# Were any Japanese generals of WWII held in high regard by their foes? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 13, 2010, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406 "2010-03-13T23:57:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Snnipe\_70E](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5a626/32.png) [@Snnipe\_70E](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snnipe_70E)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2016, 5:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406/41 "2016-03-27T05:47:06Z")
> [@Danimal](#): > > Well, the banzai charge in the classic sense wasn’t intended to have any military value. It was just an honorable means of suicide. When they were actually trying to take a position, the Japanese were quite capable of using infiltration, and were famously fond of night attacks. (Sometimes fonder than made any sense; they made several night attacks in the Philippines in 1941 and 1942, rendering their air superiority useless). > > You’re quite right about the shockingness of Guadalcanal, though. Thing is, if the Japanese had just had the sense to destroy the supply depots before withdrawing when the Marines landed, the Americans would have starved to death. The U.S. supply ships weren’t properly combat-loaded, and then had to be withdrawn before they could be finished unloading. That was because the US under valued what is call the 4 arm of defence, the merchant marine. There were so few freighters that any loss was costly. (my nit pick) ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2016, 9:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406/42 "2016-03-27T09:12:50Z")
> [@runcible\_spoon](#): > > The US knew he was going to be doing an inspection tour, and arranged for eighteen fighters to intercept his transport and shoot it down. I’d call that assassination. That’d do it. ---
**Author:** ![Didactylos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a183cd/32.png) [@Didactylos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Didactylos)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2016, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406/43 "2016-03-27T09:19:31Z")
> [@SmellySocks](#): > > Yamamoto actually intended for the attack to take place 30 minutes AFTER a declaration of war has been announced to America. This is a common misconception. The japanese leadership (including Yamamoto) had intended to break off the on-going negotiations to resolve Japanese-American relations just prior to the attack. A long encrypted message was transmitted to the japanese embassy the evening before, but their staff didn’t decrypt it until the next day and it was delivered to the US Secretary of State Hull several hours after the attack. Records indicate Japan didn’t formulate a declaration of war until news of the successful attack. The notification delivered to Hull didn’t even severe diplomatic relations. Of course it’s possible Yamamoto was misled by his superiors on the content of the note. ---
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [March 27, 2016, 1:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406/44 "2016-03-27T13:47:34Z")
I can’t believe that I am responding to this 6 year old thread but Yamamoto wasn’t assassinated, he was ambushed. It was know where he was going to be and a trap was set. Anyways the word used doesn’t really matter since he was a legitimate target. ---
**Author:** ![handsomeharry](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e9c0ed/32.png) [@handsomeharry](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/handsomeharry)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2016, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406/45 "2016-03-29T01:17:44Z")
> [@Ike\_Witt](#): > > I can’t believe that I am responding to this 6 year old thread but Yamamoto wasn’t assassinated, he was ambushed. It was know where he was going to be and a trap was set. Anyways the word used doesn’t really matter since he was a legitimate target. They are not mutually exclusive. JFK’s route was well known. He was assassinated \*and \*ambushed. ---
**Author:** ![Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/7cd45c/32.png) [@Elendil\_s\_Heir](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Elendil_s_Heir)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2016, 3:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406/46 "2016-03-29T03:47:40Z")
I personally think that “assassinated” has a distinct political connotation which makes the term inapplicable to Yamamoto’s death. Lincoln, Franz Ferdinand and JFK were assassinated; Lord Nelson, A.P. Hill and Yamamoto were casualties of war. ---
**Author:** ![UDS](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecae2f/32.png) [@UDS](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UDS)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2016, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406/47 "2016-03-29T04:07:25Z")
I think “assassinate” implies a planned, targeted murder, usually of somebody prominent or notable, carried out for a political or ideological motive. But it does imply a _murder_. If the killing is regarded as justified - a judicial execution, an attack on a combatant in a war - then I don’t think we’d call it an assassination. The victims of a terrorist bomb in a public place, say, aren’t assassinated, because they haven’t been selected for killing; they were just the people who happened to be there. But plant the same bomb to go off at the time and place of a cabinet meeting, and those who die can be said to have been assassinated. I wouldn’t say Yamamoto was assassinated. He was an active combatant in a war. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2016, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406/48 "2016-03-29T09:19:17Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Also, that incident isn’t a particularly good example of “inferior” tactics, since he apparently killed the guy. Yes, but that didn’t stop the tank. So still an ‘inferior’ tactic. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 29, 2016, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406/49 "2016-03-29T12:38:04Z")
I would guess the tank probably came to a halt when its commander’s head started rolling around the crew compartment. I know it would’ve distracted me a bit. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/were-any-japanese-generals-of-wwii-held-in-high-regard-by-their-foes/532406.md?page=2)