Not 1 US Soldier Died in Hostile Action While Occupying Japan: Why?

[Elhuero]

I do agree with one aspect of the subject of Japan.
Every Japanese national was an enemy, there were no "hands off" targets
we went in, firebombed them to boost our morale and show strength after PH. then we dropped 2 atomic warheads to show them our our resolve to win.

Don't ever forget, we didn't start it, but we will finish it.

yup, the "war on terror" is as pointless as the "war on drugs"

we need to take the gloves off and be vicious to radical islam.

[Byte Stryke]

yup, the "war on terror" is as pointless as the "war on drugs"

we need to take the gloves off and be vicious to radical islam.

I think that if the terrorists hide in civilian populations... we carpet bomb that city.
the only way to win a war is to make the cost of resistance so high that it becomes ineffective to fight it.

Even the taliban and Al-quada understand this and that's exactly what they are doing.

[colocowboy01]

Sounds like a cool book, Pancho. I will have to read it.

[Ridge]

The Japanese fully surrendered to US forces in September 1945. The Taliban have yet to surrender to us.

[cstone]

Someone refresh my memory. How many independent tribal factions were there in Japan in 1945? How many Japanese civilian non-combatants were intentionally targeted and killed by U.S and allied forces? How many Muslim non-combatants have been intentionally targeted and killed by U.S. and allied forces? Most importantly, what target(s) could the U.S. or coalition forces drop a nuclear bomb or two on, which would then force the supreme (godlike) ruler of Islam to go onto television or radio to admit complete and utter defeat and tell his people to lay down their arms and submit to occupation?

I'm not getting the connection between our current wars and the war in the Pacific. I love history, and most history contains some lessons for current and future conduct, but this connection may be a stretch too far for me.

Oh, I really liked the Punic War review, although I hope you weren't casting the Cathaginians in the role of the Jihadi Muslims. No connections I could make there as well. Sorry if I missed that one too. I do appreciate Hannibal's leadership qualities. My favorite comparison is: Lee is to the Confederacy what Hannibal was to Carthage. Just a wealth of conversation there.

Thanks for the book suggestion. It will go on the To Read list.

[RMAC757]

Someone refresh my memory. How many independent tribal factions were there in Japan in 1945? How many Japanese civilian non-combatants were intentionally targeted and killed by U.S and allied forces? How many Muslim non-combatants have been intentionally targeted and killed by U.S. and allied forces? Most importantly, what target(s) could the U.S. or coalition forces drop a nuclear bomb or two on, which would then force the supreme (godlike) ruler of Islam to go onto television or radio to admit complete and utter defeat and tell his people to lay down their arms and submit to occupation?

Thanks for the book suggestion. It will go on the To Read list.

Stone, I believe the bombing of civilian population centers was one the cornerstones of Lemays strategy over Japan. Over 100,000 people were killed alone in the bombing of Tokyo. Lemay was a gloves off dude.

[cstone]

Stone, I believe the bombing of civilian population centers was one the cornerstones of Lemays strategy over Japan. Over 100,000 people were killed alone in the bombing of Tokyo. Lemay was a gloves off dude.

Is anyone seriously thinking that this type of strategy would be considered or acceptable today? This is not that conflict, and we are not those people. We can not fight all wars the same way but need to tailor our strategy to win the political war as well as the military war.

Tor - You obviously have a love of history. I share that interest, but admit your greater depth of knowledge regarding the Punic Wars. If you ever want a free lunch and would like to discuss the ancient world, I'm buying

[streetglideok]

Thats the problem, that kind of strategy isnt politically correct today. They think war is some kind of political arguement, a few soldiers die, and we win. War is won when the winner dominates all levels of a society. You must bring the civilians to their knees as well as the military. Conquer is the word. Look at Sherman's March thru the south, the burning of atlanta, the seige at vicksburg, and thats just a couple of nasty engagements of the civil war. The gloves had to come off completely, to win the civil war. The only problem with the afghanis, they fight like this, but we dont. They dont have much to begin with, so aside from wholesale slaughtering to break them, its going to be a nasty ordeal, just like what the british and the soviets found.

[gcrookston]

Stone, I believe the bombing of civilian population centers was one the cornerstones of Lemays strategy over Japan. Over 100,000 people were killed alone in the bombing of Tokyo. Lemay was a gloves off dude.

Much of Japan's military manufacturing was cottage based. Small factories in homes throughout the country. LeMay (and others), made a strong argument that civilian homes harboring military manufacturing were legitimate targets. Some interesting observations of these home based factories have been reported by former P.O.W.s. Most recently I read another observation of this in Unbroken.

As for bombing a people into total submission... I know of no instance in history that the outcome was any different than that experienced by the Nazis undertaking the London Blitz...

[Pancho Villa]

Much of Japan's military manufacturing was cottage based. Small factories in homes throughout the country. LeMay (and others), made a strong argument that civilian homes harboring military manufacturing were legitimate targets. Some interesting observations of these home based factories have been reported by former P.O.W.s. Most recently I read another observation of this in Unbroken.

As for bombing a people into total submission... I know of no instance in history that the outcome was any different than that experienced by the Nazis undertaking the London Blitz...

Uhm, Japan? No land invasion, just the threat of total annihilation from the air.

Fun fact: The Japanese had a "final battle" mentality wherein their thinking was that if they could inflict enough casualties on the invading Americans they would be able to preserve their "national spirit" (ie political-religious system.)

Slogans like "100 million deaths before surrender" became popular in the propaganda press. The strategy went something like this: throw millions of sketchily armed japanese old men, women and children at the beachheads in the hopes of inflicting enough casualties to cause the Americans to withdraw.

Schooling beyond the 6th grade was suspended; children aged 12 and older were expected to take part in the national banzai charge. Hiroshima was the HQ for Army Group South, which swelled to 900,000 strong, mostly those too old, too young and females.

When the US found out about this, they sent out the famous missive..."THERE ARE NO CIVILIANS IN JAPAN." They were correct.

The reason the Japanese were not ready to surrender was because they held out a final hope for a "last victory" if they could simply throw enough bodies at the Americans and make it not worth our while to continue. Once we demonstrated the ability and the will to reduce Japan to a radioactive wasteland, if pushed to, all hope for the preservation of the "national spirit" faded and unconditional surrender followed.

FWIW, I believe that is why you saw insurgent activity in Germany. They held out hope that the Americans would begin to fight the Soviets and Germany could emerge as a power again somehow when those two exhausted each other. The will to fight is largely dependent on the hope of final victory - not necessarily that you will live (not everyone is afraid of death,) but that your side will eventually come out on top - that your death will not be in vain. Japan, with such dramatic demonstrations of how outclassed they were and such a stark alternative - surrender or total annihilation - had no such outlets, and so lacked even the relatively minor insurgency of Germany.