Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

Japanese denial of WWII crimes

  • 20-02-2013 10:25pm
    #1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭


    I became interested in this while reading about the rape of Nanking by the Japanese army. I had not realised the extent of denial by modern day Japanese leading figures towards some of their warcrimes, particularly those of a sexual nature involving 'comfort' women in China and Korea.

    Part of the issue is in this open letter:
    Hundreds of thousands of Asians and Allied POWs were enslaved for labor in Japanese mines and factories throughout Asia and in the Japanese homeland.

    And then the Rape of Nanjing, the six-week episode beginning 13 December 1937 that set the pattern for Japanese aggression.

    In that period in Nanjing alone, 300,000 unarmed civilians were murdered by the invading Japanese Imperial Army, many summarily executed by beheading for the entertainment of the army.

    Eighty thousand girls and women were raped.

    Families were slaughtered, homes and businesses were looted and destroyed.

    These terrible injustices inflicted by the Japanese lust for empire so many years ago are once more repeated as the Japanese government and supporters deny any atrocities ever happened.

    Asian victims, families, and survivors still wait for justice so long denied by Japan.
    http://www.4thmedia.org/2012/10/16/letter-to-japanese-ambassador-to-washington-on-continued-denial-of-their-war-crimes-crimes-against-humantiy-and-glorification-of-war-criminals/

    The denial of clear crimes in this case seems illogical. Some of the denials come from the highest of levels with Prime minister Shinzo abe denying that women had been forced to work as sex slaves for the army. He subsequently backtracked.

    Any more views on this?


«1

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 429 ✭✭Neutronale


    I became interested in this while reading about the rape of Nanking by the Japanese army. I had not realised the extent of denial by modern day Japanese leading figures towards some of their warcrimes, particularly those of a sexual nature involving 'comfort' women in China and Korea.

    Part of the issue is in this open letter:
    http://www.4thmedia.org/2012/10/16/letter-to-japanese-ambassador-to-washington-on-continued-denial-of-their-war-crimes-crimes-against-humantiy-and-glorification-of-war-criminals/

    The denial of clear crimes in this case seems illogical. Some of the denials come from the highest of levels with Prime minister Shinzo abe denying that women had been forced to work as sex slaves for the army. He subsequently backtracked.

    Any more views on this?

    Empires tend to bring crimes along with them. The people creating an empire tend to see themselves as superior and those they are dominating as inferior, less then human and so they justify their inhuman treatment of them.

    I think this is similar to holocaust denial, which seems to be a growing phenomenon...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭gobnaitolunacy


    The Emperor got off scot free at the end of the war. The US thought the population would be more docile if they didn't publicly humiliate him by putting him on trial. They did get him to reduce his status from a sort of demi-god though, that was about it.

    Also, the Burma 'Death Railway'; seen as a POW forced-labour litany of atrocities through western eyes, is viewed as an engineering triumph in Japan.
    EDIT: there were also many, many more Asians than POW's 'employed' on the Death Railway who perished, but they seem to have been forgotten.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 13,946 ✭✭✭✭Zebra3


    Any more views on this?

    Not really surprising.

    Most countries refuse to acknowledge the crimes they commit.

    The sham that was the Nuremburg Trials was based on trying "them" only for crimes "we" did not commit.

    Also only the "political" war criminals were tried by the Allies. The scientists went off to work for NASA and put man on the moon.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,636 ✭✭✭feargale


    One of the worst instances of denial is that of the Turks in relation to atrocities against the Armeians, particularly in 1915.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,920 ✭✭✭Einhard


    In some ways, I think the Japanese were worse than the Nazis in their activities. Indeed, I seem to recall being told about a Nazi envoy in Nanking reporting in horror to Berlin about the depravities he was witnessing. While the Nazis were brutal and their crimes horrific, they appear to have been more restrained, at least towards those who were lucky enough to be Christian, able-bodied etc. The Japanese, on the other hand, seemed to be almost indiscriminate in their violence. The horrors perpetrated in places such as Nanking really haven't permeated Western consciousness. Many people haven't even heard of that event or the many like it. As for contrition, the Japanese have managed little enough of it. Whereas German has been fulsome in its contrition- to the point where some have accused it of going too far- Japan has been far less forthcoming, and this has caused justified resentment in Asia. Many people in the West see Japan as a docile land, and it is for the most part, but there is a stong nationalistic streak in its people.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Einhard wrote: »
    a Nazi envoy in Nanking reporting in horror to Berlin about the depravities he was witnessing.

    John Rabe perhaps. He was a prominent German businessman but I don't think a member of the Nazi party although I am not certain of that. The behaviour of the Japanese in China was more a reflection on the methods in their army at the time rather than any societal reflection.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,407 ✭✭✭Cardinal Richelieu


    John Rabe perhaps. He was a prominent German businessman but I don't think a member of the Nazi party although I am not certain of that. The behaviour of the Japanese in China was more a reflection on the methods in their army at the time rather than any societal reflection.

    He joined the Nazi Party in 1934 and was for a time the regional Party leader in Nanking.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    The behaviour of the Japanese in China was more a reflection on the methods in their army at the time rather than any societal reflection.
    I dunno JB. Japanese culture has tended to see itself as homogenous and very much as apart and superior to the barbarians beyond their shores. The word for non Japanese is outsider(with roots of stranger/enemy) and definitely has pejorative overtones. The notion of non Japanese being subhuman was easy to promote. The army stuff just reflected and played up a wider feeling in that society. It certainly didn't spring from nowhere, nor was it a recent political movement/philosophy when compared to Nazi Germany.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    Wibbs wrote: »
    I dunno JB. Japanese culture has tended to see itself as homogenous and very much as apart and superior to the barbarians beyond their shores. The word for non Japanese is outsider(with roots of stranger/enemy) and definitely has pejorative overtones. The notion of non Japanese being subhuman was easy to promote. The army stuff just reflected and played up a wider feeling in that society. It certainly didn't spring from nowhere, nor was it a recent political movement/philosophy when compared to Nazi Germany.

    I would stand over the comment "The behaviour of the Japanese in China was more a reflection on the methods in their army at the time rather than any societal reflection."

    There are a number of reasons why I say this, take the treatment by Japanese of their prisoners of war in WWI and compare it to the horrific treatment of similar POW's in WWII. The significance of this is that it shows that within a short period of time historically speaking the attitude changed significantly. In this time period there was a change in army training methods. The army was also responsible to the emperor rather than the government of the time thus had more autonomy to direct itself towards its own goals. They decided at an early point that they would need to expand Japans boundaries for living space (Similar to German plans for lebensbaum). Combined with the League of Nations proclamations which Japan saw as hypocritical due to the colonies of some of the Leagues leaders an anti- western view developed generally in the country during this time. This lead the army to drive towards expansion and the training of their troops legitimised vicious methods in the name of the emperor, i.e. if you committed an act in the name of the emperor it was for the greater good, the emperor being a god like figure. Gradually the army began a type of peer pressure towards rape and murder of 'sub-humans'- Chinese, Koreans. If a soldier did not participate in these acts they could bring shame on their families as they were not acting in the emperors interests. As this did not exist in WWI and disappeared to a certain extent after WWII it would seem to reflect a sudden army change.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭gobnaitolunacy


    Something 'clicked' in the mindset of the Japanese military between the Russo-Japanese War/WW1 (Russian POWs were even PAID and some German POWs settled in Japan post-WW1) and the Second Sino-Japanese War/WW2.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,407 ✭✭✭Cardinal Richelieu


    Something 'clicked' in the mindset of the Japanese military between the Russo-Japanese War/WW1 (Russian POWs were even PAID and some German POWs settled in Japan post-WW1) and the Second Sino-Japanese War/WW2.

    Rather than contributing to a change in the Japanese military mindset the main influence on Japanese life by the German POWs was more likely Beethoven 9th and Baumkuchen. Only 63 German POWs of the 1000 held at Bando camp decided to stay on after the WW1 and that was by far, the camp that best treated German POWs.

    No mention yet of Kenji Doihara and how he controlled the Opium Trade in China to finance Japanese Military Operations and weaken Chinese opposition.

    http://www.paperlessarchives.com/FreeTitles/OpiumAJapaneseTechniqueofOccupation.pdf


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭gobnaitolunacy


    Rather than contributing to a change in the Japanese military mindset the main influence on Japanese life by the German POWs was more likely Beethoven 9th and Baumkuchen. Only 63 German POWs of the 1000 held at Bando camp decided to stay on after the WW1 and that was by far, the camp that best treated German POWs.

    No mention yet of Kenji Doihara and how he controlled the Opium Trade in China to finance Japanese Military Operations and weaken Chinese opposition.

    http://www.paperlessarchives.com/FreeTitles/OpiumAJapaneseTechniqueofOccupation.pdf

    I'm not suggesting for a second that the Germans had anything to do with influencing the military, just illustrating how humanely they and the Russians were treated.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    Can anyone give any justification, other than racial prejudice, why the policy of the USA regarding bombing Japan was so markedly different to that regarding bombing Germany?

    The USAAF which bombed Germany did so in daylight, in relatively small concentrated numbers and against carefully selected industrial and military targets with the intention of achieving at least some precision in the matter.

    Against Japan, they bombed indiscriminately and at night, deliberately using firebombs to destroy the generally very infllammable Japanese architecture, much of which was constructed of wood and even paper.

    "When we're done with them the Japanese language will only be spoken in Hell," to quote one senior US military figure.

    The bombing offensive culminated in the terrible fire raids on Tokyo and of course the atomic attacks against Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    Meanwhile, in Germany against their caucasian and teutonic kith and kin, the Americans were far more circumspect.

    Why?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,349 ✭✭✭✭super_furry


    Pearl Harbour? I think in their mindset, that gave them all the justification they needed.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    Einhard wrote: »
    In some ways, I think the Japanese were worse than the Nazis in their activities. Indeed, I seem to recall being told about a Nazi envoy in Nanking reporting in horror to Berlin about the depravities he was witnessing. While the Nazis were brutal and their crimes horrific, they appear to have been more restrained, at least towards those who were lucky enough to be Christian, able-bodied etc
    I doubt that there was an atrocity at Nanking that wasn't replicated a thousand times across Soviet towns and cities. Any "restraint" in Nazi violence (which is questionable at best) went out the window as soon as the first Wehrmacht units crossed the Soviet border
    Wibbs wrote:
    It certainly didn't spring from nowhere, nor was it a recent political movement/philosophy when compared to Nazi Germany
    It's worth noting that the roots of the Herrenvolk and Volksliste ideology ran deep into 19th C German history. The Nazis tapped into and radicalised a longstanding disdain of the Slavs and Jews but they didn't invent it. WWI was, possibly like Japan, a key radicalising agent in this process


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,073 ✭✭✭gobnaitolunacy


    Can anyone give any justification, other than racial prejudice, why the policy of the USA regarding bombing Japan was so markedly different to that regarding bombing Germany?

    The USAAF which bombed Germany did so in daylight, in relatively small concentrated numbers and against carefully selected industrial and military targets with the intention of achieving at least some precision in the matter.

    Against Japan, they bombed indiscriminately and at night, deliberately using firebombs to destroy the generally very infllammable Japanese architecture, much of which was constructed of wood and even paper.

    "When we're done with them the Japanese language will only be spoken in Hell," to quote one senior US military figure.

    The bombing offensive culminated in the terrible fire raids on Tokyo and of course the atomic attacks against Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    Meanwhile, in Germany against their caucasian and teutonic kith and kin, the Americans were far more circumspect.

    Why?

    By the time US bombers were in range of the Japanese mainland to carry out raids, the Americans were well aware of the fight to the death 'Way of the Warrior' where no quarter could be expected. True, there was a certain amount of racism involved, esp. propaganda posters and movies of the time (the Japanese portrayed as simian, short-sighted, buck toothed Orientals) and the perhaps OTT internment of anyone of Japanese birth or background in the States.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Reekwind wrote: »
    I doubt that there was an atrocity at Nanking that wasn't replicated a thousand times across Soviet towns and cities.
    Not within an asses roar of the same degree RW. Estimates of the death toll run as high as 20 million Chinese. This was daily rape and slaughter of men women and children by regulars in the Japanese army. While the Germans could be and were ruthlessly vicious at times and especially with certain groups they considered subhuman, there wasn't the wholesale slaughter across the board like the Japanese in China. In Nanking alone there were over quarter of a million civilians and unarmed POW's killed(often by blowing them up with grenades en masse, bayoneting the survivors and burning the bodies. Many were just buried alive), never mind over the 20,000 women raped(pregnant women being a particular fave) and most of them were butchered afterwards, if the gang rapes didn't kill them first. They even went around mutilating the corpses. Just to make their point like. There were competitions among the officer caste where they'd place wagers on how many people they could kill with swords. That's before we even take the comfort women and rape houses into account. They even had special chairs they'd strap the terrified women into to make it easier to rape them to death. That's before we take the medical experimentation and testing of weapons on live subjects, or bayonet practice with live prisoners.

    The German embassy itself were so shocked by the carnage in Nanking they attempted to smuggle out reports and photos and film of the various atrocities. There were many western and local witnesses to this and other Japanese war crimes in China. Indeed there are enough Japanese soldiers who came forward afterwards with their own reports. If one is of a weak stomach I'd not go looking for photos that did get out.

    Like I said the Germans were no angels, not by any measure. Neither for that matter were the Russians and other allies before and after Germany fell, but few instances come close to the widespread slaughter in that theatre of war. Or I'd like to read about an example of one that compares.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,845 ✭✭✭Hidalgo


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Not within an asses roar of the same degree RW. Estimates of the death toll run as high as 20 million Chinese. This was daily rape and slaughter of men women and children by regulars in the Japanese army. While the Germans could be and were ruthlessly vicious at times and especially with certain groups they considered subhuman, there wasn't the wholesale slaughter across the board like the Japanese in China. In Nanking alone there were over quarter of a million civilians and unarmed POW's killed(often by blowing them up with grenades en masse, bayoneting the survivors and burning the bodies. Many were just buried alive), never mind over the 20,000 women raped(pregnant women being a particular fave) and most of them were butchered afterwards, if the gang rapes didn't kill them first. They even went around mutilating the corpses. Just to make their point like. There were competitions among the officer caste where they'd place wagers on how many people they could kill with swords. That's before we even take the comfort women and rape houses into account. They even had special chairs they'd strap the terrified women into to make it easier to rape them to death. That's before we take the medical experimentation and testing of weapons on live subjects, or bayonet practice with live prisoners.

    The German embassy itself were so shocked by the carnage in Nanking they attempted to smuggle out reports and photos and film of the various atrocities. There were many western and local witnesses to this and other Japanese war crimes in China. Indeed there are enough Japanese soldiers who came forward afterwards with their own reports. If one is of a weak stomach I'd not go looking for photos that did get out.

    Like I said the Germans were no angels, not by any measure. Neither for that matter were the Russians and other allies before and after Germany fell, but few instances come close to the widespread slaughter in that theatre of war. Or I'd like to read about an example of one that compares.

    If the slaughter in Nanking was committed by regular forces, that would differentiate it to (at least early) acts committed in the Soviet Union with special groups like The Black Crows behind some of the worst atrocities as part of cleaning/sweeping up operations.

    I suppose a common theme is Japanese/Germans looking on the enemy in each instance as being sub-human. This in a way justified their actions, they didn't have to act humanely as they weren't fighting equal humans


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    Wibbs wrote: »
    While the Germans could be and were ruthlessly vicious at times and especially with certain groups they considered subhuman, there wasn't the wholesale slaughter across the board like the Japanese in China.
    Then where did those 20-30m Soviet dead come from?*

    I doubt that there is anything in your post above that wasn't seen in occupied Soviet territory. The German embassy staff may have been shocked but a few years later their compatriots were carrying out similar policies of indiscriminate violence in the USSR. Not just countless rapes and out-of-hand shootings but the razing of entire villages and towns; orgies of mass violence (50,000 dead in a week in Kiev); and truly depraved levels of violence – over 30,000 burnt alive or hanged in the streets in Odessa. While the violence often started with shooting Jews and Communists, it tended to rapidly escalate into frenzies of violence, as at Bialystok

    (This is not even touching on the millions of Soviet citizens who died behind barbed wire in Nazi prison camps or the genocidal 'Hunger Plan' intended to kill millions more)

    But, in contrast to Nanking and the most well known massacres of Soviet Jewry, the countless massacres that took place in the USSR were largely the destruction of rural settlements. The USSR saw a thousand Oradours during its years of occupation - villages burnt to the ground and their inhabitants shot in the hundreds – that have gone almost forgotten today

    *Worth putting into perspective given China's population was approx twice that of the Soviet Union at the time
    Hidalgo wrote:
    If the slaughter in Nanking was committed by regular forces, that would differentiate it to (at least early) acts committed in the Soviet Union with special groups like The Black Crows behind some of the worst atrocities as part of cleaning/sweeping up operations.
    That's something that has to be challenged: the Wehrmacht (and other regular units, including from Axis allies) were amongst the most common and brutal perpetrators of atrocities of Soviet civilians. The idea that this was largely the preserve of the SS or specialist/auxiliary units is a myth. The atrocities began as soon as the first Wehrmacht units crossed the border


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,763 ✭✭✭✭Crann na Beatha


    This post has been deleted.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 37,305 ✭✭✭✭the_syco


    There are a number of reasons why I say this, take the treatment by Japanese of their prisoners of war in WWI and compare it to the horrific treatment of similar POW's in WWII.
    Was reading through the pages that were linked to what you linked, and it seems that some think during WW1, the Japanese were trying to prove themselves "equal" to the west, so wanted to ensure the PoW were treated well, but they no longer cared by WW2.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    That's before we take the medical experimentation and testing of weapons on live subjects
    In "Unit 731" they would operate on living victims, to see what would happen if X, Y, or Z was taken out, frozen, thawed, put back in, etc. Seem 731 was the worst (documented) place. And yes, video was found of said experiments.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    The German embassy itself were so shocked by the carnage in Nanking they attempted to smuggle out reports and photos and film of the various atrocities.
    The Germans seemed to only see the jews, etc, as the infection in society that needed to be eliminated. The Japanese saw all Chinese as subhuman enemies. I suppose this difference is showed in the amount of people massacred.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Can anyone give any justification, other than racial prejudice, why the policy of the USA regarding bombing Japan was so markedly different to that regarding bombing Germany?

    The USAAF which bombed Germany did so in daylight, in relatively small concentrated numbers and against carefully selected industrial and military targets with the intention of achieving at least some precision in the matter.

    Against Japan, they bombed indiscriminately and at night, deliberately using firebombs to destroy the generally very infllammable Japanese architecture, much of which was constructed of wood and even paper.

    "When we're done with them the Japanese language will only be spoken in Hell," to quote one senior US military figure.

    The bombing offensive culminated in the terrible fire raids on Tokyo and of course the atomic attacks against Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    Meanwhile, in Germany against their caucasian and teutonic kith and kin, the Americans were far more circumspect.

    Why?


    I don't think that's entirely accurate. They actually weren't that accurate in Europe. The idea of precision bombing from altitude is a bit of myth. One that the public were sold at the time, but wasn't really true. The allies had realised that as the war went on. They also realised if you destroy a city, its almost impossible to move through it afterwards in order for your ground troops to capture it. Which is only an issue you have ground troops in place. The other point is they didn't have the resources to do such large raids till later in the war.

    http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2008/October%202008/1008daylight.aspx

    Even today precision bombing is often not that accurate.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,121 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Can anyone give any justification, other than racial prejudice, why the policy of the USA regarding bombing Japan was so markedly different to that regarding bombing Germany?

    The USAAF which bombed Germany did so in daylight, in relatively small concentrated numbers and against carefully selected industrial and military targets with the intention of achieving at least some precision in the matter.

    Against Japan, they bombed indiscriminately and at night, deliberately using firebombs to destroy the generally very infllammable Japanese architecture, much of which was constructed of wood and even paper.

    "When we're done with them the Japanese language will only be spoken in Hell," to quote one senior US military figure.

    The bombing offensive culminated in the terrible fire raids on Tokyo and of course the atomic attacks against Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    Meanwhile, in Germany against their caucasian and teutonic kith and kin, the Americans were far more circumspect.

    Why?

    I think the Americans were more aware of what the Japanese had been up to, in how they treated POWs and native populations during the war, and I don't think they had any sympathy for any Japanese people as a result, so it was no holds barred.

    I also think that it was only late in the game that the verifiable truth of what the Nazis had been up to was out in the open, and that had the allies known earlier, the Germans would have probably been dealt with in the same way that the Japanese population was.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    BostonB wrote: »
    I don't think that's entirely accurate. They actually weren't that accurate in Europe. The idea of precision bombing from altitude is a bit of myth. One that the public were sold at the time, but wasn't really true. The allies had realised that as the war went on.
    True enough. At the time the only bombing technique that was anyway "precise" was dive bombing IE Ju 88's and Ju 87's on the German side, Helldivers and Skuas on the US and UK side. Though largely a British invention the Germans really ran with divebombing as a tactic. Ju 87 Stuka pilots were expected to be able to hit within a 10 metre zone on a target and the better pilots could get closer than that. They were light bombers* with light bomb loads though and more tactical than strategic in design and like all bombers vulnerable to enemy fighters.




    *The Ju 88 was originally designed as a heavier dive bomber carrying heavier payloads, but airframe stresses caused them to dial back on that and come in at shallower angles(compared to the up to 90 degree dive of the 87) so accuracy was compromised.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,170 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    I also think that it was only late in the game that the verifiable truth of what the Nazis had been up to was out in the open, and that had the allies known earlier, the Germans would have probably been dealt with in the same way that the Japanese population was.
    I'm not so sure E. For a start it was fairly well known and known early enough among the rank and file of the German atrocities, particularly in the east. It was well known that Jews and others were being viciously targetted. US newspapers were covering the concentration/extermination camps pretty early on. Maybe the sheer horror at the reality of it came later, but it wasn't a secret by any means.

    Secondly, the largest diaspora in the US wasn't Irish or Italian it was German. German was quite the common language in the US before WW1. Add in the huge Irish diaspora who would have had little love for England and support wouldn't have been that great for getting involved. Before Pearl Harbor many Americans while being somewhat sympathetic about what was happening in Europe, were also pretty big into isolationism. I would say myself that race did come into it. The Germans although enemies were also seen more as "one of us", like has been mentioned the racial cartooning of the Japanese was damned strong and I can't recall ever seeing similar about Germans.

    Thirdly the Germans did suffer quite the casualty loss during the war and one often forgotten about today after the war was over. A couple of million never came home after hostilities were officially over. Men and women and children, civilian and POW's. It was a war where no nation involved came out clean of blood.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,126 ✭✭✭Reekwind


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    I also think that it was only late in the game that the verifiable truth of what the Nazis had been up to was out in the open, and that had the allies known earlier, the Germans would have probably been dealt with in the same way that the Japanese population was.
    They were. Yes, Tokyo may have been a largely wooden city but the quantity of bombs dropped on Hamburg (1943) still killed 40,000 people in an horrific firestorm that melted tarmac roads and copper roofs


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,121 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    Wibbs wrote: »
    I'm not so sure E. For a start it was fairly well known and known early enough among the rank and file of the German atrocities, particularly in the east. It was well known that Jews and others were being viciously targetted. US newspapers were covering the concentration/extermination camps pretty early on. Maybe the sheer horror at the reality of it came later, but it wasn't a secret by any means.

    Secondly, the largest diaspora in the US wasn't Irish or Italian it was German. German was quite the common language in the US before WW1. Add in the huge Irish diaspora who would have had little love for England and support wouldn't have been that great for getting involved. Before Pearl Harbor many Americans while being somewhat sympathetic about what was happening in Europe, were also pretty big into isolationism. I would say myself that race did come into it. The Germans although enemies were also seen more as "one of us", like has been mentioned the racial cartooning of the Japanese was damned strong and I can't recall ever seeing similar about Germans.

    Thirdly the Germans did suffer quite the casualty loss during the war and one often forgotten about today after the war was over. A couple of million never came home after hostilities were officially over. Men and women and children, civilian and POW's. It was a war where no nation involved came out clean of blood.
    Reekwind wrote: »
    They were. Yes, Tokyo may have been a largely wooden city but the quantity of bombs dropped on Hamburg (1943) still killed 40,000 people in an horrific firestorm that melted tarmac roads and copper roofs

    Ah well, that's my theory firebombed.:(


  • Registered Users Posts: 14 GenPol


    I just wanted to point out that the 442nd Infantry Regiment was composed entirely of Japanese American volounteers, and was one of if not the most decorated American regiment serving in Europe, earning 8 Presidential Unit citations, 21 Medals of Honor, and a record number of Purple Hearts. It was also a Japanese-American unit that liberated the concentration camp at Dachau.

    The treatment of Japanese Americans during WWII was awful, no doubt, but it's important to remember the other stuff as well.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Wibbs wrote: »
    True enough. At the time the only bombing technique that was anyway "precise" was dive bombing IE Ju 88's and Ju 87's on the German side, Helldivers and Skuas on the US and UK side. Though largely a British invention the Germans really ran with divebombing as a tactic. Ju 87 Stuka pilots were expected to be able to hit within a 10 metre zone on a target and the better pilots could get closer than that. They were light bombers* with light bomb loads though and more tactical than strategic in design and like all bombers vulnerable to enemy fighters. ....

    Even in the Vietnam war bombing still wasn't that accurate, bombs went everywhere, and F105's suffered terrible losses in ground attack again dive bombing to get accuracy. Even in the Falklands accuracy was quite poor unless delivered close in, which again resulted in losses.

    For all the political theories, you can't escape the practical limitations of the technology involved.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Reekwind wrote: »
    They were. Yes, Tokyo may have been a largely wooden city but the quantity of bombs dropped on Hamburg (1943) still killed 40,000 people in an horrific firestorm that melted tarmac roads and copper roofs

    They'd tried to do that before in other raids in Germany but hadn't succeeded. A number of things came together to make those Dresden and Hamburg raids particularly destructive.

    http://www.onlinemilitaryeducation.org/posts/10-most-devastating-bombing-campaigns-of-wwii/


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,301 ✭✭✭Snickers Man


    BostonB wrote: »
    I don't think that's entirely accurate. They actually weren't that accurate in Europe. The idea of precision bombing from altitude is a bit of myth. One that the public were sold at the time, but wasn't really true.

    It's true to say that the definition of "precision" would vary over the decades. The precision of a 1940s four engined bomber would not be anywhere near as accurate as a 21st century laser guided missile.

    But by comparison with their British Allies, the USAAF bombing Germany set out to be, and was, way more accurate and discerning. The Americans flew by day and aimed at specific military and industrial targets. The British, once they realised how fanciful their original tactics were, just tried to hit cities at night and destroy them en masse. The Area Directive made no pretensions to differentiate between "military" and "civilian" targets in a particular city.

    The American day-bombing tactics also reinforced, by necessity, the likelihood of concentrated bombing on small areas. Flying without the cover of darkness or fighter support, which pretty much described all raids on Germany until late 1944, required bombers to fly in tight formation for reasons of self defence. An American plane that fell out of formation over Germany was easy meat for German fighters.

    A study of the Hamburg firestorm raids of 1943 illustrates the difference between the British and American objectives. The British aimed for the residential suburbs; the Americans deliberately targeted individual aircraft and submarine factories. Far from being a "round the clock" operation, at least one of the American daylight raids on Hamburg that week was so concentrated that most people in the city didn't realise a raid was taking place. Of course with all the mayhem of the firestorm the night before, there was enough ongoing destruction to distract most of them from the raid on industrial targets that was taking place.

    The Americans never had any qualms about massive destructive anti civilian raids on Japan. I don't think the Pearl Harbor comparison is a valid one. After all, whatever you say about the dastardly nature of the Japanese surprise attack/pre-emptive strike, there is no doubt that Pearl Harbor was fundamentally a miltary target.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    ...But by comparison with their British Allies, the USAAF bombing Germany set out to be, and was, way more accurate and discerning. ....

    Might depend on how you define "accurate"

    Some missed Dresden by 120 km.
    In the fall of 1944, only seven percent of all bombs dropped by the Eighth Air Force hit within 1,000 feet of their aim point.
    In Europe the Norden likewise demonstrated a poor real-world accuracy. Under perfect conditions only 50 percent of American bombs fell within a quarter of a mile of the target, and American flyers estimated that as many as 90 percent of bombs could miss their targets.

    In Europe they flew much higher then the Norden had been trialled with, and in Japan they flew higher and faster again. It was impossible to be accurate like that.
    316 B-17 Flying Fortresses bombed Dresden, dropping 771 tons of bombs.[58][59] The rest misidentified their targets. Sixty bombed Prague, dropping 153 tons of bombs on the Czech city while others bombed Brux and Pilsen
    ccording to American pilots, it was the result of a navigation mistake: at the same time, a massive bombing of Dresden was under way, 120 km north from Prague.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1945_Bombing_of_Prague
    The 379th bombardment group started to bomb Dresden at 12:17 aiming at marshalling yards in the Friedrichstadt district west of the city centre as the area was not obscured by smoke and cloud. The 303rd group arrived over Dresden 2 minutes after the 379th found that the their view was obscured by clouds so they bombed Dresden using H2X radar to target this location. The groups that followed the 303rd, (92nd, 306th, 379th, 384th and 457th) also found Dresden obscured by clouds and they too used H2X to locate the target. H2X aiming caused the groups to bomb inaccurately with a wide dispersal over the Dresden area.

    Not that accurate maybe.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 5,108 ✭✭✭pedroeibar1


    WW2 bombing never was accurate unless it was very low level and daytime. Even then it was inaccurate. Do not be fooled by the 'smart bomb's used today - most of that is PR guff, those weapons amount to a minute fraction of what is dropped but they give civilians a 'feelgood' factor that innocent women and children are not being killed/maimed.

    The bombing of the Normandy beaches prior to invasion was not very accurate - The US made wildly optimistic claims about its prowess at ‘precision’ bombing.
    In the 30 minutes preceding H-Hour 329 Liberators and Fortresses of the US Eight Air Force dropped 13,000 bombs – not one fell on Omaha Beach. Heavy bombing formations remained incapable of dropping the majority of their load within a five-mile radius of their target. 'The Air Corps might just as well have stayed at home in bed for all the good that their bombing concentration did' according to a 1st Division officer.(D-Day, Beevor, page 910)
    Elsewhere in the book he mentions a remark current at that time in relation to aircraft – ‘If it is grey we duck, if it is brown they duck and if it is silver we all duck.’


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    BostonB wrote: »
    Originally Posted by Snickers Man

    ...But by comparison with their British Allies, the USAAF bombing Germany set out to be, and was, way more accurate and discerning. ....
    Might depend on how you define "accurate"

    Some missed Dresden by 120 km.

    ......

    Not that accurate maybe.

    It is usually accepted that in the European arena that the USAAF set out their stall to avoid civilian casualties. This was one of the main reasons for their long held view that daytime raids were worth the risk. They may not have been accurate but they attempted to be.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    It is usually accepted that in the European arena that the USAAF set out their stall to avoid civilian casualties. This was one of the main reasons for their long held view that daytime raids were worth the risk. They may not have been accurate but they attempted to be.

    You could argue they also they attempted to do the same in Japan...
    Over Japan, the B-29s encountered the jet stream, fierce winds above 25,000 feet that added as much as 250 mph to an aircraft’s speed relative to the ground. The jet stream pushed the bombers over the target too fast for the Norden bombsight to compensate. Flying against the jet stream, the speed relative to the ground was so slow that the airplanes were sitting ducks.

    Daylight precision bombing faltered, especially on the missions from the Marianas. The weather permitted only four days a month of visual bombing. The long distances and high altitudes consumed so much fuel that the bomb loads were relatively small. There were frequent aborts and ditchings as Twentieth Air Force worked the kinks out of the new bomber under combat conditions.

    Arnold and the AAF were under tremendous pressure to produce strategic results and help bring the war in the Pacific to an end. Hansell stuck doggedly to daylight precision bombing, although repeated efforts against such targets as the Nakajima-Musashino aircraft plant near Tokyo were unsuccessful.

    Meanwhile, the clamor was building in Washington to switch to incendiary area bombing. The Office of Scientific Research and Development had developed the highly effective M-69 incendiary bomb, to which the Japanese style of construction was starkly vulnerable. Japanese industry, including cottage industries making military parts and equipment, was so integrated with populated areas that it was difficult to draw the line between them.

    The Japanese regarded surrender as dishonorable and fought to the last in battle after battle. The possibility loomed that an invasion of the Japanese home islands would be necessary. Plans projected a landing force of 1.8 million US troops and anticipated massive casualties. The US was no longer as reluctant as it once had been to bomb enemy cities.

    LeMay, who was the more aggressive commander and who had gotten better results with the B-29s in India and China, replaced Hansell at XXI Bomber Command in January 1945. XX Bomber Command was phased out and its aircraft and crews were transferred to the Marianas.

    It had become apparent, LeMay said, that "we weren’t going to be able to defeat Japan using high-altitude precision bombing before the scheduled invasion was to begin."

    Acting on his own initiative, LeMay ordered a massive low-level night mission against Tokyo with incendiary bombs March 9. Three wings of bombers would attack from the altitudes of 4,000 to 9,200 feet. The aircraft were stripped of excess weight, including most of the guns. Flying lower and less heavily laden, the B-29s carried more than twice as many bombs as before. The strike force found landfall by radar and bombed with intervalometers set to space the bombs 50 feet apart. About a fourth of Tokyo was destroyed and some 84,000 people were killed. It was supposedly while touring the firebombed area that Emperor Hirohito came to the conclusion that the war had to end as soon as possible.

    LeMay continued to order precision attacks and to use high explosive bombs when targets and weather were suitable, but the emphasis had shifted to incendiary bombing at night. It systematically laid waste to Japan’s large industrial cities and by July, had reduced overall Japanese industrial output to some 60 percent from the 1944 level.

    LeMay and Arnold believed that the incendiary bombing would eventually bring on a Japanese surrender. Gen. George C. Marshall, the Army Chief of Staff, and President Truman were not convinced. The Japanese military hardliners were prepared to accept enormous casualties and destruction and had assembled a force of 2.3 million troops in the home islands to throw back an invasion. Truman decided to use the atomic bomb.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    BostonB wrote: »
    You could argue they also they attempted to do the same in Japan...

    Its a harder argument to make as the last few paragraphs of your quoted paragraph indicate. In his book 'horror in the east' Laurence Rees indicates that there was a prevailing attitude amongst many western countries that Japanese were not equals. To me it seems that this was reflected in the American bombing attitudes in a manner comparable to the way Nazi Germany treated its enemies in the east differently than those in the west. That may seem an over the top comment but remember the bombing of Japan culminated with 2 atomic bombings- I would ask if the 'humane' attitude of the european USAAF would have carried out an atomic bombing of a German city?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Maybe you missed this earlier
    http://www.onlinemilitaryeducation.org/posts/10-most-devastating-bombing-campaigns-of-wwii/

    Ask yourself the question in reverse. Imagine the allies had the experience of 5 or 6 years of was with Japan before the war in Europe began. Then had all the technology they had in Japan available in Europe. Would they have used B29's and atomic weapons rather than fighting another 6 years of war?

    Remember they didn't really need to invade japan. Its navy and air force were obliterated. It was blockaded by subs and ships. Cut off in effect. There some argument for the idea that the destruction of japan, wasn't only a message for japan, but also for Russia.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    I don't think the difference in attitudes can be attributed to war weariness if that is the point being made. There was more to it than that.

    There was a difference in attitudes by Americans towards Japanese in many parts of that country, this is well documented even in laws in some states.

    http://jicproject.wikispaces.com/Anti+Japanese+Sentiment+Before+WWII

    http://archive.vancouver.wsu.edu/crbeha/ja/ja.htm

    http://mason.gmu.edu/~jboggs/openseason/background.html

    http://kaga.wsulibs.wsu.edu/cdm-imls_2/item_viewer.php?CISOROOT=/wsuvan1&CISOPTR=1463&CISOBOX=1&REC=1


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    My point has nothing to do with war weariness. Its simply the poor accuracy of the technology, the limitations of aiming from altitude and speeds, and the availability of the technology at that point in the war.

    You can have all the attitude you want. But if you can't physically and technically carry it out, its really irrelevant what the attitude is.

    There a whole other side of it too. Where massive funds and resources are poured into a project, there's often enormous pressure to get results and use what every is the outcome of all that expense. The US big bomber programme is an example.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    BostonB wrote: »
    You can have all the attitude you want. But if you can't physically and technically carry it out, its really irrelevant what the attitude is.
    .

    If the quote above is true then how do you explain the explicitally different concepts of daytime riads (USAAF) and nighttime area bombing (RAF).

    What was the point in flying in daylight, endangering ones own pilots, if we discount the sought accuracy.




    The difference is outlined here:
    The Allied Practice

    In practice, the Allies carried pursued two types of bombing campaigns against Germany. These were precision bombing and area bombing.

    Precision or Pinpoint Bombing: Never as precise as claimed, the primary objective was to destroy a specific military or industrial target using aerial bombardment. Civilians were often killed in these kinds of operations. However, their deaths were considered an unfortunate result of the inaccuracy of precision bombing, the intent was not to target and kill civilians wholesale. By and large, the British pursued this kind of bombing in 1940 and 1941. It was abandoned by the RAF in favor of city-killing, area bombing in February 1942. The US followed suit in December 1943, after the disastrous second Schweinfurt raid, but continued to pursue both area and precision bombing until the end of the war in Europe. In operations over Japan, the USAAF overwhelmingly conducted area bombing.

    Area Bombing (also called Strategic Bombing): In contrast to precision bombing, area bombing targeted entire cities, consisting of many square miles, and not specific military or industrial targets. During area bombing runs wave after wave of bombers, including as many as 1,000 airplanes, would sweep over a wide expanse and drop hundreds, perhaps thousands, of tons of bombs on the target city.

    The concept of area bombing held that cities, as vital centers of economic production, were in themselves legitimate targets. Following this reasoning, it ran that if an entire urban area was destroyed it would dislocate the industrial labor force, thereby making it more difficult for the enemy to produce the war materiel necessary to keep up the fight. Similarly, the logic of area bombing also ran that the enemy's industrial workforce was in itself a legitimate target. Kill enough of the enemy's laborers and industry would grind to a halt. In connection with this there was the question of shattering the morale of the belligerent population. Killing as many civilians as possible and rendering as many homeless as possible was thought to have a dramatically negative effect on the morale of the civilian population. Once morale had been undermined it was assumed (hoped) that the enemy would capitulate (see Douhet's Concept above).

    Area bombing could consist of dropping purely high-explosive bomb loads. More often, however, it entailed using a bombing method called "firebombing" in which high-explosives and incendiary bombs were dropped during the same air raid. Firebombing was employed simply to achieve the maximum amount of destruction possible. The objective was to send as many bombers as possible over the target in as rapid a succession as possible in order to create a self-fueling firestorm. First dropped would be the high-explosives, in order to blow apart buildings, destroy water mains, and wreck roads. Incendiary bombs filled with phosphorus (later napalm) would then be dropped in order to cause huge fires. A third wave of bombers would drop fragmentation or time-delay bombs in order to kill firefighters arriving on the scene and thus keep the fires burning. This firestorm would grow so hot that it would create its own wind tunnel effect and burn absolutely everything, including steel. Firestorms caused by bombing could burn for days, until all of its fuel had been exhausted.

    The British perfected firebombing and employed it against many German cities, particularly older ones which had crowded streets and mostly wooden structures. The destruction of Hamburg and Dresden, are the best known examples of cities destroyed by bombing created firestorms, while in Japan Tokyo and other cities were incinerated by firestorms caused by the USAAF.

    http://www.worldfuturefund.org/wffmaster/Reading/war.crimes/World.war.2/Bombing.htm


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    If the quote above is true then how do you explain the explicitally different concepts of daytime riads (USAAF) and nighttime area bombing (RAF).

    What was the point in flying in daylight, endangering ones own pilots, if we discount the sought accuracy.

    The difference is outlined here:

    I don't think you've taken in what you quoted. The US assumed their heavily armed bombers could defend themselves. They couldn't they were massacred. Something the British has learnt since 1939. The US had to relearn that lesson. They didn't restart daylight bombing till they had fighter protection the whole way to the target The British couldn't do that, as their fighters didn't have the range, and also their bombers weren't as heavily armed to begin with.

    Ultimately the US had to learn the lesson about accuracy themselves also. The British had already learnt this lesson earlier in the war.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    BostonB wrote: »
    I don't think you've taken in what you quoted. The US assumed their heavily armed bombers could defend themselves. They couldn't they were massacred. Something the British has learnt since 1939. The US had to relearn that lesson. They didn't restart daylight bombing till they had fighter protection the whole way to the target The British couldn't do that, as their fighters didn't have the range, and also their bombers weren't as heavily armed to begin with.

    Ultimately the US had to learn the lesson about accuracy themselves also. The British had already learnt this lesson earlier in the war.

    You are not for some reason answering what I asked. Again as quoted above you refer to the USAAF partaking in daytime raids.

    the question I asked is regarding the USAAF policy of flying at daytime when regardless of their bombers defence capabilities it was more dangerous than flying at night:
    "What was the point in flying in daylight, endangering ones own pilots, if we discount the sought accuracy."

    My contention is simply that the reason they flew daytime raids was to increase accuracy- as per explanation in link I previously gave, i.e. demonstrating a different attitude to that of the US bombing campaign in Japan.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    ass u me
    ?

    ...er I dunno if I should decline a date politely or be insulted?...

    Your question is based on a flawed premise....that the British didn't bomb during the day, and that the US didn't bomb at night. However the US AND British both started out with day light raids and were slaughtered. The US ended up using (relearning) much if the techniques and technologies invented/learnt by the British.

    There's also another flawed premise. That the US didn't try daylight raids, or to be accurate in Japan. They did and was just as much as a failure as it was in Europe.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    For example
    The B-26 entered service with the Eighth Air Force in England in early 1943, with the 322d Bombardment Group flying its first missions in May 1943. Missions were similar to those flown in North Africa with B-26s flying at low level and were unsuccessful. The second mission, an unescorted attack on a power station at IJmuiden, Netherlands resulted in the loss of the entire attacking force of 11 B-26s to anti-aircraft fire and Luftwaffe Focke-Wulf Fw 190 fighters.
    1939 - disastrous daylight raid on German warships off Wilhelmshaven - 22 Wellingtons are caught in a cloudless sky in broad daylight by flak and Luftwaffe fighters, guided for the first time by German radar. 12 bombers are lost to Luftwaffe fighters.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    BostonB wrote: »
    ?

    ...er I dunno if I should decline a date politely or be insulted?...

    :D

    I should make clear that the boldening text was pointing out they should not have made the assumption you suggest.
    as in assume>>>ass u me


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    BostonB wrote: »
    ?

    ...er I dunno if I should decline a date politely or be insulted?...

    Your question is based on a flawed premise....that the British didn't bomb during the day, and that the US didn't bomb at night. However the US AND British both started out with day light raids and were slaughtered. The US ended up using (relearning) much if the techniques and technologies invented/learnt by the British.

    There's also another flawed premise. That the US didn't try daylight raids, or to be accurate in Japan. They did and was just as much as a failure as it was in Europe.

    The question is not based on the flawed premise, rather it is based on a generalisation. I note you have not answered it...

    Do you accept that in the European part of the war the USAAF to a large extent carried out their bombing missions by day and that the RAF to a large extent carried out their bombing at night?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    Sure.

    And they started the same in Japan.
    The difficulty of strategic bombing had been seen on June 15th, 1944, when a raid on Yawata’s iron and steel works resulted in just 2% of the complex being damaged. On August 20th, a raid on the same plant led to 18 bombers being shot down out of 70 planes – an attrition rate of 25%. The target was barely touched. Such losses for so little reward convinced many crews that strategic bombing was untenable.
    The first bombing raid against Tokyo occurred on November 24th. The city was 1,500 miles from the Marianas. Brigadier-General Emmett O’Donnell flying the ‘Dauntless Dotty’ led 111 B-29’s against the Musashima engine factory. The planes dropped their bombs from 30,000 feet and came across the first of a number of problems – accuracy. The B-29’s were fitted with an excellent bomb aimer – the Norden – but it could not make out its target through low cloud. Also flying at 30,000 feet meant that the planes frequently flew in a jet stream wind that was between 100 and 200 mph which further complicated bomb aiming. Of the 111 planes on the raid, only 24 found the target.

    In January 1945, Curtis LeMay flew to the Marianas to take control of 21st Bomber Command. The 20th Bomber Command, which had been based in India and China, was also transferred to the Marianas and LeMay was given command of this as well. Both units became the 20th Air Force. By March 1945, over 300 B-29’s were taking part in raids over Japan.

    However, flights over Japan remained risky as there were very many young Japanese men who were willing to take on the risk of attacking a B-29, despite its awesome firepower (12 x .50 inch guns and 1 cannon). When Japan introduced its ‘George’ and ‘Jack’ fighters, the number of casualties for the 20th Air Force increased and the damage done by the bombers was not really worth the losses. In March 1945, the capture of Iwo Jima meant that P-51 Mustangs could be used to escort the B-29’s. P-61 ‘Black Widows’ gave night time protection to the bombers during night raids. The Mustang was more than a match for the ‘Jack’ and ‘George’ fighters and daylight bombing raids over Japan became less hazardous with such protection.

    LeMay still experienced one major problem though. The investment the Allies were getting for the number of bombs dropped was small. The bombers were not having a discernable impact on manufacturing in Japan. Pinpoint bombing was simply not giving the returns that LeMay wanted.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    BostonB wrote: »
    Sure.

    And they started the same in Japan.

    Yes but changed, thats the point being made. A change of attitude.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 18,056 ✭✭✭✭BostonB


    No the point (or suggestion) being was made was the change of attitude dictated the change in bombing policy. A suggestion is also being made they could have been accurate if they wanted, and that they were more accurate in ETO than the PTO.

    The facts don't support that. In fact there's a myriad of technical and practical reasons for why the bombing policy and practice happened as it did. Also its not credible to ignore the time line, where the bombing in Japan was based on previous experience in the ETO.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,578 ✭✭✭jonniebgood1


    BostonB wrote: »
    No the point (or suggestion) being was made was the change of attitude dictated the change in bombing policy. A suggestion is also being made they could have been accurate if they wanted, and that they were more accurate in ETO than the PTO.
    .

    Refer to Posts 32 &33, then 40 & 41
    BostonB wrote: »

    The facts don't support that. In fact there's a myriad of technical and practical reasons for why the bombing policy and practice happened as it did. Also its not credible to ignore the time line, where the bombing in Japan was based on previous experience in the ETO.
    The USAAF flew daytime over Germany while at the same time night time over Japan. You cannot have the same accuracy at night as during the day. The change in late 1944/ early 45 saw a massive increase in damage done as they used a mix of incendaries as well as explosives. They also began flying lower altitudes in Japan.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement