And that’s without the Bushido code of death before surrender;
http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/Pearlman/pearlman.asp
And that’s without the Bushido code of death before surrender;
http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/resources/csi/Pearlman/pearlman.asp
Not exactly. The Japanese had more than 500,000 troops on Kyushuwaiting for the U.S. invasion.
Words. I understand the need a lot of people have to justify dropping the bomb.
We have no such code here, yet the American soldiers have stood up to and won the day against all these so called codes and super soldiers. Why did it not matter during the battles? The Nazi war machine, the Japanese Bushido code, where were they when we took it all the way through Europe and then to Japan?
Now you’re just being silly.
Didn’t the Berlin Offensive consist of 350,000 Soviet casualties and 900,000 Nazi casualties? That doesn’t include the other battles in the German homeland with the Allies. This is what you consider mopping up.
This is bordering on the disingenuous, now. There have been numerous cited cases where it’s made clear that the Wehrmacht and the Imperial Japanese Army were two very different beasts - including from a veteran of Okinawa, who made it clear in no uncertain terms that his fellow Marines did not relish a fight on the mainland, for it would almost certainly mean death, given the fierce fighting they had experienced on Okinawa (Iwo Jima is another good case study of Japanese tactics, or rather how their ideology influenced it).
The bomb was not pleasant, the bomb killed civilians (as did many conventional bombing runs in previous months, like the firebombing of Toyko - another point you’ve not addressed). But the alternatives were even more unpleasant, and would have resulted in even more civilian casualties. This was not some fantasy land whereby war was a matter of simply asking the enemy nicely if they’d maybe like to give up at some point, it was a total war with a fanatical enemy bent on fighting to the death.
The bomb gave them (well, most of them - even after Nagasaki there were nutcases who did not want to surrender. How would you ‘negotiate’ with this mentality?) a way out, a way to save face, a way to preserve the ‘Yamato-damashii’ in defeat.
The battle of Iwa Jima was to the death. Very few soldiers surrendered (216 of 18,000 Japanese soldiers).
Had we taken your approach, each of Japan’s islands would have been subjected to an uncontested barrage of 16" guns, carpet bombing and marine assaults. Fighting would be house to house until everything was destroyed because civilians would have been pressed into service. The concept of civilians would have been lost.
So to answer your question, where were the Japanese super soldiers when we “took it all the way”? They died and took many civilians with them.
The civilians were women ,children and men too old to be conscripted.
Just now?
Wrong again. If I remember correctly, the volunteer military service law at the end of the war mandated conscription for all Japanese males between the ages of 15 and 60 and all females between the ages of 17 to 40. Additionally, school children were being taught to use bamboo staves and spears to fight the coming American invasion. ( A picture is included here. ) Also children were being taught to be suicide bombers by strapping them with bombs.
The link above also contains a decent argument for dropping the atomic bombs on Japan.
They weren’t too helpless to leap off of cliffs rather than be captured, just like their Okinawan cousins.
And yet the women, children and elderly died by the thousands on Iwa Jima.
When you use school girls to make weapons then the building they are in becomes a target. When soldiers use a house to fire from it becomes a target.
Japan used everybody capable of drawing breath to advance the war and a homeland invasion would have devastated the civilian population.
Iwo Jima had no civilians. I believe you are thinking of Okinawa.
You show a complete and total lack of understanding of the Japanese mindset of the day.
The Imperial government had spent a very long time building up the idea of Bushido, and using the historical lessons of Ancient Japan. You know, a society that deemed that certain dishonors, the only option was to take your own life? Men, women and children being taught (and expected to use) the ritualistic suicide?
That attitude got warped a bit as things went on, and it was no longer a ritualistic suicide in order to cleanse the honor of your family. By the end of WW2, it was a “death by any means but at the hands of the barbaric invaders, and take some with you if you can” mindset.
Britain had pressed old men, 60 years old and older, into the Home Guard. If Sealion had happened, those old men with their antique rifles would have been going up against the best troops the Germans could throw into the fight. they would have been slaughtered. But they would have taken a German or two with them, in theory.
And they would have been seen as heroic figures to the British.
The Japanese would be doing the exact same thing, but also including all women, and young men down to the age of 15.
Those that were unable to fight would have killed themselves. some would have charged US positions, hoping to take out an invader. Old men, women, children… this is what the US forces would have been facing.
If you can’t grasp that fact, regardless of what the argument is, maybe you should admit that and move on.
The women were encouraged to kill themselves:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/20/world/asia/20iht-oki.html
These weren’t “just words” we’re using to justify our love for vaporising helpless…worms. The Japanese even sent their most powerful battleship, the Yamato, on a deliberate suicide mission.
The infantry were equally suicidal;
You have a funny definition of ‘mop-up’. Given the casualty levels around Berlin. Even so:
Does this read like a ‘mop-up’ operation?!
and
“Mop-up” indeed. :rolleyes:
I have my doubts any of this will matter to gonzomax, but I know I’m learning some things.
And I had a great-uncle who was in the U.S. Marines during the war. We only discussed it once (I think it was the 40th anniversary of V-J day or something) and he also described some of the ideas expressed here - that an invasion would have been disastrous for both sides and Japanese women had been convinced the Americans would rape and slaughter them all.
Something I wasn’t aware of, either - in October 1945 a typhoon devastated the island of Okinawa;
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq102-6.htm
Imagine if Japan hadn’t surrendered when it did - this epicentre of the storm would have been the staging area for the invasion.
There were also a number of tropical storms throughout November, when Operation Olympic was scheduled to be launched: 1945 Pacific typhoon season - Wikipedia
Anyone familiar with the preparations for D-Day will know the crucial importance weather has on amphibious invasions (D-Day itself was delayed due to choppy seas). This in turn would have postponed Operation Coronet - the war could have dragged out even longer. With more civilians dying in bombing raids and through starvation, and a Soviet presence.
Let’s not over exaggerate the “Bushido mindset”. There was a lot of peer pressure involved, and many of the suicides and suicidal attacks were involuntary.
You are kidding aren’t you? Women and children mobilized at the last desperate minute ,would provide resistance to an army. They would run in terror and rightly so. I do understand that people want to believe we were justified in dropping the bombs. Hell you are able to convince yourself we needed to drop 2 of them. I do understand the need . We have to pretend we are not aggressive and and a warring society. It makes us feel better. Pick up your eyes.