research it more and you will find the answer.
December 7th, 1941
- Thread starter CourierDriver
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Benzadmiral
Panzerman said:
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
I don't agree with the "Cowardly" assessment. It was a massive blunder more or less. Adm. Yamamoto (the key planner) was horrified that United States wasn't officially declared war on in time knowing it would only create more outrage and galvanize the American public even more so...
I won't deny it is possible, but Pearl Harbor was all about "surprise".
I find it a little difficult to believe the Japanese went through the trouble of hiding their fleet for weeks and developing a surprise attack, just to give it all away with a timely declaration of war.
Once you look at the Bataan Death March, Rape of Nanking, and other even more despicable acts, it becomes clear the Japanese were not terribly concerned with the rules of engagement.
Possible? Yes. Convinced? No.
Either way, Yammi should have quit his job and run. Right about the time he was clutching his sword, listening to P38's fly up on his butt is probably when he had the same feeling.
I don't agree with the "Cowardly" assessment. It was a massive blunder more or less. Adm. Yamamoto (the key planner) was horrified that United States wasn't officially declared war on in time knowing it would only create more outrage and galvanize the American public even more so...
I won't deny it is possible, but Pearl Harbor was all about "surprise".
I find it a little difficult to believe the Japanese went through the trouble of hiding their fleet for weeks and developing a surprise attack, just to give it all away with a timely declaration of war.
Once you look at the Bataan Death March, Rape of Nanking, and other even more despicable acts, it becomes clear the Japanese were not terribly concerned with the rules of engagement.
Possible? Yes. Convinced? No.
Either way, Yammi should have quit his job and run. Right about the time he was clutching his sword, listening to P38's fly up on his butt is probably when he had the same feeling.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: pbm
Originally Posted By: CharlieBauer
Originally Posted By: UltrafanUK
I go to a few meetings every year to listen to the born again far right in Germany
You what?
The so called 'born again far right in Germany' are those people who oppose Merkels Islamization of their country. Ultrafan UK is spouting nonsense again.
I wonder if he is aware of the number of RAPES being committed in Sweden, Germany etc... by these 'poor migrants' (GOOGLE it).
And some are Nazis...
I have a lady-friend in Sweden, she doesn't mention this as a huge problem. She's probably more likely to be raped at a drunken frat party by good Aryans...
Originally Posted By: CharlieBauer
Originally Posted By: UltrafanUK
I go to a few meetings every year to listen to the born again far right in Germany
You what?
The so called 'born again far right in Germany' are those people who oppose Merkels Islamization of their country. Ultrafan UK is spouting nonsense again.
I wonder if he is aware of the number of RAPES being committed in Sweden, Germany etc... by these 'poor migrants' (GOOGLE it).
And some are Nazis...
I have a lady-friend in Sweden, she doesn't mention this as a huge problem. She's probably more likely to be raped at a drunken frat party by good Aryans...
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
There have been several historical books relating how multinational corporations & financiers loaned money to & built plants in early 1930s Nazi Germany-not sure anyone could have predicted the monster that Hitler would become. We also were quite well aware that war was inevitable, our factories were switching to war materiel long before 12/7/41. That doesn't excuse the cowardly attack by Axis Japan-it was a miracle our aircraft carriers weren't there.
It's very complicated. But one of the factors that led to Hitler in power was the economic collapse of 1929 which drastically effected the U.S. economy and a complex relationship, in which the U.S. was gradually attempting to moderate the the harsh Versailles penalties and normalize and stabilize Germany's economy. After the Crash there were no more willing lenders and the French began pressing the German gov't ever harder and mainstream German politicians would increasingly become marginalized and threatened by the various militias rooted in the Freikorp that ultimately opened the door for the Nazis...
Well there's good and there's evil. Not that complicated.
You don't attack a country to kill and enslave people because it's a good business decision. They earned every bit of each nuclear gift we sent them. Germany should have got a few too.
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
There have been several historical books relating how multinational corporations & financiers loaned money to & built plants in early 1930s Nazi Germany-not sure anyone could have predicted the monster that Hitler would become. We also were quite well aware that war was inevitable, our factories were switching to war materiel long before 12/7/41. That doesn't excuse the cowardly attack by Axis Japan-it was a miracle our aircraft carriers weren't there.
It's very complicated. But one of the factors that led to Hitler in power was the economic collapse of 1929 which drastically effected the U.S. economy and a complex relationship, in which the U.S. was gradually attempting to moderate the the harsh Versailles penalties and normalize and stabilize Germany's economy. After the Crash there were no more willing lenders and the French began pressing the German gov't ever harder and mainstream German politicians would increasingly become marginalized and threatened by the various militias rooted in the Freikorp that ultimately opened the door for the Nazis...
Well there's good and there's evil. Not that complicated.
You don't attack a country to kill and enslave people because it's a good business decision. They earned every bit of each nuclear gift we sent them. Germany should have got a few too.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
I don't agree with the "Cowardly" assessment. It was a massive blunder more or less. Adm. Yamamoto (the key planner) was horrified that United States wasn't officially declared war on in time knowing it would only create more outrage and galvanize the American public even more so...
I won't deny it is possible, but Pearl Harbor was all about "surprise".
I'm currently reading Toland's Pacific Crucible, and one of Yamamoto's preconditions for planning the attack was declaring war just prior. But I'm just now getting the sense of the bizarre anarchy that was the Imperial Japanese gov't, and the heated rivalries between the IJ Army and Navy...
Quote:
I find it a little difficult to believe the Japanese went through the trouble of hiding their fleet for weeks and developing a surprise attack, just to give it all away with a timely declaration of war.
Well, we were a bit arrogant and didn't think it was even possible that the Japanese could carry out such an attack anyways. And there was already one or more "War Warnings" issued by Washington so we knew sooner or later there was going to be a war. They just didn't know it would start at Hawaii and the home of the USN Pacific Fleet. The Japanese in fact were rather happy to goad on American racist preconceptions of Asians not being able to fly well and they had an active deception program to minimize their pilots martial skills..
Quote:
Once you look at the Bataan Death March, Rape of Nanking, and other even more despicable acts, it becomes clear the Japanese were not terribly concerned with the rules of engagement.
The Japanese Army and Navy were two very different organizations. Adm. Yamamoto thought most IJ Army generals were fanatics and imbeciles...
Quote:
Possible? Yes. Convinced? No.
Either way, Yammi should have quit his job and run. Right about the time he was clutching his sword, listening to P38's fly up on his butt is probably when he had the same feeling.
He died doing what he loved, flying. A noted American historian and ex-military officer called him the best naval admiral since Nelson. That's probably a stretch, but he was very astute and was reluctant to carry out the attack. But he followed orders which is a pity, It's a shame he didn't follow his first love, resign his commission, and become a professional gambler. "Yammi" loved flying, gambling and women...
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
I don't agree with the "Cowardly" assessment. It was a massive blunder more or less. Adm. Yamamoto (the key planner) was horrified that United States wasn't officially declared war on in time knowing it would only create more outrage and galvanize the American public even more so...
I won't deny it is possible, but Pearl Harbor was all about "surprise".
I'm currently reading Toland's Pacific Crucible, and one of Yamamoto's preconditions for planning the attack was declaring war just prior. But I'm just now getting the sense of the bizarre anarchy that was the Imperial Japanese gov't, and the heated rivalries between the IJ Army and Navy...
Quote:
I find it a little difficult to believe the Japanese went through the trouble of hiding their fleet for weeks and developing a surprise attack, just to give it all away with a timely declaration of war.
Well, we were a bit arrogant and didn't think it was even possible that the Japanese could carry out such an attack anyways. And there was already one or more "War Warnings" issued by Washington so we knew sooner or later there was going to be a war. They just didn't know it would start at Hawaii and the home of the USN Pacific Fleet. The Japanese in fact were rather happy to goad on American racist preconceptions of Asians not being able to fly well and they had an active deception program to minimize their pilots martial skills..
Quote:
Once you look at the Bataan Death March, Rape of Nanking, and other even more despicable acts, it becomes clear the Japanese were not terribly concerned with the rules of engagement.
The Japanese Army and Navy were two very different organizations. Adm. Yamamoto thought most IJ Army generals were fanatics and imbeciles...
Quote:
Possible? Yes. Convinced? No.
Either way, Yammi should have quit his job and run. Right about the time he was clutching his sword, listening to P38's fly up on his butt is probably when he had the same feeling.
He died doing what he loved, flying. A noted American historian and ex-military officer called him the best naval admiral since Nelson. That's probably a stretch, but he was very astute and was reluctant to carry out the attack. But he followed orders which is a pity, It's a shame he didn't follow his first love, resign his commission, and become a professional gambler. "Yammi" loved flying, gambling and women...
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
There have been several historical books relating how multinational corporations & financiers loaned money to & built plants in early 1930s Nazi Germany-not sure anyone could have predicted the monster that Hitler would become. We also were quite well aware that war was inevitable, our factories were switching to war materiel long before 12/7/41. That doesn't excuse the cowardly attack by Axis Japan-it was a miracle our aircraft carriers weren't there.
It's very complicated. But one of the factors that led to Hitler in power was the economic collapse of 1929 which drastically effected the U.S. economy and a complex relationship, in which the U.S. was gradually attempting to moderate the the harsh Versailles penalties and normalize and stabilize Germany's economy. After the Crash there were no more willing lenders and the French began pressing the German gov't ever harder and mainstream German politicians would increasingly become marginalized and threatened by the various militias rooted in the Freikorp that ultimately opened the door for the Nazis...
Well there's good and there's evil. Not that complicated.
You don't attack a country to kill and enslave people because it's a good business decision. They earned every bit of each nuclear gift we sent them. Germany should have got a few too.
Thanks for school-boy simplistic moralist lecture "let's needlessly murder civilians with nuclear weapons" guy.
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
There have been several historical books relating how multinational corporations & financiers loaned money to & built plants in early 1930s Nazi Germany-not sure anyone could have predicted the monster that Hitler would become. We also were quite well aware that war was inevitable, our factories were switching to war materiel long before 12/7/41. That doesn't excuse the cowardly attack by Axis Japan-it was a miracle our aircraft carriers weren't there.
It's very complicated. But one of the factors that led to Hitler in power was the economic collapse of 1929 which drastically effected the U.S. economy and a complex relationship, in which the U.S. was gradually attempting to moderate the the harsh Versailles penalties and normalize and stabilize Germany's economy. After the Crash there were no more willing lenders and the French began pressing the German gov't ever harder and mainstream German politicians would increasingly become marginalized and threatened by the various militias rooted in the Freikorp that ultimately opened the door for the Nazis...
Well there's good and there's evil. Not that complicated.
You don't attack a country to kill and enslave people because it's a good business decision. They earned every bit of each nuclear gift we sent them. Germany should have got a few too.
Thanks for school-boy simplistic moralist lecture "let's needlessly murder civilians with nuclear weapons" guy.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
I don't agree with the "Cowardly" assessment. It was a massive blunder more or less. Adm. Yamamoto (the key planner) was horrified that United States wasn't officially declared war on in time knowing it would only create more outrage and galvanize the American public even more so...
I won't deny it is possible, but Pearl Harbor was all about "surprise".
I find it a little difficult to believe the Japanese went through the trouble of hiding their fleet for weeks and developing a surprise attack, just to give it all away with a timely declaration of war.
Once you look at the Bataan Death March, Rape of Nanking, and other even more despicable acts, it becomes clear the Japanese were not terribly concerned with the rules of engagement.
Possible? Yes. Convinced? No.
There's some controversy about that. Their 14 part declaration was basically breaking off negotiations and it would have been interpreted as I guess this means war although it wasn't a formal declaration. It was supposed to be delivered a half hour before the attack which wouldn't have left much time to alert forces as going through the chain of command takes time. As it was, it was delivered over a half hour after the attack had begun. There was also the risk that the attack would be delayed due to unforeseen circumstances. The US supplied 93% of Japan's oil at the time so others have pointed out that an embargo was in itself an act of war, or at least it would be interpreted that way today. Hitler approved of surprise attacks, in fact all the countries he attacked, he didn't declare war on except for the US. There is a saying that all's fair in love and war. Not everyone followed the Geneva or Hague conventions. Japan didn't sign the Geneva convention on the treatment of prisoners although it was a signatory to the Hague convention relative to the Opening of Hostilities.
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
I don't agree with the "Cowardly" assessment. It was a massive blunder more or less. Adm. Yamamoto (the key planner) was horrified that United States wasn't officially declared war on in time knowing it would only create more outrage and galvanize the American public even more so...
I won't deny it is possible, but Pearl Harbor was all about "surprise".
I find it a little difficult to believe the Japanese went through the trouble of hiding their fleet for weeks and developing a surprise attack, just to give it all away with a timely declaration of war.
Once you look at the Bataan Death March, Rape of Nanking, and other even more despicable acts, it becomes clear the Japanese were not terribly concerned with the rules of engagement.
Possible? Yes. Convinced? No.
There's some controversy about that. Their 14 part declaration was basically breaking off negotiations and it would have been interpreted as I guess this means war although it wasn't a formal declaration. It was supposed to be delivered a half hour before the attack which wouldn't have left much time to alert forces as going through the chain of command takes time. As it was, it was delivered over a half hour after the attack had begun. There was also the risk that the attack would be delayed due to unforeseen circumstances. The US supplied 93% of Japan's oil at the time so others have pointed out that an embargo was in itself an act of war, or at least it would be interpreted that way today. Hitler approved of surprise attacks, in fact all the countries he attacked, he didn't declare war on except for the US. There is a saying that all's fair in love and war. Not everyone followed the Geneva or Hague conventions. Japan didn't sign the Geneva convention on the treatment of prisoners although it was a signatory to the Hague convention relative to the Opening of Hostilities.
So the man who commanded pilots to ram their planes in acts of mass suicide thought the army was a bunch of fanatics?
No kidding. Everyone knows fanatics never order people to ram airplanes in suicide against targets.
Which Branch was it that ran the Japanese [censored] ships that 20,000 American POWS died on? Were those army ships? Does the army run ships?
Also, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "Man, I love flying!" was the last thing on his mind at that moment.
It's getting clear to me that for whatever reason, you have idolized and downplayed the malice of the Imperial Navy.
They were a bunch of animals as much as anything discovered in nature, and perhaps worse.
No kidding. Everyone knows fanatics never order people to ram airplanes in suicide against targets.
Which Branch was it that ran the Japanese [censored] ships that 20,000 American POWS died on? Were those army ships? Does the army run ships?
Also, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "Man, I love flying!" was the last thing on his mind at that moment.
It's getting clear to me that for whatever reason, you have idolized and downplayed the malice of the Imperial Navy.
They were a bunch of animals as much as anything discovered in nature, and perhaps worse.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
So the man who commanded pilots to ram their planes in acts of mass suicide thought the army was a bunch of fanatics?
He was long dead by the time the Kamikazes were deployed. And there were also American pilots that rammed their aircraft into Japanese ships. Of course it was stupid idea, but it wasn't Yamamoto's...
Quote:
No kidding. Everyone knows fanatics never order people to ram airplanes in suicide against targets.
He never ordered anyone to do that AFAIK. He actually kept the names of all Japanese naval aviators that died in training accidents on the wall in his office and sometimes openly wept for them...
Quote:
Which Branch was it that ran the Japanese [censored] ships that 20,000 American POWS died on? Were those army ships? Does the army run ships?
Not sure, might have been more the Army with maritime service support but I don't know...
Quote:
Also, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "Man, I love flying!" was the last thing on his mind at that moment.
It's getting clear to me that for whatever reason, you have idolized and downplayed the malice of the Imperial Navy.
They were a bunch of animals as much as anything discovered in nature, and perhaps worse.
No, I've just read a bit about it. I doubt you read much other than your accusatory strawman comments...
I suggest starting with Flyboys...
So the man who commanded pilots to ram their planes in acts of mass suicide thought the army was a bunch of fanatics?
He was long dead by the time the Kamikazes were deployed. And there were also American pilots that rammed their aircraft into Japanese ships. Of course it was stupid idea, but it wasn't Yamamoto's...
Quote:
No kidding. Everyone knows fanatics never order people to ram airplanes in suicide against targets.
He never ordered anyone to do that AFAIK. He actually kept the names of all Japanese naval aviators that died in training accidents on the wall in his office and sometimes openly wept for them...
Quote:
Which Branch was it that ran the Japanese [censored] ships that 20,000 American POWS died on? Were those army ships? Does the army run ships?
Not sure, might have been more the Army with maritime service support but I don't know...
Quote:
Also, I'm going to go out on a limb and say that "Man, I love flying!" was the last thing on his mind at that moment.
It's getting clear to me that for whatever reason, you have idolized and downplayed the malice of the Imperial Navy.
They were a bunch of animals as much as anything discovered in nature, and perhaps worse.
No, I've just read a bit about it. I doubt you read much other than your accusatory strawman comments...
I suggest starting with Flyboys...
Originally Posted By: Wolf359
There's some controversy about that. Their 14 part declaration was basically breaking off negotiations and it would have been interpreted as I guess this means war although it wasn't a formal declaration.
It's been a long day of Federal jury duty, but I'll look into it...
Quote:
It was supposed to be delivered a half hour before the attack which wouldn't have left much time to alert forces as going through the chain of command takes time. As it was, it was delivered over a half hour after the attack had begun. There was also the risk that the attack would be delayed due to unforeseen circumstances. The US supplied 93% of Japan's oil at the time so others have pointed out that an embargo was in itself an act of war, or at least it would be interpreted that way today. Hitler approved of surprise attacks, in fact all the countries he attacked, he didn't declare war on except for the US. There is a saying that all's fair in love and war. Not everyone followed the Geneva or Hague conventions. Japan didn't sign the Geneva convention on the treatment of prisoners although it was a signatory to the Hague convention relative to the Opening of Hostilities.
I mostly agree. But even a more significant warning time might not have made much difference. The carriers weren't at Pearl Harbor thank God, they had been off delivering aircraft to the forward bases Wake and Midway Islands, where Japanese aggression was considered more likely. The U.S. forces in the Philippines under MacArthur DID receive a timely war warning after Pearl Harbor had been hit, but inexplicably did next to nothing as Mac waffled and his idiot Chief of Staff refused to allow junior officers to have access and most of the USAAF aircraft were caught on the ground when they could have been bombing Formosa/Taiwan...
It's very hard to say what a proper advance warning would have done at Pearl. It's very unclear how this would have effected Adm. Kimmel or Gen. Short's planning, and might have even been worse! Maybe they disperse or scramble some aircraft or ready some AAA guns, those are the best possible options. But, who knows? As I stated, the U.S. authorities did not believe the IJN capable of such a strike and they still believed in the Mahan Doctrine of Battleship primacy. As bad as the attack on Pearl was it was perhaps one of the better possible outcomes as (mainly obsolete) battleships were sunk in recoverable shallow waters, the carriers were gone, and the Japanese pilots had boners for hitting ships and ignored the fuel depot. If they had taken out the fuel farm tanks at Pearl, one USN admiral (Nimitz?) said the war might have lasted into 1947...
There's some controversy about that. Their 14 part declaration was basically breaking off negotiations and it would have been interpreted as I guess this means war although it wasn't a formal declaration.
It's been a long day of Federal jury duty, but I'll look into it...
Quote:
It was supposed to be delivered a half hour before the attack which wouldn't have left much time to alert forces as going through the chain of command takes time. As it was, it was delivered over a half hour after the attack had begun. There was also the risk that the attack would be delayed due to unforeseen circumstances. The US supplied 93% of Japan's oil at the time so others have pointed out that an embargo was in itself an act of war, or at least it would be interpreted that way today. Hitler approved of surprise attacks, in fact all the countries he attacked, he didn't declare war on except for the US. There is a saying that all's fair in love and war. Not everyone followed the Geneva or Hague conventions. Japan didn't sign the Geneva convention on the treatment of prisoners although it was a signatory to the Hague convention relative to the Opening of Hostilities.
I mostly agree. But even a more significant warning time might not have made much difference. The carriers weren't at Pearl Harbor thank God, they had been off delivering aircraft to the forward bases Wake and Midway Islands, where Japanese aggression was considered more likely. The U.S. forces in the Philippines under MacArthur DID receive a timely war warning after Pearl Harbor had been hit, but inexplicably did next to nothing as Mac waffled and his idiot Chief of Staff refused to allow junior officers to have access and most of the USAAF aircraft were caught on the ground when they could have been bombing Formosa/Taiwan...
It's very hard to say what a proper advance warning would have done at Pearl. It's very unclear how this would have effected Adm. Kimmel or Gen. Short's planning, and might have even been worse! Maybe they disperse or scramble some aircraft or ready some AAA guns, those are the best possible options. But, who knows? As I stated, the U.S. authorities did not believe the IJN capable of such a strike and they still believed in the Mahan Doctrine of Battleship primacy. As bad as the attack on Pearl was it was perhaps one of the better possible outcomes as (mainly obsolete) battleships were sunk in recoverable shallow waters, the carriers were gone, and the Japanese pilots had boners for hitting ships and ignored the fuel depot. If they had taken out the fuel farm tanks at Pearl, one USN admiral (Nimitz?) said the war might have lasted into 1947...
As far as Japanese atrocities, of course they were hideous. But whether they were a signatory or not to Geneva Convention, the savage behavior of the IJA was a relatively recent development by WWII. During the Russo-Japanese War in the early 1900's for instance, both sides took tens of thousands of POWs and Russians were treated very well - in fact better than captured Japanese POWs by Russians. And when IJA ex-POW's returned home, they were not considered dishonorable beyond the standards of any Western army. But Japan knew they couldn't defeat industrialized Western and Euro powers because of their lack of an industrial base. So they attempted to compensate by completely [censored] the Code of Bushido into a pseudo, fake history of standard of fanaticism that never was traditionally applied to regular Japanese (peasant) soldiers. It was only higher ranking Samurai that traditionally were expected fight to the death or commit suicide for failure. Some refer to this concept as "the third force" with the first two forces being the man (soldier) and his weapon(s). The Third Force was his superior fighting spirit and toughness that would permit him to match an army with more firepower and resources...
The Japanese military became increasingly brutalized with a pseudo-never surrender doctrine of fanaticism, but beginning in the 1920's, the Army especially became essentially a gangster force that was corrupted with senior officers actually extorting protection money from senior industrialists and the wealthy. The senior leadership were increasingly rotted with both moral and corporeal corruption and increasingly despised the rule of law and moderate liberal politicians looking Westward. The IJA just increasingly did what it wanted, like the invasions of China that were largely unplanned and Tokyo increasingly lost control or its forces until those forces essentially took control of them...
The Japanese military became increasingly brutalized with a pseudo-never surrender doctrine of fanaticism, but beginning in the 1920's, the Army especially became essentially a gangster force that was corrupted with senior officers actually extorting protection money from senior industrialists and the wealthy. The senior leadership were increasingly rotted with both moral and corporeal corruption and increasingly despised the rule of law and moderate liberal politicians looking Westward. The IJA just increasingly did what it wanted, like the invasions of China that were largely unplanned and Tokyo increasingly lost control or its forces until those forces essentially took control of them...
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
He was long dead by the time the Kamikazes were deployed. And there were also American pilots that rammed their aircraft into Japanese ships. Of course it was stupid idea, but it wasn't Yamamoto's...
He was NOT long dead when he first approved and ordered "special attacks" (sucides). This was definitely before the official kamikaze squadrons were formed, but his first use of suicide acts as military strategy began with the midget subs, and not planes. He then quickly expanded the "special attacks" to include airplanes as well.
Quote:
He never ordered anyone to do that AFAIK. He actually kept the names of all Japanese naval aviators that died in training accidents on the wall in his office and sometimes openly wept for them...
His subordinates who disagreed with the ffect of "special attacks" on his legacy and soul certainly did know.
Accidents must have caused him grief that murder never brought to his heart.
Quote:
Not sure, might have been more the Army with maritime service support but I don't know...
Nope. The Japanese Navy was a monster on the water.
This order was issued before the death of Admiral Yamamoto to the Navy: "Do not stop with the sinking of enemy ships and cargoes; at the same time that you carry out the complete destruction of the crews of the enemy's ships, if possible, seize part of the crew and endeavour to secure information about the enemy."
The slaughter of servicemen, merchantmen, doctors, nurses, and civilians captured by the Navy was not only common, it was required.
Quote:
No, I've just read a bit about it. I doubt you read much other than your accusatory strawman comments...
I suggest starting with Flyboys...
Try reading more than a bit about it. Start here: https://www.amazon.com/Slaughter-Sea-Story-Japans-Crimes/dp/1591142636
He was long dead by the time the Kamikazes were deployed. And there were also American pilots that rammed their aircraft into Japanese ships. Of course it was stupid idea, but it wasn't Yamamoto's...
He was NOT long dead when he first approved and ordered "special attacks" (sucides). This was definitely before the official kamikaze squadrons were formed, but his first use of suicide acts as military strategy began with the midget subs, and not planes. He then quickly expanded the "special attacks" to include airplanes as well.
Quote:
He never ordered anyone to do that AFAIK. He actually kept the names of all Japanese naval aviators that died in training accidents on the wall in his office and sometimes openly wept for them...
His subordinates who disagreed with the ffect of "special attacks" on his legacy and soul certainly did know.
Accidents must have caused him grief that murder never brought to his heart.
Quote:
Not sure, might have been more the Army with maritime service support but I don't know...
Nope. The Japanese Navy was a monster on the water.
This order was issued before the death of Admiral Yamamoto to the Navy: "Do not stop with the sinking of enemy ships and cargoes; at the same time that you carry out the complete destruction of the crews of the enemy's ships, if possible, seize part of the crew and endeavour to secure information about the enemy."
The slaughter of servicemen, merchantmen, doctors, nurses, and civilians captured by the Navy was not only common, it was required.
Quote:
No, I've just read a bit about it. I doubt you read much other than your accusatory strawman comments...
I suggest starting with Flyboys...
Try reading more than a bit about it. Start here: https://www.amazon.com/Slaughter-Sea-Story-Japans-Crimes/dp/1591142636
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
He was NOT long dead when he first approved and ordered "special attacks" (sucides). This was definitely before the official kamikaze squadrons were formed, but his first use of suicide acts as military strategy began with the midget subs, and not planes. He then quickly expanded the "special attacks" to include airplanes as well.
Okay? What was the first one then?
Japanese pilots were supremely trained and some of the best in the world. Their great weakness was their inability to replace them like the United States could. The kamikazes were desperate attempts to stem and invasion of the home islands and no significant attacks occurred until at least 1944 if not '45. They weren't [censored] away their elite corp of aviators in 1943, not until most of the elite pilots were dead or chased out of of the skies...
And every nation had pilots that rammed other stuff like planes and ships. The Japanese were the ones who codified it...
Quote:
His subordinates who disagreed with the ffect of "special attacks" on his legacy and soul certainly did know.
Accidents must have caused him grief that murder never brought to his heart.
Okay, I guess you know his heart then!
Quote:
Not sure, might have been more the Army with maritime service support but I don't know...
Nope. The Japanese Navy was a monster on the water.
Like the United States, the Japanese had a maritime service like the Merchant Marine IIRC, at least until we torpedoed most of it. I don't know specifically the [censored] ships or the specific instances. BTW, there's a lot of youtube videos showing U.S. sailors gunning Japanese pilots and sailors in the water. Does that make us all evil too?..
Quote:
This order was issued before the death of Admiral Yamamoto to the Navy: "Do not stop with the sinking of enemy ships and cargoes; at the same time that you carry out the complete destruction of the crews of the enemy's ships, if possible, seize part of the crew and endeavour to secure information about the enemy."
Where is this quote from?
Quote:
The slaughter of servicemen, merchantmen, doctors, nurses, and civilians captured by the Navy was not only common, it was required.
Try reading more than a bit about it. Start here: https://www.amazon.com/Slaughter-Sea-Story-Japans-Crimes/dp/1591142636
Oh wow! Did you just Google that (book you've never and will never read)? Congratulations! You're an expert now!
He was NOT long dead when he first approved and ordered "special attacks" (sucides). This was definitely before the official kamikaze squadrons were formed, but his first use of suicide acts as military strategy began with the midget subs, and not planes. He then quickly expanded the "special attacks" to include airplanes as well.
Okay? What was the first one then?
Japanese pilots were supremely trained and some of the best in the world. Their great weakness was their inability to replace them like the United States could. The kamikazes were desperate attempts to stem and invasion of the home islands and no significant attacks occurred until at least 1944 if not '45. They weren't [censored] away their elite corp of aviators in 1943, not until most of the elite pilots were dead or chased out of of the skies...
And every nation had pilots that rammed other stuff like planes and ships. The Japanese were the ones who codified it...
Quote:
His subordinates who disagreed with the ffect of "special attacks" on his legacy and soul certainly did know.
Accidents must have caused him grief that murder never brought to his heart.
Okay, I guess you know his heart then!
Quote:
Not sure, might have been more the Army with maritime service support but I don't know...
Nope. The Japanese Navy was a monster on the water.
Like the United States, the Japanese had a maritime service like the Merchant Marine IIRC, at least until we torpedoed most of it. I don't know specifically the [censored] ships or the specific instances. BTW, there's a lot of youtube videos showing U.S. sailors gunning Japanese pilots and sailors in the water. Does that make us all evil too?..
Quote:
This order was issued before the death of Admiral Yamamoto to the Navy: "Do not stop with the sinking of enemy ships and cargoes; at the same time that you carry out the complete destruction of the crews of the enemy's ships, if possible, seize part of the crew and endeavour to secure information about the enemy."
Where is this quote from?
Quote:
The slaughter of servicemen, merchantmen, doctors, nurses, and civilians captured by the Navy was not only common, it was required.
Try reading more than a bit about it. Start here: https://www.amazon.com/Slaughter-Sea-Story-Japans-Crimes/dp/1591142636
Oh wow! Did you just Google that (book you've never and will never read)? Congratulations! You're an expert now!
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Okay? What was the first one then?
First suicide attacks were actually used against the Australians in 1942.
Quote:
Japanese pilots were supremely trained and some of the best in the world. Their great weakness was their inability to replace them like the United States could. The kamikazes were desperate attempts to stem and invasion of the home islands and no significant attacks occurred until at least 1944 if not '45. They weren't [censored] away their elite corp of aviators in 1943, not until most of the elite pilots were dead or chased out of of the skies...
And every nation had pilots that rammed other stuff like planes and ships. The Japanese were the ones who codified it...
Yeah, they codified it more than 1000 years ago in Bushido Code.
They weren't wasting away their experienced pilots at pretty much any point, because even under official Kamikaze, being an experienced pilot was an automatic dis qualifier for Kamikaze duty.
Quote:
Okay, I guess you know his heart then!
Only as much as you claimed to know.
Quote:
Like the United States, the Japanese had a maritime service like the Merchant Marine IIRC, at least until we torpedoed most of it. I don't know specifically the [censored] ships or the specific instances. BTW, there's a lot of youtube videos showing U.S. sailors gunning Japanese pilots and sailors in the water. Does that make us all evil too?..
Help me out with that one. Every search term I use seems to bring up nothing but loads of videos of the Japanese doing horrible things to their prisoners.............for some strange reason.
My only point was that the Japanese were just as despicable on the water as they were on land.
Quote:
Where is this quote from?
A document presented at the Tokyo Trials, used to convict many Naval officers of war crimes.
Quote:
Oh wow! Did you just Google that (book you've never and will never read)? Congratulations! You're an expert now!
Oh wow! Did you just Google Flyboys (book you've never and will never read)? Congratulations! You're an expert now!
Okay? What was the first one then?
First suicide attacks were actually used against the Australians in 1942.
Quote:
Japanese pilots were supremely trained and some of the best in the world. Their great weakness was their inability to replace them like the United States could. The kamikazes were desperate attempts to stem and invasion of the home islands and no significant attacks occurred until at least 1944 if not '45. They weren't [censored] away their elite corp of aviators in 1943, not until most of the elite pilots were dead or chased out of of the skies...
And every nation had pilots that rammed other stuff like planes and ships. The Japanese were the ones who codified it...
Yeah, they codified it more than 1000 years ago in Bushido Code.
They weren't wasting away their experienced pilots at pretty much any point, because even under official Kamikaze, being an experienced pilot was an automatic dis qualifier for Kamikaze duty.
Quote:
Okay, I guess you know his heart then!
Only as much as you claimed to know.
Quote:
Like the United States, the Japanese had a maritime service like the Merchant Marine IIRC, at least until we torpedoed most of it. I don't know specifically the [censored] ships or the specific instances. BTW, there's a lot of youtube videos showing U.S. sailors gunning Japanese pilots and sailors in the water. Does that make us all evil too?..
Help me out with that one. Every search term I use seems to bring up nothing but loads of videos of the Japanese doing horrible things to their prisoners.............for some strange reason.
My only point was that the Japanese were just as despicable on the water as they were on land.
Quote:
Where is this quote from?
A document presented at the Tokyo Trials, used to convict many Naval officers of war crimes.
Quote:
Oh wow! Did you just Google that (book you've never and will never read)? Congratulations! You're an expert now!
Oh wow! Did you just Google Flyboys (book you've never and will never read)? Congratulations! You're an expert now!
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Okay? What was the first one then?
First suicide attacks were actually used against the Australians in 1942.
Do tell!
Quote:
Yeah, they codified it more than 1000 years ago in Bushido Code.
Wrong. The Bushido Code was the B.S. code of revisionist fiction that was never to be applied to the low level soldiers and junior officers in the days of the samurai. Bradley goes into this in "Flyboys". Read my preceding posts, the IJA took many prisoners in the Russo-Japanese War and treated them very well, and didn't shun their own POW's on return...
Quote:
They weren't wasting away their experienced pilots at pretty much any point, because even under official Kamikaze, being an experienced pilot was an automatic dis qualifier for Kamikaze duty.
Whatever attacks there were were random. They certainly didn't need to use suicide tactics against the Aussies in 1942...
Quote:
Only as much as you claimed to know.
I never claimed any innate knowledge of him other than what I've read so for by Toland...
Quote:
Help me out with that one. Every search term I use seems to bring up nothing but loads of videos of the Japanese doing horrible things to their prisoners.............for some strange reason.
Because the videos are removed by "good, patriotic" Americans I suppose.
Quote:
My only point was that the Japanese were just as despicable on the water as they were on land.
They certainly were capable of being despicable everywhere. My only point is that the IJN was generally a bit "cleaner" and a bit less batsh it crazy than the Army. Not that they were perfect nor innocent. There was a very active competition between them both that bordered on shooting at points, the Army actually had ships that were carriers and the Navy had a large "Landing Force" of naval infantry/marines...
Quote:
A document presented at the Tokyo Trials, used to convict many Naval officers of war crimes.
Fair enough. But the real [censored] in the Unit 731 that conducted gruesome vivisections (autopsies on the living, including some Allied prisoners) were never punished because we wanted their research. We're hardly perfect either and tended to be a bit uneven in prosecutions and some of the biggest c*nts never got their due...
Quote:
Oh wow! Did you just Google Flyboys (book you've never and will never read)? Congratulations! You're an expert now!
Nope. I never Googled it because I bought it at a store and read it, twice I think...
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Okay? What was the first one then?
First suicide attacks were actually used against the Australians in 1942.
Do tell!
Quote:
Yeah, they codified it more than 1000 years ago in Bushido Code.
Wrong. The Bushido Code was the B.S. code of revisionist fiction that was never to be applied to the low level soldiers and junior officers in the days of the samurai. Bradley goes into this in "Flyboys". Read my preceding posts, the IJA took many prisoners in the Russo-Japanese War and treated them very well, and didn't shun their own POW's on return...
Quote:
They weren't wasting away their experienced pilots at pretty much any point, because even under official Kamikaze, being an experienced pilot was an automatic dis qualifier for Kamikaze duty.
Whatever attacks there were were random. They certainly didn't need to use suicide tactics against the Aussies in 1942...
Quote:
Only as much as you claimed to know.
I never claimed any innate knowledge of him other than what I've read so for by Toland...
Quote:
Help me out with that one. Every search term I use seems to bring up nothing but loads of videos of the Japanese doing horrible things to their prisoners.............for some strange reason.
Because the videos are removed by "good, patriotic" Americans I suppose.
Quote:
My only point was that the Japanese were just as despicable on the water as they were on land.
They certainly were capable of being despicable everywhere. My only point is that the IJN was generally a bit "cleaner" and a bit less batsh it crazy than the Army. Not that they were perfect nor innocent. There was a very active competition between them both that bordered on shooting at points, the Army actually had ships that were carriers and the Navy had a large "Landing Force" of naval infantry/marines...
Quote:
A document presented at the Tokyo Trials, used to convict many Naval officers of war crimes.
Fair enough. But the real [censored] in the Unit 731 that conducted gruesome vivisections (autopsies on the living, including some Allied prisoners) were never punished because we wanted their research. We're hardly perfect either and tended to be a bit uneven in prosecutions and some of the biggest c*nts never got their due...
Quote:
Oh wow! Did you just Google Flyboys (book you've never and will never read)? Congratulations! You're an expert now!
Nope. I never Googled it because I bought it at a store and read it, twice I think...
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Do tell!
Sydney Harbor. Upon requesting men for the midget sub attack on Sydney, Yamamoto's subordinates were quite concerned, because of the guarantee of the death of all crew of the subs. After Pearl Harbor and other incidents, his subs had done the math and realized that getting into a midget sub was a one-way trip. They felt that this, combined with the new technology to detect undersea vessels meant even more certain death, and that Yamamoto using suicide as a military strategy was disastrous for him.
Yamamoto ignored the protests, and ordered the doomed raid anyway. Sure enough, every midget sub operator killed themselves on the raid.
Quote:
Wrong. The Bushido Code was the B.S. code. Bradley goes into this in "Flyboys"...
It's not wrong. The Bushido Code is clearly outlined, and has been fulfilled with plenty of documented suicide attacks over centuries.
Quote:
Whatever attacks there were were random. They certainly didn't need to use suicide tactics against the Aussies in 1942...
They did a lot of stupid things they didn't need to do in 1942.
Shall we discuss a really stupid program called the I-Boats?
Quote:
I never claimed any innate knowledge of him other than what I've read so for by Toland...
I never claimed any innate knowledge of him other than what has been reported of his war crimes half a million times over the last 70-odd years.
Quote:
Because the videos are removed by "good, patriotic" Americans I suppose.
I can also find videos that claim the Holocaust never happened. Maybe those are right too.
Quote:
They certainly were capable of being despicable everywhere. My only point is that the IJN was generally a bit "cleaner" and a bit less batsh it crazy than the Army. Not that they were perfect nor innocent. There was a very active competiton that bordered on shooting at points, the Army actually had ships that were carriers and the Navy had a large "Landing Force" of naval infantry/marines...
Cleaner how? Killing military POWs? Check. Killing captured medical staff? Check. Killing captured civilians? Check. Making games of murder by feeding people to sharks, beheading competitions, etc? Check.
Quote:
Fair enough. But the real [censored] in the Unit 731 that conducted gruesome vivisections (autopsies on the living) were never punished because we wanted their research. We're hardly perfect either...
Agreed. My only point was that there is no reason in the activity of the Japanese to believe that they were in any way at all concerned with a proper declaration of war. Were it not for the possibility that the word "coward" could be attached to that act, I doubt the Japanese would have ever bothered arguing over the matter. But there is the simple situation that on one side of that line is dishonor, and on the other side are the shrugging shoulders of "War is war.".
Quote:
Nope. I never Googled it because I bought it at a store and read it, twice I think...
Are you suggesting that just because a book can be found on the internet, that it does not mean that a person never read the book?
Do tell!
Sydney Harbor. Upon requesting men for the midget sub attack on Sydney, Yamamoto's subordinates were quite concerned, because of the guarantee of the death of all crew of the subs. After Pearl Harbor and other incidents, his subs had done the math and realized that getting into a midget sub was a one-way trip. They felt that this, combined with the new technology to detect undersea vessels meant even more certain death, and that Yamamoto using suicide as a military strategy was disastrous for him.
Yamamoto ignored the protests, and ordered the doomed raid anyway. Sure enough, every midget sub operator killed themselves on the raid.
Quote:
Wrong. The Bushido Code was the B.S. code. Bradley goes into this in "Flyboys"...
It's not wrong. The Bushido Code is clearly outlined, and has been fulfilled with plenty of documented suicide attacks over centuries.
Quote:
Whatever attacks there were were random. They certainly didn't need to use suicide tactics against the Aussies in 1942...
They did a lot of stupid things they didn't need to do in 1942.
Shall we discuss a really stupid program called the I-Boats?
Quote:
I never claimed any innate knowledge of him other than what I've read so for by Toland...
I never claimed any innate knowledge of him other than what has been reported of his war crimes half a million times over the last 70-odd years.
Quote:
Because the videos are removed by "good, patriotic" Americans I suppose.
I can also find videos that claim the Holocaust never happened. Maybe those are right too.
Quote:
They certainly were capable of being despicable everywhere. My only point is that the IJN was generally a bit "cleaner" and a bit less batsh it crazy than the Army. Not that they were perfect nor innocent. There was a very active competiton that bordered on shooting at points, the Army actually had ships that were carriers and the Navy had a large "Landing Force" of naval infantry/marines...
Cleaner how? Killing military POWs? Check. Killing captured medical staff? Check. Killing captured civilians? Check. Making games of murder by feeding people to sharks, beheading competitions, etc? Check.
Quote:
Fair enough. But the real [censored] in the Unit 731 that conducted gruesome vivisections (autopsies on the living) were never punished because we wanted their research. We're hardly perfect either...
Agreed. My only point was that there is no reason in the activity of the Japanese to believe that they were in any way at all concerned with a proper declaration of war. Were it not for the possibility that the word "coward" could be attached to that act, I doubt the Japanese would have ever bothered arguing over the matter. But there is the simple situation that on one side of that line is dishonor, and on the other side are the shrugging shoulders of "War is war.".
Quote:
Nope. I never Googled it because I bought it at a store and read it, twice I think...
Are you suggesting that just because a book can be found on the internet, that it does not mean that a person never read the book?
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Do tell!
Sydney Harbor. Upon requesting men for the midget sub attack on Sydney, Yamamoto's subordinates were quite concerned, because of the guarantee of the death of all crew of the subs. After Pearl Harbor and other incidents, his subs had done the math and realized that getting into a midget sub was a one-way trip. They felt that this, combined with the new technology to detect undersea vessels meant even more certain death, and that Yamamoto using suicide as a military strategy was disastrous for him.
Yamamoto ignored the protests, and ordered the doomed raid anyway. Sure enough, every midget sub operator killed themselves on the raid.
The IJN used midget subs at Pearl Harbor as well. But where are you getting the info that Yamamoto had anything to do with the Sydney Harbor planning? Maybe he did, but Yamamoto was primarily an aviation admiral and specialist with carriers as he took an early career risk to avoid battleships and cruisers in favor of aviation in an era when most naval officers of any navy strived for getting on big gun ships as the primary naval weapon for promotions and career purposes...
Quote:
It's not wrong. The Bushido Code is clearly outlined, and has been fulfilled with plenty of documented suicide attacks over centuries.
Um, no, it is wrong. It wasn't Bushido, it was a "b@stardized" version of it that didn't exist in Japanese military culture since it was the IJA that defeated the samurai to begin with and modernized Japan. The Bullshatido Code was introduced somewhere around the 1920's IIRC. Prior to that, IJA DID NOT fight to the death against Russians. Although they still wantonly slaughtered Chinese. The actual code only should have applied to very senior officers, not line troops..
Quote:
They did a lot of stupid things they didn't need to do in 1942.
Shall we discuss a really stupid program called the I-Boats?
They did in general, such as having a parallel Army-Navy...
Quote:
I never claimed any innate knowledge of him other than what has been reported of his war crimes half a million times over the last 70-odd years.
Yamamoto was never tried for any war crimes he was ambushed and killed in 1943. I doubt he would have been tried had he survived the war but who knows?...
Quote:
I can also find videos that claim the Holocaust never happened. Maybe those are right too.
Um, apples and oranges bud. When I was in the Army, the JAG did training on the Law of Land Warfare. One of the Army lawyers was a completely hot young blond female captain. My [censored] young Captain stood up during a lecture on war crimes (probably to sort of impress her with what a bad [censored] he was)to mock the idea of taking prisoners and being "nice" in war. He said his marine sergeant grandfather would "take captured Japanese soldiers out for a five mile roadmarch and be back in 5 minutes".
Of course, this was code for killing all Japanese prisoners of war, which is completely stupid since Japanese POWs were of immense help. In any case, she told him sternly and coldy "there's no statute of limitations on war-crimes and your grandfather could be tried!" He **** and sat right back down with his tale between his legs...
Quote:
Cleaner how? Killing military POWs? Check. Killing captured medical staff? Check. Killing captured civilians? Check. Making games of murder by feeding people to sharks, beheading competitions, etc? Check.
Well, we didn't have beheading contests, but we did bomb the [censored] out of Tokyo with firebombs and killed over 100,000 mostly Japanese civilians...
And while the IJA tended to fight to the bitter end, those that did surrender were often killed by US and Allied troops out of hatred and revenge...
Quote:
Agreed. My only point was that there is no reason in the activity of the Japanese to believe that they were in any way at all concerned with a proper declaration of war. Were it not for the possibility that the word "coward" could be attached to that act, I doubt the Japanese would have ever bothered arguing over the matter. But there is the simple situation that on one side of that line is dishonor, and on the other side are the shrugging shoulders of "War is war.".
Not all. Yamamoto spent quite a bit of time in American and liked it here, he understood the mentality here and knew Japan couldn't win and that Pearl Harbor was a massive, reckless gamble. But one that was well executed and supremely botched at the same time...
Quote:
Are you suggesting that just because a book can be found on the internet, that it does not mean that a person never read the book?
Have you read it? The reviews of the author are generally good but there are some that claim he sucks at research and just makes up stuff. I mean, if you claim you're a specialist on the IJN, you should at least know what a Long Lance torpedo is FFS!
Originally Posted By: Nickdfresh
Do tell!
Sydney Harbor. Upon requesting men for the midget sub attack on Sydney, Yamamoto's subordinates were quite concerned, because of the guarantee of the death of all crew of the subs. After Pearl Harbor and other incidents, his subs had done the math and realized that getting into a midget sub was a one-way trip. They felt that this, combined with the new technology to detect undersea vessels meant even more certain death, and that Yamamoto using suicide as a military strategy was disastrous for him.
Yamamoto ignored the protests, and ordered the doomed raid anyway. Sure enough, every midget sub operator killed themselves on the raid.
The IJN used midget subs at Pearl Harbor as well. But where are you getting the info that Yamamoto had anything to do with the Sydney Harbor planning? Maybe he did, but Yamamoto was primarily an aviation admiral and specialist with carriers as he took an early career risk to avoid battleships and cruisers in favor of aviation in an era when most naval officers of any navy strived for getting on big gun ships as the primary naval weapon for promotions and career purposes...
Quote:
It's not wrong. The Bushido Code is clearly outlined, and has been fulfilled with plenty of documented suicide attacks over centuries.
Um, no, it is wrong. It wasn't Bushido, it was a "b@stardized" version of it that didn't exist in Japanese military culture since it was the IJA that defeated the samurai to begin with and modernized Japan. The Bullshatido Code was introduced somewhere around the 1920's IIRC. Prior to that, IJA DID NOT fight to the death against Russians. Although they still wantonly slaughtered Chinese. The actual code only should have applied to very senior officers, not line troops..
Quote:
They did a lot of stupid things they didn't need to do in 1942.
Shall we discuss a really stupid program called the I-Boats?
They did in general, such as having a parallel Army-Navy...
Quote:
I never claimed any innate knowledge of him other than what has been reported of his war crimes half a million times over the last 70-odd years.
Yamamoto was never tried for any war crimes he was ambushed and killed in 1943. I doubt he would have been tried had he survived the war but who knows?...
Quote:
I can also find videos that claim the Holocaust never happened. Maybe those are right too.
Um, apples and oranges bud. When I was in the Army, the JAG did training on the Law of Land Warfare. One of the Army lawyers was a completely hot young blond female captain. My [censored] young Captain stood up during a lecture on war crimes (probably to sort of impress her with what a bad [censored] he was)to mock the idea of taking prisoners and being "nice" in war. He said his marine sergeant grandfather would "take captured Japanese soldiers out for a five mile roadmarch and be back in 5 minutes".
Of course, this was code for killing all Japanese prisoners of war, which is completely stupid since Japanese POWs were of immense help. In any case, she told him sternly and coldy "there's no statute of limitations on war-crimes and your grandfather could be tried!" He **** and sat right back down with his tale between his legs...
Quote:
Cleaner how? Killing military POWs? Check. Killing captured medical staff? Check. Killing captured civilians? Check. Making games of murder by feeding people to sharks, beheading competitions, etc? Check.
Well, we didn't have beheading contests, but we did bomb the [censored] out of Tokyo with firebombs and killed over 100,000 mostly Japanese civilians...
And while the IJA tended to fight to the bitter end, those that did surrender were often killed by US and Allied troops out of hatred and revenge...
Quote:
Agreed. My only point was that there is no reason in the activity of the Japanese to believe that they were in any way at all concerned with a proper declaration of war. Were it not for the possibility that the word "coward" could be attached to that act, I doubt the Japanese would have ever bothered arguing over the matter. But there is the simple situation that on one side of that line is dishonor, and on the other side are the shrugging shoulders of "War is war.".
Not all. Yamamoto spent quite a bit of time in American and liked it here, he understood the mentality here and knew Japan couldn't win and that Pearl Harbor was a massive, reckless gamble. But one that was well executed and supremely botched at the same time...
Quote:
Are you suggesting that just because a book can be found on the internet, that it does not mean that a person never read the book?
Have you read it? The reviews of the author are generally good but there are some that claim he sucks at research and just makes up stuff. I mean, if you claim you're a specialist on the IJN, you should at least know what a Long Lance torpedo is FFS!
- Status
Similar threads
