Mindboggling!

[dcunning30]

[quote][quote]It is what it is.

[ATI_7500]

So, you think it's a crime against humanity to destroy an enemy's ability to product the material to conduct war?  That's nonsense.  back then, bombit was quite low-tech, so consequently, in the process of destroying munitions factories, civilians were killed.  It's unfortunate, but that's war.  1945 was not in the 18th century.

There's a difference between bombing a scelected target precisely and arriving with hundreds of aircraft to carpet bomb everything that somehow *had* to do with the target.

And if a B-17 bomb operator states that the bomb sight was so accurate that it could put the bombs into "a glass of picles", I'm pretty  sure there wasn't made any effort to actually *try* to use it to its full potential.

Once agai, I'd like to hear a realistic solution, if you have one.

Don't involve civilians in your military actions. Period.

It is realistic and can be put into action quite easily.

That's not exactly true.  There were months where certain production, such as fighters would rise, but Albert Speer achieved these short-lived increases on the backs of slave labor.

Even if, it proves that the allied strikes against protuction facilities were virtually useless.

Obviously you didn't read the article I linked.  And I didn't make a generalized statement, I was quite specific.  So your generalized response is a non sequitur.

Your "specific" article was about japanese suicide submarines and how they would have been used in case of an allied invasion. So far, so harmless.
But your "the bombs were mercyful" comment was unnecessary and - as I already pointed out - disgusting.

[dcunning30]

[quote][quote]So, you think it's a crime against humanity to destroy an enemy's ability to product the material to conduct war?

[beaky]

How were the two A-bombs "merciful"?
Good question.... if I may:

Most of the dead in Hiroshima and Nagasaki never knew what hit them (although yes, many suffered terribly). The same cannot be said for the much greater number of innocents who died in incendiary bombings of places like Tokyo, which was burned to the ground and rebuilt something like 5 times during the course of the war... (and yes, by 1945, LeMay was targeting civilian centers to break Japanese morale... we were taking a savage beating, with troops fighting and dying all over the world)... war is a stupid  act of savagery, and the world probably could have done without the decades of nuclear blackmail that followed (and all the "little" proxy  wars, like Korea and Vietnam, that resulted from that)... but compared to the attack plan shown in dcunning's post, Hiroshima and Nagasaki were like a peck on the cheek. I know it sounds crazy, but...

And had we squared off with the Japanese (whose fighting spirit and ingenuity are legendary to this day) on their home turf, we might have lost... it was by no means a done deal by that point. Fighting spirit wins wars, not  technology or even superior numbers (except, perhaps when it comes to nukes). I have met vets who were standing by to invade Japan in early 1945, and they were scared to death, and not very confident they could prevail.
They also weren't looking forward to squaring off against old folks  and children armed with kitchen knives and pitchforks.

Imagine you are Harry Truman in July 1945. In one hand, you have certain- and I mean certain- victory in the form of the A-bombs, with peace and stability closer at hand, less civilian casualties, and a strong warning to the burgeoning USSR... and in the other hand you have a desperate assault on the last country anyone in their right mind would want to back into a corner, after years of bloody, costly, horrible fighting.

What would you do? I think Truman was a compassionate man, and no mere politician... and I think he did the right thing. I also think it haunted him for the rest of his life.

Also: a more likely scenario than a rout would have been the above-described division of Japan (US/Soviet), a la Korea... or even direct conflict between the US and Russia...by destroying Japan's resolve utterly before the Russians could mount an attack, the US, in a way, secured an independent future for Japan, where after a long period of humiliation, it would regain its sovereignty and eventually nearly bankrupt the US in the realm of world trade.

[ATI_7500]

That's ridiculous!  Germany lost their ability to transport goods, munitions, and troops as a result of interdiction campaigns.  Germany became fuel starved as a result of bombing campaigns.  Germany ended up building Junkers Jumo engines for the ME262 with inferior metalurgy which resulted in the engines burning out prematurely.  Why, because of an effective bombing campaign.

Yeah, sure.

The only thing I can agree on is the fuel, but production and transport were at best made difficult by the bombings.

And the problems with the Me 262s engines can't be attributed to the bombing campaign. If the RLM had been smart, they could have had the 262 in service by mid to late 1943 - with devastating impact on the "effective" bombing campaign.

Reading the title of the article and skimming the first few lines does not constitute reading the article.  

I never stated that I read the article.

and call me disgusting when you clearly don't know what you're talking about.

I called you disgusting because you approved the killing of thousands of people in Hiroshima and Nagasaki!

Why don't you run along and talk about flight simulator and leave me alone.  Sheesh!  

Whatever.




Rotty, no "fighting spirit" or fear thereof justifies killing civilians on purpose.
It certainly would have had the opposite effect - a desire of revenge and thus a much, much stronger will to fight till the end.

For me, the commanders of the bomber force belong right into line with the people responsible for the Holocaust and other mass murders.

I also think it haunted him for the rest of his life.

I damn well hope so.

[dcunning30]

Heretic,

since you appear to admit you didn't read the article, then why on earth are you calling me disgusting due to my comment which was based on the contents of the article.

It's like arguing that 1 + 1 doesn't equal 2, and you've never had a math class in your life!

This is moronic to the nth degree!

Please, just leave me alone.  This is stupid!

[dcunning30]

This article discusses the strategic bombing campaign in WWII.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategic_ ... ectiveness

[ATI_7500]

Heretic,

since you appear to admit you didn't read the article, then why on earth are you calling me disgusting due to my comment which was based on the contents of the article.

The nature of the comment was disgusting.

It would be like saying that Hitlers Holocaust was a good thing.

It's just wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong...!

Please, just leave me alone.  This is stupid!

The internet is not the place to be alone.

[H]

...no "fighting spirit" or fear thereof justifies killing civilians on purpose.

No one was justifying the sole killing of noncombatant civilians; amongst the patriots of 1945 Japan, they were a minority. Although all countries may have their suicidal patriots (those that know their sacrifice will have gained no victory), do not confuse WW2 Japan with WW2 Germany, allied or not.

It certainly would have had the opposite effect - a desire of revenge and thus a much, much stronger will to fight till the end.

:-? [color=#003300]Bj

[dcunning30]

Heretic,

since you appear to admit you didn't read the article, then why on earth are you calling me disgusting due to my comment which was based on the contents of the article.

The nature of the comment was disgusting.

It would be like saying that Hitlers Holocaust was a good thing.

It's just wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong...!

Is that what this is all about?

[ATI_7500]

You're including those of the Junkers, Dorniers, Heinkels, etc.?

Absolutely. Guernica, Warzawa, Rotterdam, London, Coventry...

Is that what this is all about?  You're offended by my choice of words?  :o

The choice and the idea.


But I'm done here.


Have fun continuing believing that two nukes were better than a fair fight.

[Felix/FFDS]

Have fun continuing believing that two nukes were better than a fair fight.

War - Total War - is not a fair fight.

I believe that the nuclear bomb(s) would have been used even if the invasion had taken place.  The Allies in the PAcific placed a higher value of life that the Japanese.  Once the invasion had started, and taking into consideration the serious casualties - first from the suicide attacks in the run up to the invasion and then once the battle was joined on the ground, by the remaining forces fighting to the death (think Tarawa, IWo Jima, Okinawa multiplied many times) AND civilians either coerced by the military, or by their own fatalistic sense of duty to their Emperoir and State, then the decision to use the nuclear weapons would have been even easier to make - and then the repercussions would have started in the US - if you had the weapon to stop the war, why wasn't it used?  Yes, Truman would have been haunted one way or another - On the one hand, tomrented by unleashing the bomb when he did, and had he waited, by NOT having unleashed it earlier.

I agree that ideally, wars should be fought by certain rules of engagement.  COnsider Agincourt, with the English and French agreeing to certain conduct   Even there, the English, by massacring the captured French nobles as a second attack was coming in, "broke" the accepted conduct.  In the end, though, the umpires conceded victory to the English.

But history has a long list of battles, wars, campaigns, where civilians suffered unjustly - and no one had pity for the Japanese who showed a blatant disregard for the lives of the captured peoples - military and civilian

[eno]

Further to Felix's comments ..... There would have been even move Japanese civilian casualties, as those who hadn't been coerced into fighting had been told that they would be butchered and eaten by the Americans.
The consequences of this were seen on some of the first islands that would have been invaded, large numbers of the civilians who were unable to fight were witnessed (filmed) jumping off cliffs and killing themselves in any way possible to avoid the US butchers.

[Bird-Nerd]

well, um, yeah, anyways thats a lot of boats....

[H]

Further to Felix's comments ..... There would have been even more Japanese civilian casualties, as those who hadn't been coerced into fighting had been told that they would be butchered and eaten by the Americans.
The consequences of this were seen on some of the first islands that would have been invaded, large numbers of the civilians who were unable to fight were witnessed (filmed) jumping off cliffs and killing themselves in any way possible to avoid the US butchers.

I was stationed a while near Ritidian Point, Guam. For the reasons you give: when the U.S. was retaking the island in WW2, it was said that a Japanese jumped off the cliff for every foot of its height (over 500') but, I must admit, I never researched the accuracy of the statement.

H