Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
dmckay

Trivia. What year were...

23 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

974
Members
4,551 posts
6,467 battles

Iwo Jima and Okinawan taken?  Which was first? Which battle resulted in the MOST casualties of the entire Pacific War.  Both sides. Trivia.

Edited by dmckay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,563 posts
6,867 battles

Both in '45, Iwo Jima first, and Okinawa had the largest US casualties... the Japanese general (General Kuribayashi) was very effective in his chosen defense on Iwo Jima..

BTW I am not a Clint Eastwood fan in general but his film "Letters from Iwo Jima" is superb.

Edited by Stauffenberg44
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,225
[WOLF3]
Members
6,438 posts
2,396 battles

^ This.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
Members
4,551 posts
6,467 battles
6 minutes ago, Stauffenberg44 said:

Both in '45, Iwo Jima first, and Okinawa had the largest US casualties... the Japanese general was very effective in his chosen defense.

Ding!  Totally correct.  Good Japanese commander. Okinawa was a hellhole (over 50,000 U.S. casualties) but Iwo seems to be more famous.  That flag raising pic? Had a lot to o do with Iwo and her fame. Hey, NOT putting any of our guys down and I salute em all.... but, oddly, most Americans today have never heard of Okinawa. No kidding. Most of my students have heard of Iwo.  Virtually none know about Okinawa.  Brutal azz fight.  Had a cousin killed there....never knew him...older than I.

 

For better or worse Okinawa swayed Truman to use the bombs.  That was part of it.  Part of it. However you can get a HELL OF A DEBATE BOUT THAT DECISION.  Not going there. :Smile_honoring:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,563 posts
6,867 battles
7 minutes ago, dmckay said:

HELL OF A DEBATE BOUT THAT DECISION.  Not going there.

*coughcouoghscaretheRusskiescoughcough*

Edited by Stauffenberg44

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
Members
4,551 posts
6,467 battles
20 minutes ago, Stauffenberg44 said:

8coughcouoghscaretheRusskiescoughcough*

Ahem, cough, hocker, etc. I agree... but not completely.  That was NOT the only reason. We wanted that war over. Do not dismiss that as a factor. Don't.  Forget 2018 and go back to Aug 1945.  Thousands of Asians civilians were still dying every month as late as Aug 1945. Stopped that fast. 10,000,000 in China alone during the course of the war,  and that is a low estimate, and millions more that were still under Japanese occupation in 1945 and being killed by the thousands..Civilians. They count?  Ya think?  Stopped that. In 3 days. This debate will never be resolved....never. 

 

When would have Japan surrendered? September 45?  Oct?  Dec?  1946? It's a "what if".

Edited by dmckay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,225
[WOLF3]
Members
6,438 posts
2,396 battles

Also to save an estimated 1,000,000 US lives.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
Members
4,551 posts
6,467 battles
22 minutes ago, Stauffenberg44 said:

8coughcouoghscaretheRusskiescoughcough*

Overly simplistic. Not the total pic. IMO\

Today folks look back who had NO skin in the game in 1945 and get judgmental. I understand.

Edited by dmckay

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
Members
4,551 posts
6,467 battles
6 minutes ago, iDuckman said:

Also to save an estimated 1,000,000 US lives.

 

To be fair,,,only if the Japanese had elected to defend their home islands. That is a "what if"  Maybe.  Maybe not. Hirohito was the one who finally stepped up to the plate after Nagasaki and told his military "no more". They obeyed. He was, after all, a God, in Japanese Shinto religion. Thought he would be hung. MacArthur nixed that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
3,563 posts
6,867 battles

Well I think you are wrong on all that, but as you say best saved for some other forum. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
974
Members
4,551 posts
6,467 battles
5 minutes ago, Stauffenberg44 said:

Well I think you are wrong on all that, but as you say best saved for some other forum. ;)

Well not wrong at all on several points ( was NOT totally at all ALL about the Russians, don't buy into that revisionism) but yes, best saved,  Carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,262
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,797 posts
15,236 battles
49 minutes ago, dmckay said:

Virtually none know about Okinawa.  Brutal azz fight. 

Technically, isn't Okinawa Japanese soil?

20 minutes ago, dmckay said:

only if the Japanese had elected to defend their home islands.

They certainly chose to defend Okinawa, quite well according to the records.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,380
[RLGN]
Members
8,249 posts
17,264 battles
25 minutes ago, dmckay said:

To be fair,,,only if the Japanese had elected to defend their home islands.

Read a magazine article recently that said the Japanese rail system was still mostly intact. What food they were capable of producing domestically could still be distributed.

If the invasion had gone in; the rail network was on the top of the pre-invasion zap list. Combined with an already stranglehold tight submarine blockade; the consequences to the Japanese people themselves could have been nothing short of catastrophic.

Edited by Estimated_Prophet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,722
[TBW]
Members
6,403 posts
12,034 battles

I took Okinawa one night in 1981 while I was on liberty, or did it take me? We never went to Iwo Jima so I didn't have the chance to take it. Sasebo Japan on the other hand, I took a couple times. Probably not the history you were looking for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,225
[WOLF3]
Members
6,438 posts
2,396 battles
23 minutes ago, Umikami said:

Technically, isn't Okinawa Japanese soil?

Yes, it was and is.  Since 1609 or 1879, depending on how you reckon it.  'Okinawa' is actually an archipelago of some 150 islands, and the 1879 figure is from a claim over then entire archipelago.

20 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

the Japanese rail system was still mostly intact.

Militarily, that's frightening.

21 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

the consequences to the Japanese people themselves could have been nothing short of catastrophic.

The military junta apparently didn't care, but if casualties on Okinawa are any indication, the numbers would have been staggering.

 

Remember, Okinawa was defended by one reinforced division.  Historians after the war estimated that Kyushu would have been defended by six divisions - formidable enough.  However, recent scholarship now estimates that there were, or would have been by Nov. 1945, twenty-two divisions (obviously of varying quality and strength) digging in on Kyushu.

Thank God that saner minds, both Truman's and Hirohito's, prevailed.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,225
[WOLF3]
Members
6,438 posts
2,396 battles
2 minutes ago, Sovereigndawg said:

I took Okinawa one night in 1981

Dawg, I liked your King Goofy avatar.  This one is pretty good, too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
245
[HC]
[HC]
Beta Testers
1,347 posts
9,543 battles
48 minutes ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Read a magazine article recently that said the Japanese rail system was still mostly intact. What food they were capable of producing domestically could still be distributed.

If the invasion had gone in; the rail network was on the top of the pre-invasion zap list. Combined with an already stranglehold tight submarine blockade; the consequences to the Japanese people themselves could have been nothing short of catastrophic.

The rail system was basically useless by mid 45 due to lack of fuel. Between Japanese Industry and the Military, the country was out of fuel. The winter of 45/46 would have been ugly for the Japanese people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,102
Alpha Tester
5,073 posts
2,434 battles
3 hours ago, dmckay said:

Iwo Jima and Okinawan taken?  Which was first? Which battle resulted in the MOST casualties of the entire Pacific War.  Both sides. Trivia.

1: 1945.

2: Iwo Jima.

3: Okinawa.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,262
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,797 posts
15,236 battles
1 hour ago, iDuckman said:

Militarily, that's frightening.

Not to mention absolutely amazing!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,262
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,797 posts
15,236 battles
10 hours ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

If the invasion had gone in; the rail network was on the top of the pre-invasion zap list. Combined with an already stranglehold tight submarine blockade; the consequences to the Japanese people themselves could have been nothing short of catastrophic.

Starvation is one of the most demoralizing, and effective, tactics in the history of warfare. People an live without electricity, running water, and any number of luxuries they have gotten accustomed to over the course of their lives; But they're hungry RIGHT NOW. I forget who originally said it, but civilization really is only three meals deep, or anarchy only one hungry day away. Catastrophic would be one of the milder terms to describe what would have happened to the Japanese civilian population had the US invaded the Japanese home islands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,380
[RLGN]
Members
8,249 posts
17,264 battles
3 hours ago, Estimated_Prophet said:

Read a magazine article recently that said the Japanese rail system was still mostly intact.

 

2 hours ago, iDuckman said:

Militarily, that's frightening.

 

1 hour ago, Umikami said:

Not to mention absolutely amazing!

SgtBeltfed remembers the information better than I did.

The rail system was still intact because it wasn't worth bombing.

2 hours ago, SgtBeltfed said:

The rail system was basically useless by mid 45 due to lack of fuel. Between Japanese Industry and the Military, the country was out of fuel. The winter of 45/46 would have been ugly for the Japanese people.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,262
[FOXEH]
Beta Testers
8,797 posts
15,236 battles
9 hours ago, SgtBeltfed said:

The winter of 45/46 would have been ugly for the Japanese people.

I'm sure it was ugly enough just the way it turned out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,225
[WOLF3]
Members
6,438 posts
2,396 battles

Watch movie Grave of the Fireflies.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×