Pacific war in pictures.

[DB_Cooper]

The second atomic bomb, "Fat Man" is dropped on Nagasaki on Aug. 9.

August 9: USSR declares war on Japan, and starts operation August Storm. Soviet gains on the continent were Manchukuo, Mengjiang (Inner Mongolia) and northern Korea (most of those territorial gains were made After the Japanese agreed to surrender..good old Stalin).

Aug 6. Recently captured American aircrews were interrogated at length by the Japanese concerning future targets for American Atomic Bombs..all of the American POWs had no idea..which the Japanese did not believe. Under torture the POWs gave some common cities in Japan and exaggerated atomic bomb numbers which the Japanese took very seriously.

On August 9, 1945 the Japanese government, responding to the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, to the declaration of war by the Soviet Union and to the effective loss of the Pacific and Asian-mainland territories, decided to accept the Potsdam Declaration.

On August 13-14 there was a coup d'état by some Japanese officers to prevent the surrender..it failed.



August 14 (7pm eastern USA time): President Truman announces Japan surrenders.

 

[Apollo14]

Hold your horses Mystic. You're jumping to some HUGE conclusions about what I said. And I have no idea why you're bringing up Roman Emperors.

In the spirit of what my point was, how about reading this. Think how likely it would be that an account like this would be taught, yet note it's source:

The following is excerpted from a report printed by the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary in 1974:

Quote:
The activities of General Motors, Ford and Chrysler prior to and during World War II...are instructive. At that time, these three firms dominated motor vehicle production in both the United States and Germany. Due to its mass production capabilities, automobile manufacturing is one of the most crucial industries with respect to national defense. As a result, these firms retained the economic and political power to affect the shape of governmental relations both within and between these nations in a manner which maximized corporate global profits. In short, they were private governments unaccountable to the citizens of any country yet possessing tremendous influence over the course of war and peace in the world. The substantial contribution of these firms to the American war effort in terms of tanks, aircraft components, and other military equipment is widely acknowledged. Less well known are the simultaneous contributions of their foreign subsidiaries to the Axis Powers. In sum, they maximized profits by supplying both sides with the materiel needed to conduct the war.

During the 1920's and 1930's, the Big Three automakers undertook an extensive program of multinational expansion...By the mid-1930's, these three American companies owned automotive subsidiaries throughout Europe and the Far East; many of their largest facilities were located in the politically sensitive nations of Germany, Poland, Rumania, Austria, Hungary, Latvia, and Japan...Due to their concentrated economic power over motor vehicle production in both Allied and Axis territories, the Big Three inevitably became major factors in the preparations and progress of the war. In Germany, for example, General Motors and Ford became an integral part of the Nazi war efforts. GM's plants in Germany built thousands of bomber and jet fighter propulsion systems for the Luftwaffe at the same time that its American plants produced aircraft engines for the U.S. Army Air Corps....

Ford was also active in Nazi Germany's prewar preparations. In 1938, for instance, it opened a truck assembly plant in Berlin whose "real purpose," according to U.S. Army Intelligence, was producing "troop transport-type" vehicles for the Wehrmacht. That year Ford's chief executive received the Nazi German Eagle (first class)....

The outbreak of war in September 1939 resulted inevitably in the full conversion by GM and Ford of their Axis plants to the production of military aircraft and trucks.... On the ground, GM and Ford subsidiaries built nearly 90 percent of the armored "mule" 3-ton half-trucks and more than 70 percent of the Reich's medium and heavy-duty trucks. These vehicles, according to American intelligence reports, served as "the backbone of the German Army transportation system."....

After the cessation of hostilities, GM and Ford demanded reparations from the U.S. Government for wartime damages sustained by their Axis facilities as a result of Allied bombing... Ford received a little less than $1 million, primarily as a result of damages sustained by its military truck complex at Cologne...

Due to their multinational dominance of motor vehicle production, GM and Ford became principal suppliers for the forces of fascism as well as for the forces of democracy. It may, of course, be argued that participating in both sides of an international conflict, like the common corporate practice of investing in both political parties before an election, is an appropriate corporate activity. Had the Nazis won, General Motors and Ford would have appeared impeccably Nazi; as Hitler lost, these companies were able to re-emerge impeccably American. In either case, the viability of these corporations and the interests of their respective stockholders would have been preserved.

 

[splinter]

^ Ought to be mandatory reading and viewing for today's 'Civics' students. Revisionist versions continue to proliferate.

Nonetheless, unspeakable atrocities by man upon his fellow man are still with us and show no signs of abating.

Praise be to the brave souls of the United States' "Greatest Generation!"

 

[Mystic]

What I said and what you have said does not look all that complicated to me. So what huge conclusions am I jumping to?

Do I really have to explain why I brought up the Roman Empire? You said that history is written by the conquerors. The Romans engaged in a lot of conquest. At one time they controlled most of what is today Europe and the Middle East. Is it so hard to understand why I used them as an example?

Is the Roman Empire still in existence? No it is not. Some Roman emperors tried to control what was written about them. They don't have much control over what is written about them today, do they? Do you think modern day historians are going to write histories of the Roman Empire based on what some Roman emperor of the past wanted written down?

The USA is very different from the Roman Empire. And we live in an information age. It would be hard today to write some elaborate false history. WWII was covered in depth by numerous war correspondents and there is totally no way all of those war correspondents could have been forced to write false histories based on what the leaders at the time in the USA wanted written down. Other countries have their own correspondents and historians. Good historians can cross check and cross reference numerous sources of information. In the case of a war somewhere they don't have to rely just on American media sources of information. In the modern world it would be extremely difficult to write an elaborate falsified history of some major event.

Even when it comes to events that happened long ago historians can turn to several sources of information. Written histories of various historians, anthropological evidence, various discoveries in scientific research, etc.

You said history is written by the conquerors. But the conquerors are eventually the vanquished.

And the modern world is very different than the world of the past. We live in an information age and major events are not likely going to have false histories.

I can't understand why anything I said here would be difficult to understand.

 

[hattaresguy]

http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/pages/ww2/

I find the Eastern Front to be the most interesting. In the west because of the Cold War it was largely glossed over in history books, and some massive battles as big or larger than Kursk were omitted from our history and are now only coming to light with the opening of east German and former Soviet archives.

The overwhelming majority of fighting against the Heer was done by the Russians, the British and US really only played a small part until 1944 and by than the war was already lost.

From an American perspective imagine the brutality of Iwo Jima except for 4 years, covering thousands of miles, and involving tens of millions of combatants. The shooting of prisoners and civilians was a very accepted and common practice for both sides.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Clz27nghIg

Even Band of Brothers was edited, they shot French civilians and some German prisoners, never made the series. Good guys don't do that...

 

[hattaresguy]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79KU997m9o4

On the German side they lied quite a bit as well.

 

[Apollo14]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
So what huge conclusions am I jumping to?


These:

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Let me tell you something that you don't know.
How do you know I don't know?

Originally Posted By: Mystic
I bet you never stopped to realize that empires do not last forever, and the conquerors do not remain conquerors forever-did you?
How do you know what I have stopped to realize or not stopped to not realize?

Originally Posted By: Mystic
Do you really think that every single war correspondent in WWII would be willing to write whatever the military and political leaders wanted written?
Where did I say anything remotely suggesting an opinion on that one way or the other?

Originally Posted By: Mystic
And if you think the history of WWII is inaccurate then tell us what actually happened.
Again, where did I comment on whether the history of WWII was accurate or not?

But you on the other hand agreed with Overkill when he said:

Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
History by definition is inaccurate because what is written down, recorded and interpreted is done by humans. We always manage to fudge-up something either due to incomplete or incorrect information, ignorance, bias...etc.


To which you said this:

Originally Posted By: Mystic
And, the history books are being rewritten as the real truth of what happened comes to light. Like you said, evolving history.


So why are you challenging me on an assertion that you invented that I said WWII history is inaccurate when you acknowledge it yourself?

 

[Nyogtha]

Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/pages/ww2/

I find the Eastern Front to be the most interesting. In the west because of the Cold War it was largely glossed over in history books, and some massive battles as big or larger than Kursk were omitted from our history and are now only coming to light with the opening of east German and former Soviet archives.

The overwhelming majority of fighting against the Heer was done by the Russians, the British and US really only played a small part until 1944 and by than the war was already lost.

From an American perspective imagine the brutality of Iwo Jima except for 4 years, covering thousands of miles, and involving tens of millions of combatants. The shooting of prisoners and civilians was a very accepted and common practice for both sides.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Clz27nghIg

Even Band of Brothers was edited, they shot French civilians and some German prisoners, never made the series. Good guys don't do that...


My father who served in the USAAC 15th Air Force from North Africa on through Italy etc. had a very different perspective than you do. He was in B-24's and thus under threat of imminent death no matter what the Russians were doing, until he used his excellent mechanical skills to become an Aircraft Armorer in a P-38 squadron. I was fortunate to meet and speak with one of the original Red Tails pilots earlier this year. When I shook his hand and thanked him and all the other fighter pilots for escorting the strategic bombing groups, he told me the men in those bombers were the bravest men he had ever known, flying in formation to accomplish their mission into clouds of flak so black he couldn't see the bombers when they entered it - and he was in an airplane.

I'll bet some Tommies on the ground from France & Belgium evacuated at Dunkirk, back to the African Desert and so forth until the end of the war would also disagree with your viewpoint, along with any number of soldiers that served in the RAF (including Polish & Free French soldiers).

I've known of Kursk etc. since the 1980's, it isn't only coming to light with the fall of the USSR. Also of NKVD policies, even before the war. Do you have no knowledge some areas such as Ukraine often the civilians welcomed the Germans at first, until the Einsatzkommando etc. were let loose to do their stuff behind the actual lines of battle.

But none of the in-depth knowledge I have about that time comes from any school course

 

[Mystic]

Originally Posted By: Apollo14
Originally Posted By: Mystic
I think history is very important and it is sad that so many people know so little about history.


Good point. WWI & WWII were required subjects when I was at school.

It's also important to understand that much history is written from the perspective of the conqueror and to teach accordingly.


Mori, people were having a nice, decent discussion about some WWII photos and the history of WWII, and then you arrive and talk about how..."history is written from the perspective of the conqueror and to teach accordingly."

So I have to assume from what you said that you think the history of WWII might be somewhat inaccurate.

And the purpose of the USA fighting in WWII, and the Allies nations for that matter fighting in WWII, was not conquest. The USA did not want to become involved in WWII. It was after Pearl Harbor that the USA declared war on Japan. And even then the USA did not declare war on Germany until after Hitler declared war on the USA. So the USA and the Allied nations were not conquerors in the first place. They were defending themselves from conquerors. Did not Hitler and the Nazis conquer much of Europe? Did not the Japanese conquer much of the Pacific?

All I said was that the photos were great and I have a real issue with people who distort history. I have a real issue when the History Channel talks about how the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor with 45 Zero fighter planes and that they had four aircraft carriers. Because I know the Japanese had six aircraft carriers in the Pearl Harbor attack, and they had numerous other warships and submarines. I think, if I remember correctly, they had 25 submarines and 5 midget submarines in the Pearl Harbor attack alone. They also had something like 2-4 Kongo Class battleships, cruisers and destroyers. And they had two waves of aircraft that attacked Pearl Harbor. I can't remember the exact number of aircraft involve but it was something like 100 aircraft in each wave. And the Japanese had many different types of aircraft. Not just Zero fighter planes. Late in WWII they even had a rocket propelled suicide plant that was launched from a Type 1 twin engine bomber and could travel some 600 mph with a heavy warhead. That plane was called the Ohka, I think. Not sure of exact spelling. It means 'Cherry Blossom' in Japanese.

You were the one who seemed to be implying that the history of WWII is inaccurate. My father fought in WWII and so did my uncle. I take offense when somebody implies that the history of WWII is inaccurate and the 'conquerors' (USA and the Allied nations) were somehow in the wrong. I also take offense because in WWII something like 12 million human beings died in the Nazi concentration camps. I take offense because some 25 million Russian civilians and soldiers died in WWII. I take offense because nobody even knows how many millions of human beings died in China. Probably something like 1 million of them in one Chinese city.

I am quite confident that we know in reasonable accuracy the history of WWII. Some new things are discovered from time to time which proves my prove that historians seek the truth and try to write truthful histories. The fact that people are willing to change history books when new facts are discovered is proof that history is self-correcting. In the end, the truth comes out.

 

[Nyogtha]

Now China is a place that just recently is allowing more access to their historical records from WWII.

Latest estimates I've seen estimate 12 to 13 million Chinese dead over their course of the war, which began when Japan invaded Manchuria.

 

[Astro14]

Apollo14/Mori is trolling you. It's his pattern.

He will deliberately take a position to get you to respond to him.

I recommend that you don't.

 

[andrewg]

This board is really getting to be just a huge argument. So many threads just seem to turn into a heated discourse rife with trolls and the like.

What is everybody arguing about? The pictures were interesting.

 

[Apollo14]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
So I have to assume from what you said that you think the history of WWII might be somewhat inaccurate.


You don't have to assume, you could just ask me for clarification of what I meant.

Or you could read the example that I put up to illustrate how interpretations differ based on the point of view of the person writing the history.

Which fits in nicely with the inaccuracy you are pointing out between the History Channel and your own understanding of what happened at Pearl Harbor.

You see, the phrase "History is written by the conquerors" is my slightly inaccurate recollection of the phrase:

“History is written by the victors"

which was said by no other than WINSTON CHURCHILL

So while you decide to assume what is in my head and proceed to give me a history lesson of what WWII was all about and try to take offense on behalf of all the people who died in it, YOU fail to realize you are talking to someone well versed in studying history who used a phrase that is well known amongst those who study history which is all about being aware of the viewpoint of the person writing the history.

Now, do you have any more comments about what I'm thinking? Anything you want to misinterpret in the junk food thread I started? Perhaps I am unAmerican for not eating McDonalds often enough?

 

[Mystic]

Yes, that is good advice. I will ignore him. Everybody knows about him.

I find it kind of interesting that Trajan always seems to want to team up with him.

It is just that I really get angry when I see the people who want to write revisionist histories and try to claim that the United States and the Allied nations were somehow the bad guys in WWII. My father an my uncle did not go into WWII to murder innocent human beings. People were being murdered by the millions in WWII and the USA helped to bring that to an end. It is wrong that the 'greatest generation' is bad mouthed by some people.

I have total respect for the 'greatest generation.'

 

[Mystic]

And this post is about the photos and we need to get back to that and ignore the trolls.

Great photos. The photo of the burning Lexington means something to me. I have not seen that particular photo before.

 

[Apollo14]

Originally Posted By: andrewg
What is everybody arguing about?


Beats me. I agreed with Mystic that teaching WWI & WWII was important.

And then he launched a tirade against me for something he imagined / assumed I said.

 

[Lapham3]

I have read about and studied WW2 and some other conflicts for 50 years. Like the Internet, there is some wrong/misinfo at times, but that can generally be filtered and overridden by and through the larger body of correct info. For many years the writings were mainly about the 'big picture' and from the perspective of the leaders and such. In more recent times, books/articles from the draftees and what they experienced-many very good. The beheading was an Australian sergeant pilot. The Bismarck was going down either way as it was surrounded by British warships and was quickly helpless. My dad was a 41st Division (National guard origin) heavy mochine gunner jungle fighter starting from Australia to New Guinea. They left San Fransisco in March '42 and had a tough time with supplies/food/good water/medical in the earlier periods. Later it was better, but disease remained a problem thruout. My dad didn't expect to survive, but did. His last malaria attack was in the early 1950's and with all else had less than good health the remainer of his life. He later said he was glad not to be a Marine 'charging the beach'. BTW-I've never seen that photo as it caught the explosion on the carrier (probably Lexington) either. Some of the war photos WERE misidentified.

 

[Mystic]

I always want the truth so it is good they found out what actually happened on the German Bismarck battleship. But I agree with you that it really does not matter much. The entire superstructure and gun turrets of the Bismarck had been shot up big time and the Bismarck was essentially completely useless. If the Germans had not scuttled the ship the Bismarck ultimately would have been sunk by the British, with ship rifle fire from battleships, cruisers, and destroyers, or using torpedoes, or else they would have towed the ship away. For historical accuracy it is good they found out the Germans scuttled the ship. A person can realize just how dangerous of a ship the Bismarck had been when they realize just how much punishment the ship was capable of enduring. Plus before the main rifles were knocked out the ship could deal out major destruction (in a pre-Atomic bomb world).

In the past the attention was focused mainly on the major leaders and it is a good thing that today we find out more about what life was like for the ordinary soldier and civilian. There are still many stories that have not been told. And many stories that have been lost forever with the passage of time.

The one thing I don't like is when someone attempts to change history for ideological reasons and not for historical accuracy reasons. Good historians try to tell a truthful and accurate story. The USA and the Allied nations in WWII certainly were not the bad guys. Individual soldiers were not perfect and nations were not perfect. But a few soldiers shooting unarmed enemy soldiers who had surrendered does not somehow change the fact that the Nazis had conquered most of Europe and the Japanese had conquered much of Asia and the Pacific by force and with the slaughter of millions of human beings. I am not excusing bad actions by anybody, but a few soldiers doing something wrong does not somehow make what the Nazis and the Japanese did right.

 

[Lapham3]

Enough fellas managed to escape Bataan(death march)and get the word out as to what happened and the 'rape of Nankin' was well known from years before=the Japanese style of warfare was brutal. With that knowledge, my dad's division took almost zero prisoners-keep in mind few Japanese even attempted to. As it was apparent to about everybody involved, Germany was essentially defeated months before VE day. As our troops drove across Germany many towns/soldiers did surrender, but also it was common for german troops to fire off all their remaining ammo and then surender=we lost guys. There were instances where those Germans were executed with a few left to retire and 'put out the word'. SS troops, known for murder, were also often executed. Nobody that cares for honest history likes to see known facts twisted any more than a scientist wants to see his testing/data later manipulated by others, but both happen and the 'spinners' should be 'called out'.

 

[hattaresguy]

Originally Posted By: Nyogtha
Originally Posted By: hattaresguy
http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/pages/ww2/

I find the Eastern Front to be the most interesting. In the west because of the Cold War it was largely glossed over in history books, and some massive battles as big or larger than Kursk were omitted from our history and are now only coming to light with the opening of east German and former Soviet archives.

The overwhelming majority of fighting against the Heer was done by the Russians, the British and US really only played a small part until 1944 and by than the war was already lost.

From an American perspective imagine the brutality of Iwo Jima except for 4 years, covering thousands of miles, and involving tens of millions of combatants. The shooting of prisoners and civilians was a very accepted and common practice for both sides.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Clz27nghIg

Even Band of Brothers was edited, they shot French civilians and some German prisoners, never made the series. Good guys don't do that...


My father who served in the USAAC 15th Air Force from North Africa on through Italy etc. had a very different perspective than you do. He was in B-24's and thus under threat of imminent death no matter what the Russians were doing, until he used his excellent mechanical skills to become an Aircraft Armorer in a P-38 squadron. I was fortunate to meet and speak with one of the original Red Tails pilots earlier this year. When I shook his hand and thanked him and all the other fighter pilots for escorting the strategic bombing groups, he told me the men in those bombers were the bravest men he had ever known, flying in formation to accomplish their mission into clouds of flak so black he couldn't see the bombers when they entered it - and he was in an airplane.

I'll bet some Tommies on the ground from France & Belgium evacuated at Dunkirk, back to the African Desert and so forth until the end of the war would also disagree with your viewpoint, along with any number of soldiers that served in the RAF (including Polish & Free French soldiers).

I've known of Kursk etc. since the 1980's, it isn't only coming to light with the fall of the USSR. Also of NKVD policies, even before the war. Do you have no knowledge some areas such as Ukraine often the civilians welcomed the Germans at first, until the Einsatzkommando etc. were let loose to do their stuff behind the actual lines of battle.

But none of the in-depth knowledge I have about that time comes from any school course


Than clearly since you have never researched the subject matter you lack the depth of knowledge to discuss German force concentration percentages, supply line issues, and production problems etc. The US Army War College has a great series of videos on youtube and their is volumes of wonderfully written biographies and records for you to research.


Research a bit and come back. Or were you just going for a dig?