Should Jimmy Doolittle have Bombed the Imperial Palace in Tokyo?

“Japan’s Meiji Constitution of 1889 defined the emperor as “sacred and inviolable” and placed him at the pinnacle of power: all legislative, executive, and judicial power. The Emperor was also the supreme military commander…” (*Racing the Enemy *Tsuyoshi Hasegawa) The Kokutai system defined Japan.

For Doolittle to have struck the Palace Grounds directly would have been a tremendous boost to American morale and an equally devastating blow to that of the Japanese people. The Emperor was the Icon of Japan, not it’s industry. Such a blow would have caused major disruption within the chain of command.

Disruption of the leadership could have been sufficient to precipitate a Communist take over of the government resulting in an immediate cessation of the war.

Crane

(Boyo - since we are discussing possible outcomes your points about planning are interesting but not pertinent)

Because? Do you really think Japan was without a line of succession in 1942? The idea that the communists would have marched in, unopposed, and taken control of Japan is not rational. The Russians didn’t want any part of that war until August, 1945 when they declared war on Japan, some 2 days after Hiroshima was bombed.

Morgenstern,

Who said anything about Russia? Stalin was honoring a non-aggression treaty between Russia and Japan.

There was a strong Communist movement in Japan. Disruption of the government might have been sufficient for a take over from within.

Crane

Do you suppose that the administration might have believed that there were good reasons not to facilitate a communist takeover of Japan?

That might have been the concern of some, but not the majority view of the Roosevelt administration. Russia was a partner of the US and the traditional enemy of Japan. The possibility of an early cessation of the war would have tipped the scales.

Crane

I don’t think so. The communists had been crushed pretty mercilessly in the 20s and although they still existed underground to an extent, they weren’t of any significant influence. The only reference I remember coming across them in terms of WW2 is late in the war, when a number of conservative politicians around former prime minister Konoye feared that mass starvation would lead to a popular revolt against the government.

Exactly - disruption in the leadership would also have provided an opportunity. The Communists were a factor in post war elections.

Crane

The Japanese communist party was a very small factor if at all. The party was illegal in WWII and membership subjected the member to sanctions. In fact, it wasn’t until the US occupied Japan, post war, that the party was legalized.

You’re seriously misunderstanding the Emperor’s position, role and actual power in practice as opposed to what it was claimed to be in theory. He was not the supreme military commander, much less the head of all legislative, executive, and judicial power. His practical role was more to rubber stamp decisions already made; the Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal had far more practical power as the Emperor’s advisor than the Emperor himself did. To give you an idea, from wiki

The military had actual control of the government and most certainly did not take their orders from the Emperor nor even seek his approval. When the Army occupied Manchuria in 1931 the Emperor didn’t even know about it until it had already happened. On the militaries role in the government

The leaders of the attempted coup prior to surrender intended to place the Emperor under house arrest and prevent the broadcast of his surrender speech. They felt they were doing so out of patriotism and reverence for the position of Emperor, acting against the expressed wishes of the Emperor in the name of his ‘true’ wishes.

If Hirohito were killed, the Japanese would have focused on a number of projects aimed at attacking the US civilian population in the mainland. There were the paper balloons intended o start forest fires in the pacific coast, and the pestilential fleas to be dropped from 6-engined seaplanes.

I differ significantly on some of the opinions in this thread.

An argument I have recently seen advanced is that the very low surrender rate of Japanese soldiers during the island battles was not entirely due to a fanatical wish to die to preserve their honor, but also at least sometimes due to American troops more or less massacring those who did surrender, or were on the verge of surrendering, and their leadership largely turning a blind eye to the practice.

Certainly that war was brutal on all sides, whether one considers a Japanese sniper in a spiderhole shooting some teenage Iowa farmboy, or an American with a flamethrower immolating a bunker full of draftee clerks fro Tokyo.

The American firebombing campaign against Japanese cities did not do much to elevate our moral position or “redeem” us, either.

This is not to say the Japanese were innocent in any way – clearly there are numerous documented cases of their war crimes. I am not saying the Americans were “as” guilty, but it seems likely that a certain amount of rose-colored glass tints our memory of our part in the war.

Rationing in the US was at least partly for psychological effect, and partly due to redistribution of key resources. There were shortages of some items, but in general, the US was producing so much of everything that most of the rationing was for a different purpose than one might think:

(cite)

The Japanese leadership was aghast at the raid, which could have killed the Emperor even by accident. A long-standing argument between factions as to which course of action to take was immediately settled in favor of Yamamoto’s plan to invade Midway (they saw Midway as the weak spot in their island perimeter through which the attack had come).

Given that they immediately made a fatal blunder out of fear for the Emperor’s safety (more correctly, fear of being thought to be unconcerned for the Emperor’s safety), it’s hard for me to believe that coming measurably closer to hitting the Emperor by hitting the palace grounds would have made much difference.

I think they focused on those programs anyway. It’s not like they decided to let up on America because Doolittle missed the Emperor, is it? Both sides spent the war doing their utmost to hurt each other – they weren’t holding back some special extra anger that would have been unleashed if we’d done something different.
.

That’s right up there with fire bearing bats dropped from B-29s!

:slight_smile:

The raid inflicted very little damage, and it exposed the USN to enormous risk-what if the carrier (Wasp) was sunk?
Also, the reaction of the IJA was severe-they went on a rampage in China-many Chinese civilians lost their lives because of this.
Yes, it boosted US moral (to launch an attack on the Japanese home islands)…but was it sound judgement to have done so?

The carrier Wasp was at no risk at all from this mission, as it had no role in it. You are thinking of another carrier/flying bug, the Hornet.

Thanks! Wasp…Hornet, Iceberg, Goldberg…whatever:D

The awakened giant had to do something. :slight_smile:

Yeah, it was basically a stunt. The US could not have foreseen that the Japanese would make a war-altering blunder (Midway) in response to a scattering of bombs (most residents of Tokyo were unaware of the attack – talk about a pinprick!). It’s not like Nimitz said to himself, “If we drop a few bombs here and there, they’ll wreck their navy!”

But it was something we could do directly to the heart of their empire, not the fringe, very early on. And while it did risk the carriers to some degree, it wasn’t that big a risk. In those early days of the war, carriers could count on the vastness of the ocean and on acting unpredictably to hide pretty effectively until they got close to land-based planes. And indeed, it was at the fringe of the land-based air umbrella that Halsey launched his bombers and turned away. Japanese early-warning craft might have spotted him, and he didn’t want to give the land-based air any time to react and sink his carriers. So he acted to minimize the risk to the priceless carriers, even though that exposed the raid aircrews to greater risk (by extending their flight to the edge of their fuel range).

Lastly, although it wasn’t much, it was doing something with the carriers. Unused assets might as well be sunk.

This lesson was re-learned at Guadalcanal, where the American Marines had terrible difficulties with the Japanese navy running in reinforcements, and even bombarding the Marine positions with battleships and cruisers. The naval commander, Robert L. Ghormely, was unwilling to risk major fleet units in the confined waters off Guadalcanal, deterred by the threat of land-based air and aggressive Japanese surface forces. Finally he was sacked and replaced with Bill Halsey. Halsey immediately asked the Marine commander, Vandegrift, what he needed. Vandegrift essentially told him the Navy had to shoulder some of the risk, rather than sheltering itself at cost to the Marines. Halsey committed his carriers to action and within 8 days of taking command fought the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands, losing Hornet and suffering major damage to Enterprise, but damaging both Japanese carriers in the action and inflicting crippling losses on Japan’s irreplaceable elite airmen.

Worse was to follow. In a series of confusing night surface actions, the US Navy lost numbers of cruisers and destroyers and even had a battleship shot up. Several of these actions were outright defeats for the Americans, and two admirals were killed closing with the enemy in the most Nelsonian style (Daniel Callaghan and Norman Scott) . The Japanese also suffered major losses in these fights. So many ships were sunk, the area acquired the nickname Ironbottom Sound.

Despite the mixed tactical results of the Navy’s intervention, the cumulative effect was to take the pressure off the Marines, who went on to win the Guadalcanal campaign, kicking off the island-hopping offensive that would eventually win the war.

Lesson: sometimes even the major fleet units have to be risked, even lost, for anything to be gained.

The effect on American morale of doing something this audacious and succeeding shouldn’t be taken too lightly either. Before the raid news from the war had been nothing but a gloomy string of defeats: Pearl Harbor, Guam, Wake Island, the Philippines, Corregidor starving and under siege waiting to fall, and the Battle of the Java Sea just to name some American defeats. The only positive propaganda spin the US public had heard thus far was of sacrifice in defeat, both real (the Marines at Wake Island) and mostly fiction (Colin Kelly crashing his damaged B-17 into and sinking the battleship* Haruna*).

You bomb a palace, you basically bomb a sturdy pile of rocks. What do you hope to achieve?

Piss off the Bad Guys.