opening post that got on my nerves:
You said the traditional casualty figures are based on racism, racism, racism. You acknowledged no other basis for it.
And then you not only emphasized it, you accused me of complicity:
Ah ok, counting the long term death toll your numbers are probably correct then. I was counting the immediate death toll.
Though in comparison I will stress it is still probably less than the overall Allied bombing campaign in general. It may exceed it in the later years, but I don't think it counts out the horror of the firebombings.
They based those assessments off faulty data samples, and sloppy analysis. The tactical situation in the Home Islands was nothing like Iwo Jima or Okinawa, and the troops were in a lot worse position in terms of morale, training and experience. The supply situation was also degrading by the day.
Not to mention that the political leadership in Japan were very aware of just how boned they were. Unless Olympic happens before the Soviet invasion of Manchuria, I doubt that they'd hold out long enough for the invasion to begin. Unconditional surrender was an inevitability the moment the Soviets joined the war, because it cut off the last option for a negotiated peace settlement.
Razing a city to destroy the military objectives within is pretty odious, and I hope you're not suggesting that this somehow made the attacks just. At any rate, the Allies didn't seem to think it was a legitimate military action when their foes did it, considering people were hanged at the Nuremberg and Tokyo tribunals for far lesser offenses.
So let me get this straight. When we point out a single factor in something, and don't point out the other ones because others have already made them obvious, we are somehow saying that that single factor is actually the only factor?
I don't have to acknowledge any other basis for it. Saying "X relies upon Y" has never been understood to mean that "X relies solely upon Y".
And I called you complicit in the ideological narrative because you are, and seem to be incapable of admitting "Gosh, people sixty plus years ago were racist".
The racial attitudes of that period are well documented, and they permeated all levels of society. Our own propaganda relied upon it. I don't think the propaganda makers and the policy makers were some how immune to this social phenomenon that was a whole hell of a lot older than they were.
I am quite willing to acknowledge people sixty years ago were racist. They segregated blood banks, for crying out loud, and interned 300,000 Japanese-Americans on the mainland, where the population had engaged in no shenanigans whatsoever, while leaving the J-A population of the Hawaiian Islands (which included spies for Japan and a small number who actively helped a downed Japanese pilot after Pearl Harbor) alone because they were too economically useful.
However, you jumped in with both feet on the racism angle without much supporting evidence and a lot of belligerence, without even a scintilla of anything about "sloppy analysis" that you brought in later. And then when I had the gall to disagree with you, you went straight to accusations of moral cowardice.
Furthermore, even if the A-Bomb was unnecessary, did the American war planners know that Downfall wasn't going to be Iwo Jima or Okinawa 2.0? They didn't need to believe anything about Mindless Asian Hordes to think that the Japanese would fight even more fiercely in defense of their Home Islands than a couple of colonial possessions.
In fact, given the importance of these possessions to the defense of their Home Islands, that would explain why they fought for them so hard. Logically, they would fight even harder for their actual homes.
Look at Germany. They were fighting well past the "quit while you're ahead" point. Why should the Japanese be any different?
And lecturing me about an ideological narrative is rich consider you identify yourself as a Marxist in your personal profile. Marxism is a much more specific ideological entity than "capitalism" or "Americanism."
Furthermore, even if the Japanese supply situation for Downfall was worse, the terrain was more in their favor. There aren't a lot of good places to invade the Home Islands.
They knew exactly where the landing would be. One can surround a small island and hit it from all directions, but an island as big as Kyushu is something else.
They knew exactly where the landing would be. One can surround a small island and hit it from all directions, but an island as big as Kyushu is something else.
Cook
Banned
They didn’t; the estimates of casualties to be expected from the invasion of the Home Islands were based on the experience of Okinawa and Iwo Jima and on their knowledge of the number of divisions the Japanese Army had in reserve in the home islands. The Tactical situation is indeed different on the home islands – it’s worse for an attacker; the terrain is far hillier and more wooded, imparting far more advantages to the defenders, something that allied experience fighting in the Italy had taught would cost them severly. What they did not know about until after the war was just how extensive the kamikaze reserve was; something that would have made amphibious landings far more hazardous than anticipated.
The Japanese government calculated at the time that their civilian population were living on an average of 1800 Calories per day, had it dropped lower it still would not have led to surrender because the regime simply did not care how many civilians died. Vice-Admiral Onishi, the creator of the Kamiakze, insisted that 20 million civilians should sacrifice themselves in attacks against the invading armies when they came. Admiral Ugaki, champion of Japan's suicidal midget submarine program rejected such half measures; he called for 100 million Japanese to die repelling the invaders.
There was no possibility of internal revolt, nor any indication that resistance on the Home Islands would be anything less that it had been on Okinawa and Iwo Jima. Just as Germany had been a rigidly controlled society with any dissent being crushed unmercifully by the Gestapo, the Kempeitai scrutinized every aspect of Japanese society and meted out lethal punishment for even minor infractions; people were beaten to death for hanging the Imperial flag above the door of their house in a manor not considered sufficiently respectful. Germany’s Nazi regime had authorized gangs to apply summary justice to anyone they suspected of less than one hundred percent loyalty in the dying days of the Battle for Berlin, but the Kempeitai had had this power since 1941. No dissent was possible.
While the American blockade meant that the Japanese home islands weren’t receiving any more resources from the Southern Resource Sphere, that does not mean that Japan was on the verge of collapse or that they did not have enough essential resources with which to fight. In December 1941 Japan had commenced the Pacific War with 29.6 million barrels of oil. In July 1945 they had 800,000 barrels of oil left, of which 316,000 barrels of oil were reserved exclusively for Kamikaze operations, for which they were also reserving pilots and aircraft and were building more for, including the MXY7 Ohka piloted bomb.
When the Allies invaded Okinawa in April 1945 Emperor Hirohito demanded a maximum effort from his commanders so that Japan could be still considered a credible military force by the Soviet Union so that an alliance with the Soviets against the Americans could be negotiated. Molotov rejected the Japanese proposal on April 5, 1945, further by rejecting Japan’s request for oil and told the Japanese that their Non-Aggression Pact would not be renewed.
From the records of the meetings of the Supreme War Leadership Council, and from the interrogations of the Japanese war leaders after the surrender, we have an extremely good picture both of the Japanese intentions, and to limited impact the atomic bombings had on their deliberations.
The Supreme War Leadership Council, consisting of Emperor Hirohito, Prime Minister Kantaro Suzuki and the inner War Cabinet had met on July 27, 1945 to consider the Allied demand for surrender that had been issued at Potsdam (and which included a warning of terrible new weapons to come). At the meeting the Chief of the Navy General Staff, Admiral Toyoda advocated rejecting the allied demands as absurd: Japan was undefeated. The Foreign Minister successfully argued against making an outright rejection, and instead the council decided simply to ignore it. That the demand had been rejected was however leaked to Japanese newspapers the next day and from there the Allies learned of it.
On 6 August 1945 the first Atomic Bomb was dropped on Hiroshima. Even this was not enough to force a change of mood in the senior command; in fact it barely seems to have registered on the leadership in Tokyo, possibly because the resulting devastation was less than what had already been inflicted on Tokyo by mass firebombing raids. The Marine Training Division headquarters was at Ujina, just four kilometres from the epicentre of the atomic blast. The headquarters was largely undamaged and became a hospital for the injured and a control centre for disaster response and sent a report to Tokyo that, ‘with sufficient preparation and safety measures, it is nothing to be afraid of.’
Two days later the Soviet Union declared war upon the Empire of Japan and invaded Manchuria on the 9th, the day after that the second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki.
Even this wasn’t enough to elicit an immediate surrender; it was not until the 15th, fully six days after the second atomic bombing and after even more fire-bombing that the Emperor radioed his Unconditional Surrender.
I am because it does. Both were legitimate military targets under International Law.
Feel free to highlight any unjust decisions made by the War Crimes Trials at Nuremburg and the international Military Tribunal for the Far East in Tokyo.
Cook,
For the sake of the argument, do you have any links corroborating the things you're saying about Hirohito wanting to ally with the Soviets?
For the sake of the argument, do you have any links corroborating the things you're saying about Hirohito wanting to ally with the Soviets?
And you're defensive for perfectly understandable reasons as well. If there's any doubt that the Japanese surrender would have happened anyway without the atomic bombs, then you have to consider the bombing a difficult ethical choice, not a black and white issue where you can simply regard anyone who disagrees with you as being motivated only by racism and self-delusion, and you just can't deal with moral ambiguity on this issue.
Can we maybe avoid re-starting that fight and focus on the issues?
Between JB's blatantly wrong (and un-diplomatically worded) opening post, my overreaction to it (saying an argument is racist isn't the same as calling the person racist, even though there's a strong overlap), his accusations of moral cowardice and dishonesty and his mind-reading, my swearing at him, etc. that was something nobody involved should be proud of.
I did some Wikipedia-ing for one of my lesser AH projects (it involves a Downfall that ruins Japan so much it ends up becoming a US territory) and the Japanese had concentrated most of their ammunition and the like in Kyushu. As Basileus said before the real fight started, Coronet is going to be much easier going.
Here's the main link, which includes a description of Japanese plans to respond to the invasion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall
One would hope the Japanese would surrender after the obliteration of most of their remaining military and the occupation of Kyushu (with the Soviets probably in control of all Korea by this point and possibly even poking at Hokkaido), but if the "wouldn't it be nice if everyone in Japan died in glorious battle" mafia took power, that might not happen. Or if the Emperor is killed somehow, things might get really bad.
(The Germans were willing to die en masse for the Fuhrer and there's no precedent for that kind of devotion to a political leader, but in Japan, the Emperor was viewed as a living god. Killing him would upset quite a lot of people, even if it's an accident.)
Between JB's blatantly wrong (and un-diplomatically worded) opening post, my overreaction to it (saying an argument is racist isn't the same as calling the person racist, even though there's a strong overlap), his accusations of moral cowardice and dishonesty and his mind-reading, my swearing at him, etc. that was something nobody involved should be proud of.
I did some Wikipedia-ing for one of my lesser AH projects (it involves a Downfall that ruins Japan so much it ends up becoming a US territory) and the Japanese had concentrated most of their ammunition and the like in Kyushu. As Basileus said before the real fight started, Coronet is going to be much easier going.
Here's the main link, which includes a description of Japanese plans to respond to the invasion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall
One would hope the Japanese would surrender after the obliteration of most of their remaining military and the occupation of Kyushu (with the Soviets probably in control of all Korea by this point and possibly even poking at Hokkaido), but if the "wouldn't it be nice if everyone in Japan died in glorious battle" mafia took power, that might not happen. Or if the Emperor is killed somehow, things might get really bad.
(The Germans were willing to die en masse for the Fuhrer and there's no precedent for that kind of devotion to a political leader, but in Japan, the Emperor was viewed as a living god. Killing him would upset quite a lot of people, even if it's an accident.)
This, is a brilliant sentence. I would like to sig that with permission.
Anyway. About the results of operation Downfall, i have questioned its oucome too in this thread i made a year ago. It shocked me when i read not only what the Japanese where planning to do but also the Americans, even without the nukes they planned to use as tactical bombs(if the first 2 failedl ike the OP said they won't use the others in Downfall would they?).
Yes, it would have been a bloodbath. Yes millions of japanese would be dead and hundreds of thousands of Americans. it would have changed the war, even though it was practically over. Now that i think about it, i don't even know what the Soviets where planning on doing if they had the chance at Japan itself. Makes it all even more terrible.
I was always one of the people that condemned the Atomic bombings on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. But, seeing Downfall as the alternative i say the effects where highly favorable towards Japan, the USA and eventually humanity(maybe a bit overreacting, but i am still in shock aobut it). Whatever the motives where, or the targets, the bombs saved both countries.