Did supression tactics work on the Japanese? Did the Japanese use them?

Griffith

Banned
I recalled in World War 2 fighting between German forces often involve supression and flanking. When Allied troops went into firefights, it becomes a challenge of who could fire enough bullets at the enemy first to force them to either hide behind cover or be cautious about exposing themsleves while trying to aim at enemy troops. Once on side gets suppressed, the other side continues firing to keep the enemy supressed while they send one or more of their own troops to look for openings and pathways that they could pass through without being spotted or being an easy target to shoot at so that they could shoot the enemy from unprotected areas usually the rear or sides. Because the supressed enemy is so busy trying to avoid getting shot they don't notice that troops that are going to flank them or pay minimal attention to them. Thus these troops that fired at the supressed enemies from unprotected usually easily the supressed enemy troops.

Now Iam curious did these tactics ever work in the Pacific Front against the Japanese. I mean we always hear of how Japanese soldiers insanely keep firing at Allied troops without trying to hide behind their barricades while firing. The way the Japanese soldiers portrayed when they fight, it is often as they keep firing without regard to their own lives despite having cover. Since Japanese soldiers fought like this were the Suppression tactics used so effectively in Europe against the Germans useless in the Pacific Front? Or did Japanese soldiers actually feared getting shot and actually tried to prevent exposure of themselves while trying to fire? Did Japanese soldiers use suppression on American soldiers?

I mean WW2 movies especially black and white films always show Japanese soldiers lacking regard to their lives and not bothering to take cover when firing. Often these movies also portray Japanese troops charging at enemy positions with bayonets.These same movies portray the American marines easily shooting down Japanese soldiers in positions such as trenches and with cover infront as though its a turkey hunt because the Japanese are shown so exposed and not taking caution.
 
The thing is those charges did occur. They were called Banzi charges and were often just masses of men charging dug in troops.

The IJA was described as 'Soldier ants' by one British General, utterly tenacious and not really deterred by weight of fire but they were also VERY inflexible with their planning. If their plan went askew they would not back down and try something new, but keep doing the plan as per the original idea, no matter how long ago the wheels fell off.

The IJA was also a very aggressive force, but this often left them exposed, during the early battles on Guadacanal the IJA launched several frontal attacks across a river against dug in opponents and even though their men got butchered they kept hitting the same point again and again. This was partially because of the mindset of it being perfectly acceptable to fail, if you do so whilst trying your best. An officer might see that his attack is not going to work, but honour and face demand that he try, no matter what. And if you fail, well you die honourably.

To the Western military that mindset makes little sense but to the IJA, perfectly normal and indeed almost expected.
 
The IJA was described as 'Soldier ants' by one British General, utterly tenacious and not really deterred by weight of fire but they were also VERY inflexible with their planning. If their plan went askew they would not back down and try something new, but keep doing the plan as per the original idea, no matter how long ago the wheels fell off.

Hilariously, the Japanese reported the same about the Americans.
 

nbcman

Donor
I recalled in World War 2 fighting between German forces often involve supression and flanking. When Allied troops went into firefights, it becomes a challenge of who could fire enough bullets at the enemy first to force them to either hide behind cover or be cautious about exposing themsleves while trying to aim at enemy troops. Once on side gets suppressed, the other side continues firing to keep the enemy supressed while they send one or more of their own troops to look for openings and pathways that they could pass through without being spotted or being an easy target to shoot at so that they could shoot the enemy from unprotected areas usually the rear or sides. Because the supressed enemy is so busy trying to avoid getting shot they don't notice that troops that are going to flank them or pay minimal attention to them. Thus these troops that fired at the supressed enemies from unprotected usually easily the supressed enemy troops.

Now Iam curious did these tactics ever work in the Pacific Front against the Japanese. I mean we always hear of how Japanese soldiers insanely keep firing at Allied troops without trying to hide behind their barricades while firing. The way the Japanese soldiers portrayed when they fight, it is often as they keep firing without regard to their own lives despite having cover. Since Japanese soldiers fought like this were the Suppression tactics used so effectively in Europe against the Germans useless in the Pacific Front? Or did Japanese soldiers actually feared getting shot and actually tried to prevent exposure of themselves while trying to fire? Did Japanese soldiers use suppression on American soldiers?

I mean WW2 movies especially black and white films always show Japanese soldiers lacking regard to their lives and not bothering to take cover when firing. Often these movies also portray Japanese troops charging at enemy positions with bayonets.These same movies portray the American marines easily shooting down Japanese soldiers in positions such as trenches and with cover infront as though its a turkey hunt because the Japanese are shown so exposed and not taking caution.
First off, Japanese tactics nor any other other army tactics are not portrayed accurately in movies.

Japan military tactics favored offensive action and the use of infiltration through or around defenders especially at night. They didn't have the extensive amount of machine guns or artillery that the Western armed forces had so they didn't use suppression fire much. For an example, read up on their Malayan Campaign. Also, the IJA 1944 strategy was to avoid beach defenses and to avoid banzai charges to try to attrition the attackers as much as possible using available heavy weapons and fortifications.
 
Last edited:
This..

First off, Japanese tactics nor any other other army tactics are not portrayed accurately in movies.

Japan military tactics favored offensive action and the use of infiltration through or around defenders especially at night. They didn't have the extensive amount of machine guns or artillery that the Western armed forces had so they didn't use suppression fire much. For an example, read up on their Malayan Campaign. Also, the IJA 1944 strategy was to avoid beach defenses and to avoid banzai charges to try to attrition the attackers as much as possible using available heavy weapons and fortifications.

First understand the "Banzai charge" as depicted in movies or war stories was a last resort by veteran soldiers, or the blundering by a inexperienced and poorly trained leader. "Bamboo Spear " tactics were something else & more sophisticated than the simple last gasp suicide charge, While the Japanese infantry divisions & regiments were lighter in terms of support weapons than the US or Commonwealth counterpart they did understand and use suppressive fires. After that the Japanese small unit commander had two basic choices; one was to probe and infiltrate the enemy defense, including flanking manuvers or attacks. The other was a shock attack vs presumablly suppressed enemy defense positions.

In the defense of the Japanese these tactics often worked for them. More often than not through 1942 they were attacking poorly trained and led enemy infantry. A lot of suppression was not necessary, some infiltration easily unnerved the enemy, and a swift shock attack served to finish off the near panicked riflemen. When the Japanese infantry ran up against well trained and decently led opposition their weapons and tactics proved sucssesful less often.
 
Top