# WWII: Battle of Midway...why couldn't the Japanese have pressed on and captured the island? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 1, 2020, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029 "2020-08-01T22:36:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2020, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/281 "2020-09-05T17:02:14Z")
The steps made by the Japanese led to War. Not the steps made by the Americans. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2020, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/282 "2020-09-05T17:06:55Z")
I’ve always been told it takes [two to tango.](https://youtu.be/F2zTd_YwTvo?t=96) ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2020, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/283 "2020-09-05T17:16:03Z")
This isnt a dance. Look the Japanese were planning for a war vs the USA since the Russo-Japanese war. They built up a huge navy- which was designed for exactly one opponent- the USA. They _acted_, the USA _reacted._ The USA reaction to the Invasion of China was mild, if truth be told. Just stop selling them the oil they needed to keep on killing the Chinese people. If the USA hadnt done that then we would have been an accessory. Just like the Pope was condemned for not speaking out about the Holocaust. The Japanese have been pushing their version of Southern Apology now for decades, that the USA forced them into the attack on Pearl Harbor. It is totally false. ---
**Author:** ![smilingbandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/4491bb/32.png) [@smilingbandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smilingbandit)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2020, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/284 "2020-09-05T18:42:21Z")
**DrDeth** is right. The logic used to defend Japan morally infantilizes them and their leadership; placing them entirely in a passive role, and acting as if they did not make choices for themselves. It assumes that their actions are entirely forced upon them. They had no enemies in the region that they did not make themselves. Each of their wars were wars of aggression, and they went to war with the United States in order to continue their wars of aggression. It was not the the United States which forced war on Japan. Japan forced the United States into the position of becoming complicit with Japanese warmongering and mass-murder - or cutting off economic ties. When we chose the latter, they responded with violence. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2020, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/285 "2020-09-05T18:50:11Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > The USA reaction to the Invasion of China was mild, if truth be told. Just stop selling them the oil they needed to keep on killing the Chinese people. If the USA hadnt done that then we would have been an accessory. Just like the Pope was condemned for not speaking out about the Holocaust. It’s also interesting to contrast this with people who claim that IBM was complicit in the Holocaust because they sold the German government machines for tabulating census information that were later used to help with putting people into camps. It’s very weird to try to figure out how those go together - in the IBM case, selling something that is primarily used for a legitimate government purpose and that is later used for something bad means you’re complicit in the ‘something bad’, but in the US embargo case ceasing to sell something that is explicitly being used for mass murder and conquest is an act of aggression that makes you responsible for the other party attacking you. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2020, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/286 "2020-09-05T22:02:28Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > This isnt a dance. Look the Japanese were planning for a war vs the USA since the Russo-Japanese war. They built up a huge navy- which was designed for exactly one opponent- the USA. The point is, it takes two (at least) to go to war. This is not done in a vacuum solely by one country. We can cast blame and say the other country was bad so we HAD to act but it still takes two. Few will give Japan a pass for what they were up to in those times but we can see, even in this thread, that the US was not exactly innocent in pushing Japan towards war. You can argue the US was being just and righteous in its actions but it remains that those actions were a part of what lead to war. Make no mistake, I am not trying to absolve Japan of anything here. But it is ridiculous to think the US had no role in the lead-up to war. It really does take two to tango. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2020, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/287 "2020-09-06T02:50:54Z")
Not when one nation sneak attacks the other. Then- it only takes one. The USA was totally innocent in pushing Japan towards war. Japan was pushing itself. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2020, 12:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/288 "2020-09-06T12:31:03Z")
You’re really stuck on that aren’t you? Which sounds to me like you’re making a moral argument, not a historical argument. My contention is the USA mostly inadvertantly (thanks Acheson!) forced the _timing_ of the war. Not the _fact_ of the war. As I interpret the far more learned @TokyoBayer he contends the same. As does much of the professional scholarship on the topic. In this thread ostensibly about occupying Midway, _all_ of this gigantic “who started it” hijack is about timing. You’re right the Japanese were hell-bent on having their war with everyone. Nobody here has disagreed with that contention. And had they miraculously subdued all of China there’s no reason to think they’d have stopped there. Racially motivated totalitarian governments are like that. Something to think about in 2020. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2020, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/289 "2020-09-06T14:11:32Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > The point is, it takes two (at least) to go to war. This is not done in a vacuum solely by one country. > > We can cast blame and say the other country was bad so we HAD to act but it still takes two. I disagree with these statements if you making them in general and not limited to the interaction between Japan and the US. There have been countless invasions and war over time where one side simply decided to take over another. > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Few will give Japan a pass for what they were up to in those times but we can see, even in this thread, that the US was not exactly innocent in pushing Japan towards war. You can argue the US was being just and righteous in its actions but it remains that those actions were a part of what lead to war. > > Make no mistake, I am not trying to absolve Japan of anything here. But it is ridiculous to think the US had no role in the lead-up to war. It really does take two to tango. One of the problems with statements such as “not innocent in pushing Japan towards war” is that it’s too easy to conflate with moral judgments. The responsibility for the war falls on Japan and not the US. This is why I said earlier that steps the US undertook did lead to war. Thinking more about this discussion and the various arguments put forth by different, people I thought of an analogy. I’m an older father and have children in or approaching adolescence. Comparing prewar Japanese leaders to adolescent children is an insult – to kids – but any parent can tell you that you have to pick your battles with your children. You and be 100% in the right and the children 100% in the wrong, but they still will rebel. You have to decide if something is really worth it or not. As @LSLGuy points out, the timing of the war was triggered by US actions. The Japanese were in the wrong and they shouldn’t have been there, but the US had the free choice if they were going to force the issue or not. A comparable situation occurred in Europe where Churchill and then later Roosevelt held their collective noses and despite hating and distrusting the Soviets, joined in partnership with them to defeat the Nazis. History could have been completely rewritten if Chamberlain had been willing to deal with the Soviets in 1939. He wasn’t – for good reasons – much like the US – for good reasons – decided to force the issue with Japan. Of course, real politics is for more complex than alt-hist allows, and the myriad of other complicating factors may have prevented and Anglo-French-Soviet partnership from being formed in 1939. Likewise, even if the Japanese assets weren’t frozen or the oil not embargoed, that may not have prevented the Japanese from launching a war, but those are unknowns. The Japanese themselves had forced the situation into this tight window of timing as they wanted to option to go to war if diplomacy failed. That is clearly their responsibility. However, it was recognized by US military leaders that the US actions could lead to a shooting war, and these top leaders urged Roosevelt to not take these actions **at that time** because the US wasn’t prepared yet. There were Japanese military leaders who were urging Japan to attack the US sooner than later because they recognized that time was not on their side. It’s unknowable what would have had happened if the US had not frozen Japanese assets or stopped the flow of oil, but it would have been a more difficult case for those leaders to have prevailed. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2020, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/290 "2020-09-06T14:38:48Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Also in the back of Shattered Sword is a analysis of the “invasion” of Midway. Even if fully supported and the IJN had won at Midway, the landings would have been a total failure. The landing forces were actually slightly outnumbered by the defenders who had heavy weapons, etc, and we well dug in. See Post 33, this has already been stated and in more detail in response to @txtumbleweed’s excellent analysis in post 14. > [@LSLGuy](#): > > You’re right the Japanese were hell-bent on having their war with everyone. Nobody here has disagreed with that contention. And had they miraculously subdued all of China there’s no reason to think they’d have stopped there. This is the scary part of prewar Japan (sorry, China, prewar to the US, not prewar with China). The hubris is mindblowing. “Let’s go to war with _everyone_!” Insane. Unfortunately for Japan, all the territory they grabbed in Asian wasn’t particularly industrialized and they weren’t able to seize weapon manufacturing plants or ransack the treasuries like the Nazis in Europe. > [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > I think part of the problem is the IJN had two objectives: destroy the American Fleet that would respond to the threat and occupy Midway. If the battle had gone the way Japan thought it would it might have been accomplished but as it turned out, there is no way they could accomplish both simultaneously and their attempt to do so resulted in their loss. See the posts (14 and 33) above. They could not have occupied Midway even had the Pacific Fleet been defeated, but you are right that the carriers were tasked with dual objectives. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2020, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/291 "2020-09-06T15:27:55Z")
In times where many people don’t have jobs or are underemployed, I should be grateful for my busy schedule, but it doesn’t give much time to respond in a timely fashion. I apologize. Here are a few more thoughts. > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I am curious about this. > > Was anything ever run by the emperor? Technically he ran the whole show but seemingly he didn’t run anything. > > Only at the very, very end after the nuclear bombs did he clearly step in and assert his authority (and he was almost the victim of a coup for it). Prior to that I have never heard he did anything one way or another. Not even rubber stamp things. Just out of it. Maybe I missed something. This is a very interesting question, see below. > [@DrDeth](#): > > They presented plans to him. I think he more or less just sat there and nodded or something. Not even close. > [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > If the emperor decide to Hulk-out and flex his (supposed) authority could he have done so and stopped the war before it started? @gdave gave an excellent answer about the major reason his role was covered up, but let me elaborate. Three good resources for understanding the role of the Emperor are Herbert P. Bix’s _Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan_, Eri’s Hotta’s 1941 _Japan 1941: Countdown to Infamy_ and Dan Carlin’s series on Japan, _Supernova in the East_. There are multi other sources and cites, but any of these give a good overview. Carlin spends some more time directly addressing the question while Hotta is more concerned with the other leaders, but still explains things such as the Imperial Councils, where the top military leaders, key cabinet officials and some other elites met to make decisions in the presence of the Emperor. Carlin directly poses the question of the Emperor flexing his muscle, and could he have prevented it, but doesn’t really come to a definitive answer, although he does ask some great questions. For Hotta, this is from a review of her book; > [@](#): > > Hotta isn’t able to resolve the lingering historical question of Emperor Hirohito’s role in the war, but her position seems to be more sympathetic, while not absolving Hirohito completely. According to her, the Emperor also seemed to embrace contradictions - he wanted peace, but was willing to lead Japan in war. He was involved in many high-level meetings at which his role was expected to be merely ceremonial, and yet he sometimes broke tradition and interrogated or scolded his generals and admirals and cabinet ministers. He was probably unaware of Japanese atrocities, but he was certainly aware of, and approved, Japanese aggression. Many officials after the war were complicit in hiding the extent of Hirohito’s knowledge and involvement in actual war planning, but it is hard to see Hirohito as a complete innocent here. > > More interesting than “How much did he know, and how involved was he?” is the real question — “Could he have stopped it?” Were there points at which Emperor Hirohito could have prevented war by calling a halt to their plans? His authority was apparently a bit fuzzy legally - technically he did not have the Constitutional authority to dictate government policy or forbid the military to do anything. And yet, he was the Emperor, and no final decision could be executed without his approval. > > There have been suggestions in the post-war years that the Emperor himself feared assassination if he tried to oppose the military. But arguments for Hirohito’s innocence may equally be historical revisionism - both the Japanese and MacArthur were eager to prop up the Emperor and downplay his culpability in order to smooth the post-war occupation of Japan. So we will probably never know if Hirohito could have stopped the war, let alone whether he actually wanted to. As @gdave said, too much was whitewashed after the war to be able to give definitive answers to these questions. It is known that the emperor was much better informed than the postwar story, and seems to have approved of many of the military actions. The historian Herbert P. Bix, author of _Hirohito and the Making of Modern Japan_, the seminal autobiography of the emperor is one of many historians who find that the emperor had responsibility for the war. Here is [an article](https://apjjf.org/-Herbert-P.-Bix/2741/article.html) by Bix. > [@](#): > > Only after intervening forcefully to suppress the uprising and punish the rebel officers, did Hirohito sanction a large expansion of the military budget, a threefold increase in the size of the army’s small garrison force in north China, and national policies that “required Japan ‘to become the stabilizing force in East Asia.” [13] Thereafter the army and navy played the guiding role in shaping domestic policy; and Hirohito, who still imagined himself to be a traditional “benevolent monarch,” threw off his earlier indecisiveness and slowly began to assert “direct” imperial rule in his capacity as uniformed commander-in-chief. > > In July 1937, Japanese and Chinese Nationalist troops clashed briefly at the Marco Polo Bridge south of Peking. The different army factions on the General Staff divided as to how to handle the fighting. One faction wanted to settle this minor provocation locally in order to concentrate resources on building Japan’s economic and military might; the other wanted to use the incident to resolve at a stroke all the outstanding issues with Chiang Kai-shek’s Nationalist government. Hirohito, from the outset, supported the territorial expansionists. When thousands of troops had been dispatched, he sanctioned a broad Japanese offensive in the Peking-Tientsin area. Shortly afterwards, on July 29-30, Chinese troops, students, and workers killed the remnants of the Japanese garrison force in the city of Tungchow, east of Peking, and also massacred 223 Japanese and Korean civilians, including many women and children. [14] Then, on August 13, Chiang suddenly spread the fighting in north China to Shanghai, in the lower Yangtze River region, where the interests of the foreign powers were most heavily concentrated. The conflict developed into an all-out, undeclared war. [15] Wanting to end it quickly, Hirohito urged major troop reinforcements and the strategic bombing of China’s cities. He also “endorsed the [army’s] decision to remove the constraints of international law on the treatment of Chinese prisoners of war.” [16] > > (skipping forward) > > Japanese historians have carefully documented Hirohito’s key role in war and postwar actions throughout the 1930s and ‘40s. It is now understood that he seldom allowed his generals and admirals to fight the war just as they wished, and that he delayed Japan’s surrender in order to preserve the imperial throne with himself on it. This last point must be emphasized. According to the accounts of individuals close to Hirohito, the emperor recognized by summer 1944 that Japan would eventually have to seek a negotiated end to the losing war. But he insisted that his armed forces first had to achieve at least one substantial military result in order to improve the surrender terms. He also rejected the idea of allowing the Allies to punish Japanese war criminals or abolish Japan’s armed forces, for they would be needed to check the Soviet Union and prevent the spread of communism at home. A year later, in late June 1945, Hirohito abandoned these preconditions: the battle of Okinawa had been lost; there would not be one-last-victory. Although he was not thinking of immediate capitulation, he was prepared to allow the Allies to punish war criminals; and even contemplated disarmament. But he (and other hardliners on the Supreme War Leadership Council) persisted in maneuvering for peace through the good offices of the still neutral Soviet Union, with the sole aim of preserving and protecting himself and the monarchy. Traditionally, very few emperors held actual power, and were kept busy with ceremonial stuff while the _bakufu_ shogunate government actually ran most of the country. Without getting too deep, the shoguate system was having major problems around the time Perry showed up and certain lord used the threat of foreign barbarians to attempt to gain power for themselves. Not that modern politicians would ever do that! Rather than start a civil war and overthrow the bakufu, they cleverly declared that they were going to “restore” the emperor so they sort of had to give him some power after all in the Meiji Constitution, but there wasn’t either a clear role or a long tradition of actual power. @Little_Nemo incorrectly claimed that by the eve of the Pacific war with America, that only the IJA and IJN were making decisions. He declined to provide a cite for his mistaken assertion (well, it would be impossible to find one) that no one was considering logistics or diplomacy and the military would unilaterally make decisions which Hirohito was forced to accept. Bix clearly demonstrates this was not the case, and Eri Hotta’s book gives cite after cite after cite on how the key civilian minsters were essential in the decision making process. The decision to make war against the US could not have been made by the military alone, it required as a minimum, the acquiescence of the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister, either of which could have resigned and brought down the cabinet, forcing the matter back to the emperor. In asking @Little_Nemo for a cite, of course, I was prepared to provide ones myself, including this one concerning his assertion that logisitics were never considered. > [@](#): > > As National Planning Board Director Teiichi Suzuki declared before an Imperial audience on September 6, 1941:At this stage our national power with respect to physical resources has come to depend entirely upon the productive capacity of the Empire itself, upon that of Manchuria, China, Indochina . . . and upon vital materials stockpiled so far. Therefore, as a result of the present overall economic blockade imposed by Great Britain and the United States, our Empire’s national power is declining day by day. Our liquid fuel stockpile, which is the most important, will reach bottom by June or July of next year, even if we impose strict wartime control on civilian demand. Accordingly, I believe it is vitally important for the survival of our Empire that we make up our minds to establish and stabilize a firm economic base.49 > > Two months later, at another conference of Japanese leaders, Prime Minister Hideki Tojo warned that “Two years from now we will have no petroleum for military use. Ships will stop moving . . . . We can talk about austerity and suffering, but can our people endure The civilian led National Planning was very much involved in the discussions leading up to the war. Sadly for Japan, none of the leaders chose to listen. Concerning the decision making process, Hotta states: > [@](#): > > The decisions were made by a small group of senior civilian officials and IJA and IJN officers, all of whom were committed to Japan’s continued imperial expansion, regarded the United States as the main obstacle to that expansion, and opposed making any significant concessions to the United States. The main decision making venue was the Liaison Conference, of which 56 meetings pertaining to the decision for war were held from April 18 through December 4, 1941. The conferences brought together representatives of the Cabinet—the prime minister, the foreign minister, the war minister (a serving IJA officer), the navy minister (a serving IJN officer), and sometimes other ministers of state—and the army and navy chiefs of staff and vice chiefs of staff. Major policy decisions reached at Liaison Conferences were forwarded to Imperial Conferences for pro forma approval by the Emperor. Hotta disagrees with Bix on the level of involvement on the Emperor, which is interesting because both are respected scholars, so it would be very interesting to see a conversation between the two. As an aside, Hotta is Japanese and follows the Japanese custom of using the title to refer to the Emperor where the American Bix uses his name as that was more well known abroad. Japanese never actually would have said Emperor Hirohito. Upon ascension to the throne, the new emperor is addressed and called Emperor (Tennō 天皇) and after death he is referred to primarily by his posthumous name, which for Hitohito is Emperor Shōwa (昭和) . ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2020, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/292 "2020-09-06T17:31:28Z")
_Major policy decisions reached at Liaison Conferences were forwarded to Imperial Conferences for pro forma approval by the Emperor._ I hate to disagree, but I dont see how “They presented plans to him. I think he more or less just sat there and nodded or something.” differs a lot from “pro-forma approval”. ---
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2020, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/293 "2020-09-06T18:30:16Z")
**TokyoBayer** gave two extensive sets of cites. Per those cites, Herbert Bix argued that Hirohito had a direct and active role in shaping Japan’s war policies. That’s obviously a lot more than “sitting and nodding”. The other historian cited, Eri Hotta, does claim that “[m]ajor policy decisions reached at Liaison Conferences were forwarded to Imperial Conferences for pro forma approval by the Emperor.” But look at the first cite **TokyoBayer** provided: > According to [Hotta]…[Hirohito] was involved in many high-level meetings at which his role was expected to be merely ceremonial, and yet he sometimes broke tradition and interrogated or scolded his generals and admirals and cabinet ministers. He was probably unaware of Japanese atrocities, but he was certainly aware of, and approved, Japanese aggression. Even Hotta, who assigns a much more indirect role to the Emperor, writes that at times he actively participated in the conferences where the “pro forma” decisions were handed to him. He didn’t just “sit and nod” - he interrogated and scolded officials, and at least indirectly made his wishes known. Now, if Hotta’s portrayal is accurate, that still leaves open the question of just how involved and responsible Hirohito was. It’s possible the officials just took the scolding, answered the questions, and then just went back to their own councils and forgot everything the Emperor said and did. They might have just viewed Hirohito as a cranky family member whose rants they had to tolerate. It’s also possible, though, that they put real effort into avoiding those scoldings and interrogations by shaping policies to conform to what they thought the Emperor wanted, and that the Emperor wielded significant indirect influence. Either way, the best historical evidence is that he did more than just “sit and nod”. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2020, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/294 "2020-09-06T18:39:40Z")
So, the evidence is lacking, several differing cites, and mine agrees totally with one experts but disagrees with another. ---
**Author:** ![gdave](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gdave/32/3683_2.png) [@gdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gdave)\ **Post date:** [September 6, 2020, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/295 "2020-09-06T18:44:24Z")
Umm, no. Again, > [Hirohito] was involved in many high-level meetings at which his role was expected to be merely ceremonial, and yet he sometimes broke tradition and interrogated or scolded his generals and admirals and cabinet ministers. He was probably unaware of Japanese atrocities, but he was certainly aware of, and approved, Japanese aggression. That’s from the expert who supposedly “agrees totally” with you. Even according to her, Hirohito _didn’t_ just sit and nod. He interrogated and scolded officials. I’m not sure what else to say here. If you honestly think that’s the same as just sitting and nodding, then I guess we just have to agree to disagree about Hirohito’s role. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2020, 12:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/296 "2020-09-08T00:31:52Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > The steps made by the Japanese led to War. Not the steps made by the Americans. I think you are struggling with the concepts being presented here. You seem to be confused regarding the difference between moral culpability and strategic wisdom. > [@Pantastic](#): > > It’s also interesting to contrast this with people who claim that IBM was complicit in the Holocaust because they sold the German government machines for tabulating census information that were later used to help with putting people into camps. Has anyone in this thread made this ridiculous argument? ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2020, 1:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/297 "2020-09-08T01:05:16Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Has anyone in this thread made this ridiculous argument? Has anyone in this thread claimed that anyone in this thread has made that particular ridiculous argument? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2020, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/298 "2020-09-08T01:22:22Z")
> [@Pantastic](#): > > Has anyone in this thread claimed that anyone in this thread has made that particular ridiculous argument? Your introducing this seems to be a total non sequitur if you aren’t suggesting this. What does this weird IBM story have to do with this subject at hand? Your full quote was: > [@Pantastic](#): > > It’s very weird to try to figure out how those go together - in the IBM case, selling something that is primarily used for a legitimate government purpose and that is later used for something bad means you’re complicit in the ‘something bad’, but in the US embargo case ceasing to sell something that is explicitly being used for mass murder and conquest is an act of aggression that makes you responsible for the other party attacking you. Uhh… so can you explain how they DO go together? You seem to be suggesting that holding both their beliefs would be hypocritical, or at least illogical. Well, okay. So? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2020, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/299 "2020-09-08T05:27:20Z")
IMB was blamed for selling stuff to the Nazis before the war, which made them a better war machine, which killed Americans and Allies. If we kept selling oil to the Imperial Japanese, we’d be complicit in the Rape of Nanking etc, and of course, helping them kill more American GIs. So, it would be wrong for us to sell oil to them. ---
**Author:** ![Pantastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/3bc359/32.png) [@Pantastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pantastic)\ **Post date:** [September 8, 2020, 8:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029/300 "2020-09-08T08:37:19Z")
If one accepts both positions, then there is no moral course of action to take in that situation as you’ll either be responsible for provoking further bad actions (if you embargo) or for assisting with further bad actions (if you don’t). And yet a lot of people seem to argue both that ‘you shouldn’t sell stuff that helps someone commit genocide’ and ‘the US is responsible for starting the war because of the oil embargo’. Also, there’s literally no weird IBM story unless you somehow consider “IBM was doing their usual business at the time with various governments” weird in some fashion. Since you just seem engaged in more complaints than discussion, this is likely the last time I will respond you on this. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wwii-battle-of-midway-why-couldnt-the-japanese-have-pressed-on-and-captured-the-island/917029.md?page=16)