OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 26, 2014, 01:43:18 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Japan and WW II  (Read 3571 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« on: April 20, 2013, 10:33:06 AM »

On a somewhat related note, I think that many folks underestimate just how tough the Japanese were in World War II. They would literally fight until the death of the last man and then would have their women, children and old folks fight too until their whole population was decimated. Man for man they were superior to any army in the world at the time. Most veterans I've talked to have all said that fighting in the Pacific was ten times worse than in Europe. And if it weren't for the atomic bomb and the United States's manufacturing power, I think that they could have taken on any world power at the time individually; even Germany, due to Japan's naval superiority.

Japanese naval superiority was largely a function of (a) surprise and (b) the Germans forcing part of the US fleet to stay in the Atlantic. At the beginning of the war, the US and Japanese had rough parity in naval forces (the Japs had more carriers, but only a few of them were comparable to the American bird farms), and if the Americans had been paying attention at Pearl, Yamomoto's forces would have gotten pretty beat up. As soon as the Americans started to respond, the Japanese started to lose at sea.

On land, the Japanese advantage basically consisted of being in dug in defensive positions on a series of volcanic islands. You can call it "tough", or you can call it stupidity. They were never a significant offensive force against a well-equipped enemy.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2013, 11:10:06 AM »

On a somewhat related note, I think that many folks underestimate just how tough the Japanese were in World War II. They would literally fight until the death of the last man and then would have their women, children and old folks fight too until their whole population was decimated. Man for man they were superior to any army in the world at the time. Most veterans I've talked to have all said that fighting in the Pacific was ten times worse than in Europe. And if it weren't for the atomic bomb and the United States's manufacturing power, I think that they could have taken on any world power at the time individually; even Germany, due to Japan's naval superiority.

Japanese naval superiority was largely a function of (a) surprise and (b) the Germans forcing part of the US fleet to stay in the Atlantic. At the beginning of the war, the US and Japanese had rough parity in naval forces (the Japs had more carriers, but only a few of them were comparable to the American bird farms), and if the Americans had been paying attention at Pearl, Yamomoto's forces would have gotten pretty beat up. As soon as the Americans started to respond, the Japanese started to lose at sea.

On land, the Japanese advantage basically consisted of being in dug in defensive positions on a series of volcanic islands. You can call it "tough", or you can call it stupidity. They were never a significant offensive force against a well-equipped enemy.


The Japanese were also poorly equipped in some ways . Their rifles were lousy.Their Zero's were fast and maneuverable but had no armor. Catch em kill em.

Fighting to the last man has it's disadvantages. Large numbers of prisoners pose a big logistical problem for the captors. Mopping up and killing all of them is actually cheaper and somewhat easier, though it costs additional casualties.

The Japanese were also capable of losing their vaunted discipline and running wild such as in Nanking where they slaughtered civilians for no good reason.

Hive mentalities has it's limits

« Last Edit: April 20, 2013, 11:11:50 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2013, 11:05:03 PM »

On a somewhat related note, I think that many folks underestimate just how tough the Japanese were in World War II. They would literally fight until the death of the last man and then would have their women, children and old folks fight too until their whole population was decimated. Man for man they were superior to any army in the world at the time. Most veterans I've talked to have all said that fighting in the Pacific was ten times worse than in Europe. And if it weren't for the atomic bomb and the United States's manufacturing power, I think that they could have taken on any world power at the time individually; even Germany, due to Japan's naval superiority.

Japanese naval superiority was largely a function of (a) surprise and (b) the Germans forcing part of the US fleet to stay in the Atlantic. At the beginning of the war, the US and Japanese had rough parity in naval forces (the Japs had more carriers, but only a few of them were comparable to the American bird farms), and if the Americans had been paying attention at Pearl, Yamomoto's forces would have gotten pretty beat up. As soon as the Americans started to respond, the Japanese started to lose at sea.

On land, the Japanese advantage basically consisted of being in dug in defensive positions on a series of volcanic islands. You can call it "tough", or you can call it stupidity. They were never a significant offensive force against a well-equipped enemy.


Also, American war vessels were limited in size due to the capability of the Panama Canal.

The Japanese faced no such potential blockages
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2013, 11:39:26 PM »

Also, American war vessels were limited in size due to the capability of the Panama Canal.

The Japanese faced no such potential blockages

The difference wasn't significant. Akagi and Kaga carried about the same aircraft complement as the American carriers when reserve aircraft were taken into account; Soryu and Hiryu were quite a bit smaller. Yamato was only slightly beamier than the Mo and somewhat shorter.

Logged
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2013, 12:26:12 AM »

Also, American war vessels were limited in size due to the capability of the Panama Canal.

The Japanese faced no such potential blockages

The difference wasn't significant. Akagi and Kaga carried about the same aircraft complement as the American carriers when reserve aircraft were taken into account; Soryu and Hiryu were quite a bit smaller. Yamato was only slightly beamier than the Mo and somewhat shorter.


I don't think Yamato would have been able to manage the Panama

I'm basing my comments on the book "Shattered Sword"
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
walter1234
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 928


« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2013, 04:30:42 AM »

Japan had been warred with China for 4 years before it attacked U.S.A

Japan had good military technology but it lack of resource.Japan wanted to take over China as China was weak at that time but had plenty of resource. Japanese people intended to defeat China within 3 month.However,Out of their expectation, they have been warred with China for 4 years but still could not conquer it.Then, Japan suddenly attacked the Pearl Habour.

One of the reason why Japan loss may be their military power is not well equipeed in some way. Besides, many of its resource and military power had already been depleted when it warred with China.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2013, 04:54:00 AM by walter1234 » Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2013, 09:58:22 AM »

Also, American war vessels were limited in size due to the capability of the Panama Canal.

The Japanese faced no such potential blockages

The difference wasn't significant. Akagi and Kaga carried about the same aircraft complement as the American carriers when reserve aircraft were taken into account; Soryu and Hiryu were quite a bit smaller. Yamato was only slightly beamier than the Mo and somewhat shorter.



I love Man Talk

Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2013, 01:12:18 PM »

Japan had been warred with China for 4 years before it attacked U.S.A

Japan had good military technology but it lack of resource.Japan wanted to take over China as China was weak at that time but had plenty of resource. Japanese people intended to defeat China within 3 month.However,Out of their expectation, they have been warred with China for 4 years but still could not conquer it.Then, Japan suddenly attacked the Pearl Habour.

One of the reason why Japan loss may be their military power is not well equipeed in some way. Besides, many of its resource and military power had already been depleted when it warred with China.

Japan's equipment was pretty much as good as anyone's at the beginning of the war, but, as you say, they did not have the resources or infrastructure to make continuous improvements. The Zero was a good plane at the beginning of the war (even with the lack of armor)- they certainly crushed the American Buffalo- but at the end of the war no major changes had been made to it, whereas the Americans were able to make their planes better and better.

The "banzai charges" were of course a really stupid tactic that often crippled their defenses. Only a few commanders were willing to set aside the suicidal ethos in favor of sound military tactics.
« Last Edit: April 21, 2013, 01:34:28 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #8 on: April 21, 2013, 11:11:12 PM »

Yamato was like two feet or so too wide to go through the canal; the bigger problem was draft, with some seven feet more than the Mo. She was also a lot heavier and slower than the American battlewagons, not that it mattered that much in the end.
Logged
NightOwl
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 596



« Reply #9 on: April 21, 2013, 11:13:52 PM »

If Japan had lost the Russo-Japanese War, the 20th century would likely have looked completely different.
Logged
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #10 on: April 22, 2013, 11:13:57 AM »

Japan had been warred with China for 4 years before it attacked U.S.A

Japan had good military technology but it lack of resource.Japan wanted to take over China as China was weak at that time but had plenty of resource. Japanese people intended to defeat China within 3 month.However,Out of their expectation, they have been warred with China for 4 years but still could not conquer it.Then, Japan suddenly attacked the Pearl Habour.

One of the reason why Japan loss may be their military power is not well equipeed in some way. Besides, many of its resource and military power had already been depleted when it warred with China.

Japan's equipment was pretty much as good as anyone's at the beginning of the war, but, as you say, they did not have the resources or infrastructure to make continuous improvements. The Zero was a good plane at the beginning of the war (even with the lack of armor)- they certainly crushed the American Buffalo- but at the end of the war no major changes had been made to it, whereas the Americans were able to make their planes better and better.

The "banzai charges" were of course a really stupid tactic that often crippled their defenses. Only a few commanders were willing to set aside the suicidal ethos in favor of sound military tactics.

I read somewhere that their standard issue infantry rifle was poor quality.

The viability of a frontal assault bayonet charge should have ended with Pickett.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #11 on: April 22, 2013, 11:34:24 AM »

Japan had been warred with China for 4 years before it attacked U.S.A

Japan had good military technology but it lack of resource.Japan wanted to take over China as China was weak at that time but had plenty of resource. Japanese people intended to defeat China within 3 month.However,Out of their expectation, they have been warred with China for 4 years but still could not conquer it.Then, Japan suddenly attacked the Pearl Habour.

One of the reason why Japan loss may be their military power is not well equipeed in some way. Besides, many of its resource and military power had already been depleted when it warred with China.

Japan's equipment was pretty much as good as anyone's at the beginning of the war, but, as you say, they did not have the resources or infrastructure to make continuous improvements. The Zero was a good plane at the beginning of the war (even with the lack of armor)- they certainly crushed the American Buffalo- but at the end of the war no major changes had been made to it, whereas the Americans were able to make their planes better and better.

The "banzai charges" were of course a really stupid tactic that often crippled their defenses. Only a few commanders were willing to set aside the suicidal ethos in favor of sound military tactics.

I read somewhere that their standard issue infantry rifle was poor quality.

My understanding (remembering conversations with Japanese military geeks) is that the rifle was okay. But bolt-action rifles versus semi-automatic M1 Garands was just not going to be a fair fight, as the Germans found out too.

There were Japanese sidearms that were indeed poorly made- as the war went sour for them this had as much to do with shoddy materials and manufacturing as with inherent design flaws.  
« Last Edit: April 22, 2013, 11:34:37 AM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #12 on: April 22, 2013, 03:14:03 PM »

Japan had been warred with China for 4 years before it attacked U.S.A

Japan had good military technology but it lack of resource.Japan wanted to take over China as China was weak at that time but had plenty of resource. Japanese people intended to defeat China within 3 month.However,Out of their expectation, they have been warred with China for 4 years but still could not conquer it.Then, Japan suddenly attacked the Pearl Habour.

One of the reason why Japan loss may be their military power is not well equipeed in some way. Besides, many of its resource and military power had already been depleted when it warred with China.

Japan's equipment was pretty much as good as anyone's at the beginning of the war, but, as you say, they did not have the resources or infrastructure to make continuous improvements. The Zero was a good plane at the beginning of the war (even with the lack of armor)- they certainly crushed the American Buffalo- but at the end of the war no major changes had been made to it, whereas the Americans were able to make their planes better and better.

The "banzai charges" were of course a really stupid tactic that often crippled their defenses. Only a few commanders were willing to set aside the suicidal ethos in favor of sound military tactics.

I read somewhere that their standard issue infantry rifle was poor quality.

My understanding (remembering conversations with Japanese military geeks) is that the rifle was okay. But bolt-action rifles versus semi-automatic M1 Garands was just not going to be a fair fight, as the Germans found out too.

There were Japanese sidearms that were indeed poorly made- as the war went sour for them this had as much to do with shoddy materials and manufacturing as with inherent design flaws.  

The materials and manufacturing is the important point here.  When it gets down to it, a bolt action is a bolt action.  The older 6.5mm Arisakas I have heard are really good guns.  Depending on my financial situation in the near future I may be able to comment better after having one, but for now, I haven't heard anything bad about them.  The 7.7mm ones degraded.  Mostly because they were newer and many of the ones built at the end of the war were done in people's living rooms.  

Where they were inferior was in submachineguns and machineguns.  The Type 96 and 99 seem to have been at least as good as the British Bren guns and the Russian DP.  It was probably superior to the American BAR as it was an actual machinegun rather than an automatic rifle.  It was likely inferior to the US M1919 and German MG34/42.   The Type 11 was an antiquated turd.  As for submachineguns, the Japanese didn't really have a gun comparable to American Thompsons, German MP-40s, British Stens, Russian PPSh and PPS weapons.  The Type 100 SMG was behind the curve and not really available in sufficient numbers to be worth discussion.

Their AT weapons would have been great in 1939 but by 43 and 44 they were hopelessly outdated.  The Shermans that were on the light side of medium in Europe were practically heavy tanks in the PTO.  I'd hate to think how Japanese 37's would have fared against Australian Matildas or Valentines if there was ever enough open ground for them to have fought a proper armoured clash.  When the Russians hit the Japanese in Manchuria with IS and T-34 tanks the Japanese stood about as long as a saltine getting hit by a sand blaster.

Airplanes - the A6M Zero was a good plane early on but it's what they ended the war with.  Like Iconodule says above, it was better than the Buffalos (as well as the Wildcats), but it didn't have the armour of the P40s.  As the war went on the US had Hellcats, Corsairs, and P-38's, and the Japanese were stuck with the outdated Zero.  They never had enough Nakajimas, and those they did were hampered by the poor quality of late war workmanship.

I have nothing much to add to Kerdy's assessment of Japanese naval technology.  The Yamato had the largest guns mounted in history at the time, IIRC, but a lot of good it did them.  Especially since I believe it was Adm. Yamamoto who pointed out that carriers were the future.

Tactically, there isn't much to add.  The Japanese soldier was one of the better soldiers in the war, but he wasn't good enough.  I think you would have found the same level of dedication in many Russian units (after their crappy start) but with a much higher level of tactical/strategic awareness and technological superiority.  The Pacific was a sideshow to most of the major powers.  They never put as much effort into it as they did against the Germans.  Ultimately, they really didn't have to.  



EDIT - The Garand really wasn't that important as far as the weapons go.  The Germans did not believe that the rifle was the primary killing weapon.  Every grenadier squad was issued one machinegun for a total of three per platoon.  The panzergrenadiers carried one per fireteam, so SIX per platoon!  Americans on the other hand issued machineguns at the company level (typically - rangers and airborne had more organic MG support).  A Garand has a higher rate of rife than a Mauser but MUCH less than an MG-42...and your average company would have access to four M1919 machineguns compared to the six per German platoon (18 for a full strength company).  Against the Japanese - who were more rifle based like the US - it could have made a difference, but remember, you can only fire the rifle as fast as you can effectively aim it - and it wasn't until the STG-44 that an effective assault rifle came out with the intermediate cartridge. 

The main thing the US had was that it's artillery doctrine was much better.  US 105s could be called in from much lower ranks than they could in other armies.  They also had targeting computers which let them hit more often.  German and Japanese artillery doctrines were behind the times.  The Russians at least made up for it in sheer numbers of guns, but American and British (to a lesser extent) artillery doctrines were vastly superior.  This hurt the Japanese as well in the Island Campaigns, as in addition to regular artillery, the US was able to hit them with ship guns as well.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2013, 03:20:31 PM by vamrat » Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox (but doubtful)
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church *of* America
Posts: 5,882


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #13 on: April 23, 2013, 02:58:15 AM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective and possibly could have severely prolonged the Pacific Theater, provided they had employed it earlier on. What I think made the Japanese soldier so much superior to other soldiers at the time was their cultural upbringing. They were more machine than man. They literally would never surrender and would fight until the very last man, and their whole population was willing to fight in order to defend their homeland if it came down to it. We had lone groups of Japanese soldiers still holed up their positions after WWII up until the late 1950s. They were that determined to win. This is in stark contrast to the untrained grunts in the Red Army who had to rely on overwhelming numbers and the somewhat under-disciplined Americans. A fairer comparison may be to the soldiers of Great Britain, but even then, I think that man for man, Japan probably had the entire world beat at the time. Now only if they had better technology, a larger population and more manufactoring capabilities to support their radical tactics. Oddly enough, Japan's bravery and warrior culture is precisely what cost them the war. Fighting until the last man and practically committing suicide with last-resort bonzai charges may be good when you have an overwhelmingly large army such as that of the USSR and the manufactoring output of the US, but when you are a mid-sized nation with really no natural resources other than sushi and a relatively small (albeit well trained) army, it is going to be a logistical nightmare for you.
Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #14 on: April 23, 2013, 03:24:58 AM »

A stereotype of Japanese is that they take other people's ideas, rather than their own.

A case can be argued that they did this with the Pearl Harbor attack; based as it was on the British raid on Taranto in Italy
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #15 on: April 23, 2013, 09:02:12 AM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective

If by "affective" you mean "emotional" I guess you're right, but that's a bit vague. But of course you mean effective in which case...
Not really.

Quote
and possibly could have severely prolonged the Pacific Theater, provided they had employed it earlier on.

No, they would have just lost all of their good pilots (and aircraft) sooner.

Quote
They were more machine than man.


No, they were just men. Read some of the letters of the kamikaze pilots.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #16 on: April 23, 2013, 10:37:55 AM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese. I even had the chance to meet a WW2 Vet. of the Imperial Army.

They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

Oh and they still hate us to some degree. I remember ten  years ago when that sub surfaced and accidentally sunk a Japanese fishing boat.

They were all a buzz that it was done on purpose.

When my son and I watched Iron Chef years back I would point out how even on a cooking show they were all Life and Death about it. I told him: "And that's why we don't allow them to have artillery anymore"
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #17 on: April 23, 2013, 10:46:51 AM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.

Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #18 on: April 23, 2013, 01:16:00 PM »

When my son and I watched Iron Chef years back I would point out how even on a cooking show they were all Life and Death about it. I told him: "And that's why we don't allow them to have artillery anymore"

There are a number of towed, self-propelled, and mortar artillery used by the JGSDF.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #19 on: April 23, 2013, 01:17:42 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



One of the characters in Michael Crichton's book The Rising Sun stated that there are three ways of viewing the Japanese.  Some study them and wish to emulate them in every way.  Others are filled with disgust and loathing towards them.  Fewer understand them and accept their cultural differences as they are.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,235


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #20 on: April 23, 2013, 01:27:34 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



One of the characters in Michael Crichton's book The Rising Sun stated that there are three ways of viewing the Japanese.  Some study them and wish to emulate them in every way.  Others are filled with disgust and loathing towards them.  Fewer understand them and accept their cultural differences as they are.

How easy it is to demonize and loathe those whom we don't understand, rather than trying to understand them.  But, hey....it does make it easier to kill them if it comes to that.  Roll Eyes
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #21 on: April 23, 2013, 01:38:33 PM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective and possibly could have severely prolonged the Pacific Theater, provided they had employed it earlier on. What I think made the Japanese soldier so much superior to other soldiers at the time was their cultural upbringing. They were more machine than man. They literally would never surrender and would fight until the very last man, and their whole population was willing to fight in order to defend their homeland if it came down to it. We had lone groups of Japanese soldiers still holed up their positions after WWII up until the late 1950s. They were that determined to win. This is in stark contrast to the untrained grunts in the Red Army who had to rely on overwhelming numbers and the somewhat under-disciplined Americans. A fairer comparison may be to the soldiers of Great Britain, but even then, I think that man for man, Japan probably had the entire world beat at the time. Now only if they had better technology, a larger population and more manufactoring capabilities to support their radical tactics. Oddly enough, Japan's bravery and warrior culture is precisely what cost them the war. Fighting until the last man and practically committing suicide with last-resort bonzai charges may be good when you have an overwhelmingly large army such as that of the USSR and the manufactoring output of the US, but when you are a mid-sized nation with really no natural resources other than sushi and a relatively small (albeit well trained) army, it is going to be a logistical nightmare for you.

Iconodule covered most of the points I would have made, including the affective vs effective.

One problem with WWII is that it is hard not to find various supermen and heroes amongst those that fought while at the same time denigrating those they defeated.

The Russians were not a mindless hoarde.  They took some extreme measures in the beginning of the war to stop the massive losses due to German encirclement.  Many Russian veterans I have read look favorably on Stalin's "Not One Step Back" order as it stopped the mass surrenders and galvanized Soviet resistance.  By 1943 the political commissars were on the way out and by 1944 the Soviets inflicted a crippling defeat on the Germans in the Bagration Campaign.  Dismissing the Russians as mindless blobs is understandable as this is how the Germans painted them after the war, and how US high command wanted to see them in the Cold War, but it is not an accurate depiction of their actual combat performance.

The US has gotten a bad reputation in the war.  Either you have over the top trumpet-fanfare-soundtrack films making them out to be Captain America clones, or you have them denigrated by their foes.  Many American soldiers did not have the experience of their British, German, Russian, or Japanese counterparts.  Hell, even the Italians were in the war first.  But there were many examples of exceptional American units.  The 101st Airborne at Bastonge, the 442nd Regimental Combat Group in ...everywhere they fought.  (These were the children of Japanese immigrants.)  The various armoured forces under Patton at various times.  Yes, the material lend-leased by the US to various powers were instrumental to allied victory, but you also cannot discount the roles American soldiers played in the various fronts on which they fought.

The British were the most "traditional" of the forces fighting.  You get a lot of respect for the British in reading reports written by the Germans.  (Though, typically little respect is spared for their leadership...whether the author is American, German, or even a New Zealander...)   And they were fighting from Day two or three of the war up until the Japanese surrender.



To understand the causes of the Japanese defeat, one needs to look no further than to Admiral Yamamoto who said that the Japanese would win the war against the US in 6 months or there would be no chance for victory.  After his death he was proven correct.  The US had more production and were not just going to give up like the Japanese high command expected.  No matter how costly it was, the US was a relentless foe against the Japanese.  And we often forget, the Japanese weren't only fighting the US Marines in island hopping campaigns.  For starts, there were more divisions of US Army fighting than there were the more popularly depicted Marines.  In addition, they were fighting the Australians in New Guinea, US-backed local forces in the Philippines, the Viet Minh under Ho Chi Minh in Indochine, the British and Indians in Burma - yes, 2.5 million Indians fought in the war, various Chinese factions and Korean nationalists, and finally the Soviets in Manchuria right before the war and in the last month or so in 1945.  These great odds were arrayed against them and they never really adapted new technology at an acceptable rate.  The Japanese faced the Russians in 1945 with much of the same equipment they fought the Russians with in 1939...with the expected results.




Oh, and as a side note, bonsai charges are the worst tactics ever developed.  I mean seriously, who ever won a war by tossing little trees at their opponents?
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #22 on: April 23, 2013, 06:13:43 PM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective

If by "affective" you mean "emotional" I guess you're right, but that's a bit vague. But of course you mean effective in which case...
More American ships were lost at Okinawa than at Pearl Harbor
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #23 on: April 23, 2013, 06:16:28 PM »

When my son and I watched Iron Chef years back I would point out how even on a cooking show they were all Life and Death about it. I told him: "And that's why we don't allow them to have artillery anymore"

That's rather imperialistic! You (US???) don't allow them...


Anyway, according to Wiki they have
Type 75 155 mm self-propelled howitzer (140)
M110 howitzer (90)
M270 MLRS (99)
Type 99 155 mm self-propelled howitzer (99)
Towed artilleryFH-70 (480)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japan_Ground_Self-Defense_Force#Self-propelled_artillery
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #24 on: April 23, 2013, 06:18:59 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



There are exceptions to rules, but in Japan belonging to a group is all important. Workplaces fostered this to get loyalty to the company.


A quite remarkable exception to the rule is Chiune Sugihara, who converted to Orthodoxy. He saved 10x more Jews during WWII than Schindler
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chiune_Sugihara
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #25 on: April 23, 2013, 06:41:20 PM »

The US has gotten a bad reputation in the war.  Either you have over the top trumpet-fanfare-soundtrack films making them out to be Captain America clones, or you have them denigrated by their foes.  Many American soldiers did not have the experience of their British, German, Russian, or Japanese counterparts.  Hell, even the Italians were in the war first.  But there were many examples of exceptional American units.  The 101st Airborne at Bastonge, the 442nd Regimental Combat Group in ...everywhere they fought.  (These were the children of Japanese immigrants.)  The various armoured forces under Patton at various times.  Yes, the material lend-leased by the US to various powers were instrumental to allied victory, but you also cannot discount the roles American soldiers played in the various fronts on which they fought.

The British were the most "traditional" of the forces fighting.  You get a lot of respect for the British in reading reports written by the Germans.  (Though, typically little respect is spared for their leadership...whether the author is American, German, or even a New Zealander...)   And they were fighting from Day two or three of the war up until the Japanese surrender.



To understand the causes of the Japanese defeat, one needs to look no further than to Admiral Yamamoto who said that the Japanese would win the war against the US in 6 months or there would be no chance for victory.  After his death he was proven correct.  The US had more production and were not just going to give up like the Japanese high command expected.  No matter how costly it was, the US was a relentless foe against the Japanese.  And we often forget, the Japanese weren't only fighting the US Marines in island hopping campaigns.  For starts, there were more divisions of US Army fighting than there were the more popularly depicted Marines.  In addition, they were fighting the Australians in New Guinea, US-backed local forces in the Philippines, the Viet Minh under Ho Chi Minh in Indochine, the British and Indians in Burma - yes, 2.5 million Indians fought in the war, various Chinese factions and Korean nationalists, and finally the Soviets in Manchuria right before the war and in the last month or so in 1945.  These great odds were arrayed against them and they never really adapted new technology at an acceptable rate.  The Japanese faced the Russians in 1945 with much of the same equipment they fought the Russians with in 1939...with the expected results.




Oh, and as a side note, bonsai charges are the worst tactics ever developed.  I mean seriously, who ever won a war by tossing little trees at their opponents?

Although I am not a fan of Bernard Montgomery, the British got a bad press in the US. Immediately following D-Day the British set about a non-glorious grinding down operation outside Caen, drawing in massive German forces upon themselves to allow the Americans to break out further west and do a long sweep around to almost encircle the Germans. The Americans were the hammer to the British-Canadian anvil.

However in the press it looked more impressive to see Americans make sweeping gains in territory rather than note just how many forces were facing the British.

Douglas MacArthur – to me a terribly over-rated general had his press group in the Pacific theatre in his hand. If the Americans won a victory it was reported as an American victory. If Australia won a victory it was reported as an American and Allied victory.

MacArthur thought Australian forces poor during the Kokoda campaign because he was based thousands of kilometres away in Melbourne and had no real grasp of the problems in New Guinea where there are massive mountains in the Owen Stanley Ranges. For him a small distance on the map; for the Aussies, huge distances up and down tremendous mountains.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kokoda_Track_campaign

The Americans performed poorly at Buna and Gona. MacArthur sacked US general Edwin F. Harding. Whilst Americans performed badly the Australians did not.

The ship HMAS Canberra was sunk of Guadalcanal in the Battle of Savo Island. It is reckoned mainly due to American fault – possibly

“Several personnel from Canberra believe that USS Bagley inadvertently torpedoed the cruiser”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Canberra_(D33)#Loss

The US ended up naming a ship USS Canberra – the only US ship to be named after a non-American capital.

Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #26 on: April 23, 2013, 07:55:48 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



One of the characters in Michael Crichton's book The Rising Sun stated that there are three ways of viewing the Japanese.  Some study them and wish to emulate them in every way.  Others are filled with disgust and loathing towards them.  Fewer understand them and accept their cultural differences as they are.

How easy it is to demonize and loathe those whom we don't understand, rather than trying to understand them.  But, hey....it does make it easier to kill them if it comes to that.  Roll Eyes

And yet political correctness goes too far too

We used to celebrate V-E Day and V-J Day (Victory in Europe and, Victory over Japan respectively)

In the 1990s our government quietly changed V-J Day to V-P Day (Victory in the Pacific) as if Japan was not our primary enemy in that theatre of operations

Also, Star Trek had a sequence where the USS Enterpirse and the USS Yamato are involved because the producers wished to note in the future we all get along; a ship with an antecedent in a US WWII vessel, and a ship with an antecedent in the Japanese Imperial Navy. I thought - what next? The USS Heinrich Himmler?
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #27 on: April 23, 2013, 10:33:13 PM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective and possibly could have severely prolonged the Pacific Theater, provided they had employed it earlier on.

No. Japan's number one disadvantage was in manpower. Midway cost them an entire year's worth of trained aircrew; other battles (e.g. Philippine Sea and Leyte Gulf) were far worse. Suicide missions would have simply sped up the process. And I wouldn't call the attacks "extremely effective": for instance, during the Okinawa campaign the kamikaze success rate was only one in nine.

Quote
What I think made the Japanese soldier so much superior to other soldiers at the time was their cultural upbringing. They were more machine than man.

But it also made them stupid. Japan needed to drive us out of the war quickly; one could very well argue that they lost simply by failing to drive us out of Pearl in the first attack. After Midway they were in retreat all the way, and the only thing they could hope for was for us to get tired of attacking them, which is not really what I would call a strategy. Had it not been for the A bombs, we still would have invaded Japan, and we would have succeeded, at a huge cost to us, but a nearly suicidal cost to them. Their system of warfare only worked when they were winning; as soon as they started to lose, they were reduced to hopeless defensive stands. The Japanese would never have even tried the Dunkirk evacuations, and their MacArthur would never have given himself the chance to say, "I shall return," but both of these retreats were key to winning the war.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #28 on: April 24, 2013, 06:41:43 AM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective

If by "affective" you mean "emotional" I guess you're right, but that's a bit vague. But of course you mean effective in which case...
More American ships were lost at Okinawa than at Pearl Harbor

And how many Japanese pilots/ planes were lost at Okinawa, compared with Pearl Harbor?
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #29 on: April 24, 2013, 08:32:31 AM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective

If by "affective" you mean "emotional" I guess you're right, but that's a bit vague. But of course you mean effective in which case...
More American ships were lost at Okinawa than at Pearl Harbor

And how many Japanese pilots/ planes were lost at Okinawa, compared with Pearl Harbor?

I don't know.

What I do know is that the Japanese didn't care.

They were effective insofar as they destroyed more of their enemy - which is the goal in war.

Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #30 on: April 24, 2013, 08:43:08 AM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective and possibly could have severely prolonged the Pacific Theater, provided they had employed it earlier on.

No. Japan's number one disadvantage was in manpower. Midway cost them an entire year's worth of trained aircrew; other battles (e.g. Philippine Sea and Leyte Gulf) were far worse. Suicide missions would have simply sped up the process. And I wouldn't call the attacks "extremely effective": for instance, during the Okinawa campaign the kamikaze success rate was only one in nine.

Quote
What I think made the Japanese soldier so much superior to other soldiers at the time was their cultural upbringing. They were more machine than man.

But it also made them stupid. Japan needed to drive us out of the war quickly; one could very well argue that they lost simply by failing to drive us out of Pearl in the first attack. After Midway they were in retreat all the way, and the only thing they could hope for was for us to get tired of attacking them, which is not really what I would call a strategy. Had it not been for the A bombs, we still would have invaded Japan, and we would have succeeded, at a huge cost to us, but a nearly suicidal cost to them. Their system of warfare only worked when they were winning; as soon as they started to lose, they were reduced to hopeless defensive stands. The Japanese would never have even tried the Dunkirk evacuations, and their MacArthur would never have given himself the chance to say, "I shall return," but both of these retreats were key to winning the war.


You're missing Japan's strategy at that time.

Japan's strategy had ceased being the gaining of possessions to gaining time.

By inflicting heavy losses they had hoped to weaken America's resolve. This same tactic worked in Vietnam

It didn't work in WWII for a number of reasons.

One being that the US used the atomic bomb that posed the real possibility of exterminating the Japanese

Two (a factor often over-looked by Americans) was the entry of the Soviet Union into the war on Japan - and their extraordinary advances against Japanese land forces in Manchuria. The prospect of a Japan partially occupied by the Soviet Union frightened those who wished o protect the status of the emperor.

As Germany had been divided, so too might Japan have been
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/Proposed_postwar_Japan_occupation_zones.png

Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Kerdy
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #31 on: April 24, 2013, 09:03:28 AM »

I was recently listening to a historian speaking about the interesting story behind the I 400 class submarines just after Japan surrendered.  Very interesting I thought.
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #32 on: April 24, 2013, 09:13:32 AM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective

If by "affective" you mean "emotional" I guess you're right, but that's a bit vague. But of course you mean effective in which case...
More American ships were lost at Okinawa than at Pearl Harbor

And how many Japanese pilots/ planes were lost at Okinawa, compared with Pearl Harbor?

I don't know.

Well it's pretty important information to get a handle on before declaring whether the tactic was effective.

At Pearl Harbor the Japanese lost 29 planes and sank 12 ships, including 4 battleships.

At Okinawa they lost 7,830 planes, as well as 16 of their own ships. They sank 28 American ships (half of those were amphibious craft, probably destroyed by ground forces).

Saying "More American ships were lost at Okinawa than Pearl Harbor" doesn't mean anything given those numbers.

Quote
What I do know is that the Japanese didn't care.

It doesn't matter if they cared or not. You be as fanatical and suicidal as you want, but you can't fight a war without manpower and materiel. Trained pilots and planes don't grow on trees, not even in Japan.

Quote
They were effective insofar as they destroyed more of their enemy - which is the goal in war.

Who still had an effective navy at the end of the battle? Hint: Not Japan.
Generally the goal in war is to win something- in this case, the Americans wanted control of Okinawa, and they ended up getting it. Japan wanted a negotiated peace settlement. They didn't get it. You aren't going to win anything by wasting your manpower and materiel, even if you inflict casualties in the process. Are you familiar with phrase "Pyrrhic victory"? Actually it doesn't even apply in this case because the Japanese still lost.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #33 on: April 24, 2013, 09:22:03 AM »

You're missing Japan's strategy at that time.

Japan's strategy had ceased being the gaining of possessions to gaining time.

By inflicting heavy losses they had hoped to weaken America's resolve. This same tactic worked in Vietnam

Even so, the Vietnamese were considerably smarter with their forces than the Imperial Japanese military at the end of WWII. They were also much more diplomatically savvy. The famous Tet Offensive, however, was a major blunder militarily speaking, and the Northern leadership were very lucky that the propaganda/ psychological effects of the offensive lasted much longer than its military gains.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #34 on: April 24, 2013, 09:41:28 AM »

The US has gotten a bad reputation in the war.  Either you have over the top trumpet-fanfare-soundtrack films making them out to be Captain America clones, or you have them denigrated by their foes.  Many American soldiers did not have the experience of their British, German, Russian, or Japanese counterparts.  Hell, even the Italians were in the war first.  But there were many examples of exceptional American units.  The 101st Airborne at Bastonge, the 442nd Regimental Combat Group in ...everywhere they fought.  (These were the children of Japanese immigrants.)  The various armoured forces under Patton at various times.  Yes, the material lend-leased by the US to various powers were instrumental to allied victory, but you also cannot discount the roles American soldiers played in the various fronts on which they fought.

The British were the most "traditional" of the forces fighting.  You get a lot of respect for the British in reading reports written by the Germans.  (Though, typically little respect is spared for their leadership...whether the author is American, German, or even a New Zealander...)   And they were fighting from Day two or three of the war up until the Japanese surrender.



To understand the causes of the Japanese defeat, one needs to look no further than to Admiral Yamamoto who said that the Japanese would win the war against the US in 6 months or there would be no chance for victory.  After his death he was proven correct.  The US had more production and were not just going to give up like the Japanese high command expected.  No matter how costly it was, the US was a relentless foe against the Japanese.  And we often forget, the Japanese weren't only fighting the US Marines in island hopping campaigns.  For starts, there were more divisions of US Army fighting than there were the more popularly depicted Marines.  In addition, they were fighting the Australians in New Guinea, US-backed local forces in the Philippines, the Viet Minh under Ho Chi Minh in Indochine, the British and Indians in Burma - yes, 2.5 million Indians fought in the war, various Chinese factions and Korean nationalists, and finally the Soviets in Manchuria right before the war and in the last month or so in 1945.  These great odds were arrayed against them and they never really adapted new technology at an acceptable rate.  The Japanese faced the Russians in 1945 with much of the same equipment they fought the Russians with in 1939...with the expected results.




Oh, and as a side note, bonsai charges are the worst tactics ever developed.  I mean seriously, who ever won a war by tossing little trees at their opponents?

Although I am not a fan of Bernard Montgomery, the British got a bad press in the US. Immediately following D-Day the British set about a non-glorious grinding down operation outside Caen, drawing in massive German forces upon themselves to allow the Americans to break out further west and do a long sweep around to almost encircle the Germans. The Americans were the hammer to the British-Canadian anvil.

However in the press it looked more impressive to see Americans make sweeping gains in territory rather than note just how many forces were facing the British.

Douglas MacArthur – to me a terribly over-rated general had his press group in the Pacific theatre in his hand. If the Americans won a victory it was reported as an American victory. If Australia won a victory it was reported as an American and Allied victory.

MacArthur thought Australian forces poor during the Kokoda campaign because he was based thousands of kilometres away in Melbourne and had no real grasp of the problems in New Guinea where there are massive mountains in the Owen Stanley Ranges. For him a small distance on the map; for the Aussies, huge distances up and down tremendous mountains.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kokoda_Track_campaign

The Americans performed poorly at Buna and Gona. MacArthur sacked US general Edwin F. Harding. Whilst Americans performed badly the Australians did not.

The ship HMAS Canberra was sunk of Guadalcanal in the Battle of Savo Island. It is reckoned mainly due to American fault – possibly

“Several personnel from Canberra believe that USS Bagley inadvertently torpedoed the cruiser”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMAS_Canberra_(D33)#Loss

The US ended up naming a ship USS Canberra – the only US ship to be named after a non-American capital.



Keep in mind that I was not going for the trumpet fanfare "America, **** Yeah!" approach.  Only pointing out that we weren't just a zerg farm for WWII.  (And by extension, that the Russians weren't the zerg rush.)

I am a little familiar with the Ozzies in Guinea, and their sacrifices.  And it wasn't just MacArthur who wasted Oceanic lives.  In the fighting in Italy in 1944 the Kiwis got tired of having their lives wasted by incompetent British leadership and the commanding officer of the NZ Division, told the Pommes that at a certain casualty cap his men would pull out an go home, regardless of the military situation.  They would fight bravely up until that point, but to him, national survival and post-war economics meant more than yet another hill in Italy.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #35 on: April 24, 2013, 09:44:04 AM »

You're missing Japan's strategy at that time.

Japan's strategy had ceased being the gaining of possessions to gaining time.

By inflicting heavy losses they had hoped to weaken America's resolve. This same tactic worked in Vietnam

Even so, the Vietnamese were considerably smarter with their forces than the Imperial Japanese military at the end of WWII. They were also much more diplomatically savvy. The famous Tet Offensive, however, was a major blunder militarily speaking, and the Northern leadership were very lucky that the propaganda/ psychological effects of the offensive lasted much longer than its military gains.

They were different sorts of wars.  The Japanese were willing to fight us in open combat.  More often than not, the Vietnamese were not.  When they did fight us, like in Ia Drang, Hue City, and as you mentioned in the Tet, the US was typically victorious, and IIRC the casualty figures were often in the 1:10 range.  Brokaw was the best general that the Vietnamese had.  When he declared the war over, it was done in all but name.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,235


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #36 on: April 24, 2013, 09:45:43 AM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



One of the characters in Michael Crichton's book The Rising Sun stated that there are three ways of viewing the Japanese.  Some study them and wish to emulate them in every way.  Others are filled with disgust and loathing towards them.  Fewer understand them and accept their cultural differences as they are.

How easy it is to demonize and loathe those whom we don't understand, rather than trying to understand them.  But, hey....it does make it easier to kill them if it comes to that.  Roll Eyes

And yet political correctness goes too far too

We used to celebrate V-E Day and V-J Day (Victory in Europe and, Victory over Japan respectively)

In the 1990s our government quietly changed V-J Day to V-P Day (Victory in the Pacific) as if Japan was not our primary enemy in that theatre of operations

Also, Star Trek had a sequence where the USS Enterpirse and the USS Yamato are involved because the producers wished to note in the future we all get along; a ship with an antecedent in a US WWII vessel, and a ship with an antecedent in the Japanese Imperial Navy. I thought - what next? The USS Heinrich Himmler?

Well, Star Trek is science fiction/fantasy.  Well, for most people, anyway  Wink.

Political correctness almost always goes too far.  Seems to be inherent in its nature.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #37 on: April 24, 2013, 10:25:16 AM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different.  

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2013, 10:26:45 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,235


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #38 on: April 24, 2013, 01:40:54 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different.  

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

Hey, better to be polite and not accept you than to be rude and ignorant and not accept you.

So, the Japanese have a different culture and different sensibilities.  Not every culture can be as cool and accepting and warm and wonderful as "western" culture  Roll Eyes.  This does not make them "Borg" (since they don't, apparently according to your friend, accept or assimilate others), it does not make them inhuman, and it is no reason to criticize, much less demonize them in any way, shape, or form.

Try to imagine how Americans might feel about WW2 if *we* had been nuked....twice.  I guess we might be a little sensitive about it.

What seems clear to me from what you write is that you don't really understand Japanese culture at any deep level.  Not that there's any need or reason for you to if you don't want to.

I, too, have a friend who spent many years in Japan, first to learn the language, and then ended up working there for quite a long time.  Her experience, once she made the effort to learn about Japanese culture, etc, was totally different, in a very positive way, from what you and your friend describe.  Which goes to show how careful we must be about making generalizations about whole cultures and peoples.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #39 on: April 24, 2013, 02:48:12 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different.  

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

Hey, better to be polite and not accept you than to be rude and ignorant and not accept you.

So, the Japanese have a different culture and different sensibilities.  Not every culture can be as cool and accepting and warm and wonderful as "western" culture  Roll Eyes.  This does not make them "Borg" (since they don't, apparently according to your friend, accept or assimilate others), it does not make them inhuman, and it is no reason to criticize, much less demonize them in any way, shape, or form.

Try to imagine how Americans might feel about WW2 if *we* had been nuked....twice.  I guess we might be a little sensitive about it.

What seems clear to me from what you write is that you don't really understand Japanese culture at any deep level.  Not that there's any need or reason for you to if you don't want to.

I, too, have a friend who spent many years in Japan, first to learn the language, and then ended up working there for quite a long time.  Her experience, once she made the effort to learn about Japanese culture, etc, was totally different, in a very positive way, from what you and your friend describe.  Which goes to show how careful we must be about making generalizations about whole cultures and peoples.



They are Borg because they have a Group Mentality..

They take no responsibility for WW2. All many of them  are conscious of is Hiroshima, which was well justified IMHO.

But thanks for jumping in. Your participation is always something to look forward to.
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,235


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #40 on: April 24, 2013, 03:02:24 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different.  

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

Hey, better to be polite and not accept you than to be rude and ignorant and not accept you.

So, the Japanese have a different culture and different sensibilities.  Not every culture can be as cool and accepting and warm and wonderful as "western" culture  Roll Eyes.  This does not make them "Borg" (since they don't, apparently according to your friend, accept or assimilate others), it does not make them inhuman, and it is no reason to criticize, much less demonize them in any way, shape, or form.

Try to imagine how Americans might feel about WW2 if *we* had been nuked....twice.  I guess we might be a little sensitive about it.

What seems clear to me from what you write is that you don't really understand Japanese culture at any deep level.  Not that there's any need or reason for you to if you don't want to.

I, too, have a friend who spent many years in Japan, first to learn the language, and then ended up working there for quite a long time.  Her experience, once she made the effort to learn about Japanese culture, etc, was totally different, in a very positive way, from what you and your friend describe.  Which goes to show how careful we must be about making generalizations about whole cultures and peoples.



They are Borg because they have a Group Mentality..

They take no responsibility for WW2. All many of them  are conscious of is Hiroshima, which was well justified IMHO.

But thanks for jumping in. Your participation is always something to look forward to.

Why, thank you  Wink!

Thanks for sharing your own opinions, which pretty much dehumanize a whole people and culture.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2013, 03:04:22 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #41 on: April 24, 2013, 03:15:12 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different.  

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

A good friend of mine lived for years in Japan and married a Japanese girl (and now she's a good friend of mine too). He's Jewish. It took some time for the family to warm up to him, but they certainly did, and the mutual affection and respect the families have for each other is pretty obvious. Her dad even wore a yarmulke to the wedding.

My mom, as a Malaysian Chinese, had no love for the Japanese... we grew up with horror stories about what they did. Yet she was able to make some genuine Japanese friends as well, later in life, and acknowledge they're not all such monsters after all.

We could get in a battle of anecdotes but it wouldn't accomplish much. Suffice to say I've seen plenty counter-examples to every single thing you say above. The argument, "I've been there" is never a very good one on big, complex topics like this, because there's always going to be someone else who's "been there" and who has a completely different perspective.

Re: WW2, sure, the Japanese generally are a lot less contrite or honest about it than, say, the Germans. But even here there are big exceptions. The greatest expose of the Nanjing massacre, for instance, was written by a Japanese journalist (Honda Katsuichi.)
« Last Edit: April 24, 2013, 03:18:16 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,455



« Reply #42 on: April 24, 2013, 03:21:01 PM »

I don't know about the Borg or zerg rushing, but I do like Japanese cars.  Grin
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #43 on: April 24, 2013, 03:33:58 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different.  

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

Hey, better to be polite and not accept you than to be rude and ignorant and not accept you.

So, the Japanese have a different culture and different sensibilities.  Not every culture can be as cool and accepting and warm and wonderful as "western" culture  Roll Eyes.  This does not make them "Borg" (since they don't, apparently according to your friend, accept or assimilate others), it does not make them inhuman, and it is no reason to criticize, much less demonize them in any way, shape, or form.

Try to imagine how Americans might feel about WW2 if *we* had been nuked....twice.  I guess we might be a little sensitive about it.

What seems clear to me from what you write is that you don't really understand Japanese culture at any deep level.  Not that there's any need or reason for you to if you don't want to.

I, too, have a friend who spent many years in Japan, first to learn the language, and then ended up working there for quite a long time.  Her experience, once she made the effort to learn about Japanese culture, etc, was totally different, in a very positive way, from what you and your friend describe.  Which goes to show how careful we must be about making generalizations about whole cultures and peoples.



They are Borg because they have a Group Mentality..

They take no responsibility for WW2. All many of them  are conscious of is Hiroshima, which was well justified IMHO.

But thanks for jumping in. Your participation is always something to look forward to.

Why, thank you  Wink!

Thanks for sharing your own opinions, which pretty much dehumanize a whole people and culture.

Thank God we have you stalking me and ready to put things right !

Keep standing up for what is right. Terrific job.. Thanks again
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #44 on: April 24, 2013, 03:39:15 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiquette is very much different.  

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

A good friend of mine lived for years in Japan and married a Japanese girl (and now she's a good friend of mine too). He's Jewish. It took some time for the family to warm up to him, but they certainly did, and the mutual affection and respect the families have for each other is pretty obvious. Her dad even wore a yarmulke to the wedding.

My mom, as a Malaysian Chinese, had no love for the Japanese... we grew up with horror stories about what they did. Yet she was able to make some genuine Japanese friends as well, later in life, and acknowledge they're not all such monsters after all.

We could get in a battle of anecdotes but it wouldn't accomplish much. Suffice to say I've seen plenty counter-examples to every single thing you say above. The argument, "I've been there" is never a very good one on big, complex topics like this, because there's always going to be someone else who's "been there" and who has a completely different perspective.

Re: WW2, sure, the Japanese generally are a lot less contrite or honest about it than, say, the Germans. But even here there are big exceptions. The greatest expose of the Nanjing massacre, for instance, was written by a Japanese journalist (Honda Katsuichi.)

The expose about the Nanking Massacre was really important. The Japanese have a very hard time facing up to the War. They have never officially apologized even though it has been asked of them. A few years ago the PM came close to an apology as I recall but couldnt go all the way and pull the trigger ( pardon the pun)
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,235


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #45 on: April 24, 2013, 03:40:33 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different. 

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

Hey, better to be polite and not accept you than to be rude and ignorant and not accept you.

So, the Japanese have a different culture and different sensibilities.  Not every culture can be as cool and accepting and warm and wonderful as "western" culture  Roll Eyes.  This does not make them "Borg" (since they don't, apparently according to your friend, accept or assimilate others), it does not make them inhuman, and it is no reason to criticize, much less demonize them in any way, shape, or form.

Try to imagine how Americans might feel about WW2 if *we* had been nuked....twice.  I guess we might be a little sensitive about it.

What seems clear to me from what you write is that you don't really understand Japanese culture at any deep level.  Not that there's any need or reason for you to if you don't want to.

I, too, have a friend who spent many years in Japan, first to learn the language, and then ended up working there for quite a long time.  Her experience, once she made the effort to learn about Japanese culture, etc, was totally different, in a very positive way, from what you and your friend describe.  Which goes to show how careful we must be about making generalizations about whole cultures and peoples.



They are Borg because they have a Group Mentality..

They take no responsibility for WW2. All many of them  are conscious of is Hiroshima, which was well justified IMHO.

But thanks for jumping in. Your participation is always something to look forward to.

Why, thank you  Wink!

Thanks for sharing your own opinions, which pretty much dehumanize a whole people and culture.

Thank God we have you stalking me and ready to put things right !

Keep standing up for what is right. Terrific job.. Thanks again

If replying to your posts in multiple threads or fora equals "stalking" you, or if you think I've violated any of the rules of this board, I invite you to report me to the mods and justify your accusation.  Yes, I do attempt to stand up for what is right.  Sorry that's a problem for you.

« Last Edit: April 24, 2013, 03:47:14 PM by J Michael » Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Dionysii
Banned
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Old Rite Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Metr. Kornilii of Russia
Posts: 642



« Reply #46 on: April 24, 2013, 04:07:14 PM »

'The Cause of Japan' by Togo Shigenori is a book I have long wanted but never got aroound to reading.

"Togo was Foreign Minister at the time of Pearl Harbor and, after a period of political eclipse, resumed this post to speed Japan's peace negotiations; he is therefor more familiar than anyone else with the underlying policies of his country at two critical points. Shortly before his death in an American military hospital (he was then serving a twenty year sentence on charges of ""conspiracy to wage aggressive war"") Togo put into his family's safekeeping elaborate notes on his youth (not included here) and his service in the Konoe and Suzuki cabinets. The notes, pedantic and impersonal, not only exonerate Togo himself of any militant designs but place an embarrassing amount of responsibility at the door of the United States. The embargo on petroleum products all but forced Japan into the war: Roosevelt, according to Togo, was fully aware of this fact and, from sources of secret information, knew thoroughly the plans and thinking of the Japanese leaders: the duplicity and delaying tactics in Washington were caused entirely by America. His justification, coupled with the light the book sheds on the power alignments within Japan and the broad diplomatic policies that were followed, is worthy of special interest in terms of history and of importance to the student or expert in Far Eastern affairs; it is newsworthy as a presentation of the japanese grounds for their actions."
https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/togo-shigenori/the-cause-of-japan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shigenori_T%C5%8Dg%C5%8D
Logged
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #47 on: April 24, 2013, 04:10:45 PM »

"The embargo on petroleum products all but forced Japan into the war"

OR they could have stopped trying to colonize East Asia and murdering people all over the place. I realize at this point the Western colonial powers had a bit of a double standard... but still.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2013, 04:11:57 PM by Iconodule » Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Dionysii
Banned
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Old Rite Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Metr. Kornilii of Russia
Posts: 642



« Reply #48 on: April 24, 2013, 05:45:53 PM »

"The embargo on petroleum products all but forced Japan into the war"

they could have stopped trying to colonize East Asia and murdering people all over the place.
I realize at this point the Western colonial powers had a bit of a double standard... but still.

You make a valid point.  
Furthermore, I think you will find that Togo Shigenori was not part of Japan's militaristic faction.


Mao Tse Tung saw the danger of Japan becoming a fascist satellite colony of the United States even before the US entered the war.
The Plot For a Far Eastern Munich
By Mao Tse Tung (May 1941)
http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/mao/selected-works/volume-3/mswv3_03.htm
« Last Edit: April 24, 2013, 06:06:56 PM by Dionysii » Logged
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #49 on: April 24, 2013, 08:03:02 PM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective

If by "affective" you mean "emotional" I guess you're right, but that's a bit vague. But of course you mean effective in which case...
More American ships were lost at Okinawa than at Pearl Harbor

And how many Japanese pilots/ planes were lost at Okinawa, compared with Pearl Harbor?

I don't know.

Well it's pretty important information to get a handle on before declaring whether the tactic was effective.
No. That's only if you assume that losses to the Japanese counted the same as they do to you. That's what you need to get a handle on; you're looking at this from a 'body count POV' which is the same error Americans did in Vietnam

(some learn by their mistakes)
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #50 on: April 24, 2013, 08:04:33 PM »

"The embargo on petroleum products all but forced Japan into the war"

OR they could have stopped trying to colonize East Asia and murdering people all over the place. I realize at this point the Western colonial powers had a bit of a double standard... but still.

There I agree with you. History has shown that Japan can be a mighty economic power WITHOUT an overseas empire
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #51 on: April 24, 2013, 08:05:27 PM »

On a somewhat related note, Japan's kamikaze pilot technique against US ships was extremely affective

If by "affective" you mean "emotional" I guess you're right, but that's a bit vague. But of course you mean effective in which case...
More American ships were lost at Okinawa than at Pearl Harbor

And how many Japanese pilots/ planes were lost at Okinawa, compared with Pearl Harbor?

I don't know.

Well it's pretty important information to get a handle on before declaring whether the tactic was effective.
No. That's only if you assume that losses to the Japanese counted the same as they do to you. That's what you need to get a handle on; you're looking at this from a 'body count POV'

I'm not actually. You were the one that said, "they sank more ships, therefore more effective." And again, the question is, was the kamikaze tactic effective? Clearly it was not. It did not accomplish their short-term goals, it did not accomplish their long-term goals.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #52 on: April 24, 2013, 09:01:58 PM »

More American ships were lost at Okinawa than at Pearl Harbor

Well, the two are hardly comparable. No American capital ship was lost at Okinawa; the vast majority were landing craft, PT boats, and other small craft. And there were a lot of them to shoot at: the Japanese damaged 482 American vessels of all kinds! By contrast, there were only a hundred vessels of all sorts, including a floating drydock, pontoons and lighters, and a Coast Guard cutter. The engagement at Okinawa, it should also be noted, lasted over a month and a half. The only significant naval engagement saw of force of ten ships (including the Yamato squashed by a fleet that included eleven carriers, never mind the rest of the force.
Logged
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #53 on: April 24, 2013, 09:21:06 PM »


You're missing Japan's strategy at that time.

Japan's strategy had ceased being the gaining of possessions to gaining time.

By inflicting heavy losses they had hoped to weaken America's resolve. This same tactic worked in Vietnam

Well, it hadn't worked yet, so it hardly could serve as a precedent.

And besides, the Japanese had plenty of time to figure out that it was a failing strategy. They inflicted huge casualties at Tarawa (which was arguably not worth taking anyway), and we kept coming. The did it again at Peleliu, and at Tinian, and so forth, and we kept coming. Repeating something that is manifestly failing is the epitome of stupidity.

As for maintaining a resolve: Pearl Harbor made it easy.
Logged
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #54 on: April 24, 2013, 09:41:51 PM »

I'm not actually. You were the one that said, "they sank more ships, therefore more effective." And again, the question is, was the kamikaze tactic effective? Clearly it was not. It did not accomplish their short-term goals, it did not accomplish their long-term goals.

That's right. They sank more ships. They were effective. Their goal was not "Hey, let's hang on to our pilots", but "Hey, lets destroy as much of the enemy as we can." You quibble about how many pilots they lost. I pointed out that pilot loss was not their concern. You point out again pilot loss. Again I note it wasn't their concern.

I also noted why their long-term goals didn't work; and it was nothing to do with this action. It involved two factors; the bomb and, the Soviet Union entering the war. Both of which were not anticipated by the Japanese. But I also note that destroying large amounts of the enemy, regardless of the cost to one's own forces worked in Vietnam.

Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #55 on: April 24, 2013, 09:47:06 PM »

They were effective insofar as they destroyed more of their enemy - which is the goal in war.

Go tell that to Pyrrhus.

The goal of war needs to be to establish the desired political outcome. Destroying the enemy is but one possible means to that end.

The goal of the war, for Japan, was to establish control over a region of east Asia and the Pacific. The USA was a potential threat due to our presence in the Philippines and the likelihood that we might defend our interests there and elsewhere in the region. Attacking Pearl only made sense under the assumption that we would respond, but they had to force us out of the war right away by making it impossible for us to maintain a military presence in Hawaii. To do this, they had to seize the islands, which is the other reason why the loss at Midway was so devastating to them. But the attack (a) was galvanizing of policy, and (b) raised them from a threat to an enemy. Before, they worried that we might interfere with their plans; after, they guaranteed that we would interfere, unless we were made incapable of doing so. After Midway, they couldn't stop us, and gave us reason to render them incapable of exerting military force. As long as we had the resolve to do so, they were lost; and that they lost at every single step after their initial attacks, giving us confidence of eventual success.
Logged
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #56 on: April 24, 2013, 09:52:14 PM »

Well, it hadn't worked yet, so it hardly could serve as a precedent.
Of course it had. It was destroying large amounts of American material, and killing lots of men.
And besides, the Japanese had plenty of time to figure out that it was a failing strategy. They inflicted huge casualties at Tarawa (which was arguably not worth taking anyway), and we kept coming. The did it again at Peleliu, and at Tinian, and so forth, and we kept coming. Repeating something that is manifestly failing is the epitome of stupidity.
So it was stupid for America to keep taking huge losses?

America destroyed (by firebombing) huge swathes of Japanese cities but this didn't bring Japan to surrender - by your logic, this too was stupid.
As for maintaining a resolve: Pearl Harbor made it easy.


I recall at the beginning of Clint Eastwood's recent film on Iwo Jima ("Flags of Our Fathers") they talked about America's flagging resolve - evidenced by falls in US Bonds purchases
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #57 on: April 24, 2013, 09:53:41 PM »

They were effective insofar as they destroyed more of their enemy - which is the goal in war.

Go tell that to Pyrrhus.

I've already dealt with that. Pyrrhus was not about wasting his own men. Japan and, Vietnam were.

You keep applying western-values and judging the enemy's plans by your values... which as I noted, is why the US lost in Vietnam. They were utterly convinced that they were winning by measuring body-counts.


It seems your posts are simply to keep repeating endlessly your own western values. It's why the US might well lose again if you can't learn from your mistakes.
« Last Edit: April 24, 2013, 09:54:29 PM by montalban » Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #58 on: April 24, 2013, 09:59:32 PM »

The goal of the war, for Japan, was to establish control over a region of east Asia and the Pacific. The USA was a potential threat due to our presence in the Philippines and the likelihood that we might defend our interests there and elsewhere in the region. Attacking Pearl only made sense under the assumption that we would respond, but they had to force us out of the war right away by making it impossible for us to maintain a military presence in Hawaii. To do this, they had to seize the islands, which is the other reason why the loss at Midway was so devastating to them. But the attack (a) was galvanizing of policy, and (b) raised them from a threat to an enemy. Before, they worried that we might interfere with their plans; after, they guaranteed that we would interfere, unless we were made incapable of doing so. After Midway, they couldn't stop us, and gave us reason to render them incapable of exerting military force. As long as we had the resolve to do so, they were lost; and that they lost at every single step after their initial attacks, giving us confidence of eventual success.


I don't doubt that the US had resolve. But destroying huge numbers of men could well have made it a case of "Is it really worth it?"

Fortunately the US had the Atomic Bomb. Just as fortunately the Soviet Union entered the war - which to Japan had the effect much the same as that on Germany when the US entered WWI

Suddenly a nation was facing a brand new enemy with millions more men in resources.

Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #59 on: April 25, 2013, 10:57:27 AM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different. 

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

Hey, better to be polite and not accept you than to be rude and ignorant and not accept you.

So, the Japanese have a different culture and different sensibilities.  Not every culture can be as cool and accepting and warm and wonderful as "western" culture  Roll Eyes.  This does not make them "Borg" (since they don't, apparently according to your friend, accept or assimilate others), it does not make them inhuman, and it is no reason to criticize, much less demonize them in any way, shape, or form.

Try to imagine how Americans might feel about WW2 if *we* had been nuked....twice.  I guess we might be a little sensitive about it.

What seems clear to me from what you write is that you don't really understand Japanese culture at any deep level.  Not that there's any need or reason for you to if you don't want to.

I, too, have a friend who spent many years in Japan, first to learn the language, and then ended up working there for quite a long time.  Her experience, once she made the effort to learn about Japanese culture, etc, was totally different, in a very positive way, from what you and your friend describe.  Which goes to show how careful we must be about making generalizations about whole cultures and peoples.



They are Borg because they have a Group Mentality..

They take no responsibility for WW2. All many of them  are conscious of is Hiroshima, which was well justified IMHO.

But thanks for jumping in. Your participation is always something to look forward to.

Why, thank you  Wink!

Thanks for sharing your own opinions, which pretty much dehumanize a whole people and culture.

Thank God we have you stalking me and ready to put things right !

Keep standing up for what is right. Terrific job.. Thanks again

If replying to your posts in multiple threads or fora equals "stalking" you, or if you think I've violated any of the rules of this board, I invite you to report me to the mods and justify your accusation.  Yes, I do attempt to stand up for what is right.  Sorry that's a problem for you.



I honestly believe that you devote time to looking for any errors I make or exaggerations or hanging statements. You never miss an opportunity to take a shot.. That is not a violation of any forum rule. But you already know that I am sure.

If you can just back off an inch or two once in awhile I would appreciate it. That is not a demand just a request. 
Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #60 on: April 25, 2013, 11:03:09 AM »

They sank more ships. They were effective. Their goal was not "Hey, let's hang on to our pilots", but "Hey, lets destroy as much of the enemy as we can." You quibble about how many pilots they lost. I pointed out that pilot loss was not their concern. You point out again pilot loss. Again I note it wasn't their concern

And again you are wrong. No pilots= no one to fly the planes and kill people. It doesn't matter what your resolve is if you have nothing left to throw at the enemy. Japan was trying to exhaust the US with casualties, but they were exhausting themselves much quicker. Most of the kamikaze pilots went into the sea without killing anyone- they would have been better off with conventional tactics. Again, given the huge loss of men and materiel, the results of the kamikaze missions over Okinawa were not worth the resources that went into it.
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #61 on: April 25, 2013, 11:28:42 AM »

They sank more ships. They were effective. Their goal was not "Hey, let's hang on to our pilots", but "Hey, lets destroy as much of the enemy as we can." You quibble about how many pilots they lost. I pointed out that pilot loss was not their concern. You point out again pilot loss. Again I note it wasn't their concern

And again you are wrong. No pilots= no one to fly the planes and kill people. It doesn't matter what your resolve is if you have nothing left to throw at the enemy. Japan was trying to exhaust the US with casualties, but they were exhausting themselves much quicker. Most of the kamikaze pilots went into the sea without killing anyone- they would have been better off with conventional tactics. Again, given the huge loss of men and materiel, the results of the kamikaze missions over Okinawa were not worth the resources that went into it.

Do you think some of the Japanese tactics were rationalized by their cultural myths and superstitions? Enough effort and especially self sacrifice could win the favor of the Kami ( Japanese protective deities) for example

Even the term Kamikaze itself suggests this. In the 13th century an invading fleet was sunk by a Hurricane. The invasion itself was understood as divine retribution for religious heresies and predicted by one of their well known Priests ( Nichiren ). I think there is an element of magical thinking involved in the Japanese approach to making war.

It's hard to understand our tactics  and military ethos even today if you are not familiar with our Civil War. I think some of their tactics have roots that are far different than ours...
« Last Edit: April 25, 2013, 11:32:27 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,235


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #62 on: April 25, 2013, 11:52:08 AM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different. 

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

Hey, better to be polite and not accept you than to be rude and ignorant and not accept you.

So, the Japanese have a different culture and different sensibilities.  Not every culture can be as cool and accepting and warm and wonderful as "western" culture  Roll Eyes.  This does not make them "Borg" (since they don't, apparently according to your friend, accept or assimilate others), it does not make them inhuman, and it is no reason to criticize, much less demonize them in any way, shape, or form.

Try to imagine how Americans might feel about WW2 if *we* had been nuked....twice.  I guess we might be a little sensitive about it.

What seems clear to me from what you write is that you don't really understand Japanese culture at any deep level.  Not that there's any need or reason for you to if you don't want to.

I, too, have a friend who spent many years in Japan, first to learn the language, and then ended up working there for quite a long time.  Her experience, once she made the effort to learn about Japanese culture, etc, was totally different, in a very positive way, from what you and your friend describe.  Which goes to show how careful we must be about making generalizations about whole cultures and peoples.



They are Borg because they have a Group Mentality..

They take no responsibility for WW2. All many of them  are conscious of is Hiroshima, which was well justified IMHO.

But thanks for jumping in. Your participation is always something to look forward to.

Why, thank you  Wink!

Thanks for sharing your own opinions, which pretty much dehumanize a whole people and culture.

Thank God we have you stalking me and ready to put things right !

Keep standing up for what is right. Terrific job.. Thanks again

If replying to your posts in multiple threads or fora equals "stalking" you, or if you think I've violated any of the rules of this board, I invite you to report me to the mods and justify your accusation.  Yes, I do attempt to stand up for what is right.  Sorry that's a problem for you.



I honestly believe that you devote time to looking for any errors I make or exaggerations or hanging statements. You never miss an opportunity to take a shot.. That is not a violation of any forum rule. But you already know that I am sure.

If you can just back off an inch or two once in awhile I would appreciate it. That is not a demand just a request. 

Actually, I do not devote my time to doing what you believe I do.  With respect to this thread, I was reading it with great interest and then I came upon your comments.  It was irrelevant to me who made the comments, and I would have replied in exactly the same manner had it been anyone other than you. 

Contrary to what you think, I do not look for opportunities to "take a shot".  You might consider, at least for a moment, that much of what you write, from the perspective that you write it, actually provokes some of my comments--not necessarily intentionally on your part, of course.  You'll be pleasantly surprised to know that there is a great deal of what you write that I just am either not interested in or choose to ignore.  And probably much that I don't even see. 

If by backing off an inch or two once in a while you mean something to the effect of "please ignore or at least don't comment on what I write a little more", I'm certainly willing to do that.  In fact, it would probably be quite beneficial for me as well as for you.  We both seem to have a knack of being able to push each others buttons, so to speak, and provoke contention and ill feeling in one another.  On the other hand, if you write something in a thread that I have interest in that is as outrageous (to me, anyway) as your comments about the Japanese people and culture were, then I probably will comment and you probably won't like it and you'll probably take it as me taking yet another "shot" at you. I can't help that, but do wish it were otherwise. 

I hope and pray that's acceptable to you and we can leave it at that.

Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #63 on: April 25, 2013, 12:15:55 PM »

They sank more ships. They were effective. Their goal was not "Hey, let's hang on to our pilots", but "Hey, lets destroy as much of the enemy as we can." You quibble about how many pilots they lost. I pointed out that pilot loss was not their concern. You point out again pilot loss. Again I note it wasn't their concern

And again you are wrong. No pilots= no one to fly the planes and kill people. It doesn't matter what your resolve is if you have nothing left to throw at the enemy. Japan was trying to exhaust the US with casualties, but they were exhausting themselves much quicker. Most of the kamikaze pilots went into the sea without killing anyone- they would have been better off with conventional tactics. Again, given the huge loss of men and materiel, the results of the kamikaze missions over Okinawa were not worth the resources that went into it.

Do you think some of the Japanese tactics were rationalized by their cultural myths and superstitions?

Sure they were. But the question is, were they actually effective? Not, did they make sense in line with a certain strain of Japanese religio-military thinking.
And the admiration for these tactics was not ubiquitous. There were voices in the military saying, "This is not a sustainable or effective way of making war." General Kuribayashi at Iwo Jima certainly was of a different mindset, and, man for man, his defense produced the best casualty ratio for Japan of the war.

Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
NicholasMyra
Avowed denominationalist
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 6,067


When in doubt, say: "you lack the proper φρόνημα"


« Reply #64 on: April 25, 2013, 12:37:17 PM »

Guys I dunno if you saw this:



So like the war's over and we can stop
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #65 on: April 25, 2013, 02:58:09 PM »

I have dealt extensively with the Japanese...
They are Borg.. Really.. They have a hive mentality. They are very much different than we are ( less so these days of course).
They may as well be from another planet.

And there are other people who have dealt extensively with Japanese who will say you are wrong. From my own experience, I would agree with them.



The etiqueete is very much different.  

Saving face is central to their ethos and is extreme. I have stories about how crazy they over this.

They have an exaggerated and extreme group mentality. They have little use for Western individualism. Your membership and enthusiastic participation is central to you life.

Their hierarchical structure has a totally different patten. .Many jobs expect you to stay at work until very late and then go get a drink..not optional. There is a problem in Japan with people dropping from exhaustion.

I had a good friend who worked in Japan for 10 years. He was very bitter about his experience. He said they will always be polite to you but they will never ever ever ever accept you.

My Buddhist teacher was an American and a professional translator of ancient Japanese Buddhists documents. Also bitter about his dealings with them. I was invited to go there several times by my group, all expenses paid ..which is very nice. But my American teacher told me they wanted to just "walk the dog"..They wanted to show off their American follower which helps to salve their feelings of inferiority to us.

oh and when you talk about WW2 with them you may discover that all they care about is Hiroshima. They make it sound like we started the War by dropping the bomb. Their consciousness begins and ends with them getting nuked.

Hey, better to be polite and not accept you than to be rude and ignorant and not accept you.

So, the Japanese have a different culture and different sensibilities.  Not every culture can be as cool and accepting and warm and wonderful as "western" culture  Roll Eyes.  This does not make them "Borg" (since they don't, apparently according to your friend, accept or assimilate others), it does not make them inhuman, and it is no reason to criticize, much less demonize them in any way, shape, or form.

Try to imagine how Americans might feel about WW2 if *we* had been nuked....twice.  I guess we might be a little sensitive about it.

What seems clear to me from what you write is that you don't really understand Japanese culture at any deep level.  Not that there's any need or reason for you to if you don't want to.

I, too, have a friend who spent many years in Japan, first to learn the language, and then ended up working there for quite a long time.  Her experience, once she made the effort to learn about Japanese culture, etc, was totally different, in a very positive way, from what you and your friend describe.  Which goes to show how careful we must be about making generalizations about whole cultures and peoples.



They are Borg because they have a Group Mentality..

They take no responsibility for WW2. All many of them  are conscious of is Hiroshima, which was well justified IMHO.

But thanks for jumping in. Your participation is always something to look forward to.

Why, thank you  Wink!

Thanks for sharing your own opinions, which pretty much dehumanize a whole people and culture.

Thank God we have you stalking me and ready to put things right !

Keep standing up for what is right. Terrific job.. Thanks again

If replying to your posts in multiple threads or fora equals "stalking" you, or if you think I've violated any of the rules of this board, I invite you to report me to the mods and justify your accusation.  Yes, I do attempt to stand up for what is right.  Sorry that's a problem for you.



I honestly believe that you devote time to looking for any errors I make or exaggerations or hanging statements. You never miss an opportunity to take a shot.. That is not a violation of any forum rule. But you already know that I am sure.

If you can just back off an inch or two once in awhile I would appreciate it. That is not a demand just a request.  

Actually, I do not devote my time to doing what you believe I do.  With respect to this thread, I was reading it with great interest and then I came upon your comments.  It was irrelevant to me who made the comments, and I would have replied in exactly the same manner had it been anyone other than you.  

Contrary to what you think, I do not look for opportunities to "take a shot".  You might consider, at least for a moment, that much of what you write, from the perspective that you write it, actually provokes some of my comments--not necessarily intentionally on your part, of course.  You'll be pleasantly surprised to know that there is a great deal of what you write that I just am either not interested in or choose to ignore.  And probably much that I don't even see.  

If by backing off an inch or two once in a while you mean something to the effect of "please ignore or at least don't comment on what I write a little more", I'm certainly willing to do that.  In fact, it would probably be quite beneficial for me as well as for you.  We both seem to have a knack of being able to push each others buttons, so to speak, and provoke contention and ill feeling in one another.  On the other hand, if you write something in a thread that I have interest in that is as outrageous (to me, anyway) as your comments about the Japanese people and culture were, then I probably will comment and you probably won't like it and you'll probably take it as me taking yet another "shot" at you. I can't help that, but do wish it were otherwise.  

I hope and pray that's acceptable to you and we can leave it at that.



 I believe your primary interest is to discredit me the best you can at every possible opportunity without exception. You are always ready to pounce..
 
You are becoming obsessive. I even had to block your private messages to me. Your list of demands and do's and donts in order to coexist with me was very agressive.

Prove me wrong with action and back off a bit..

Thanks
« Last Edit: April 25, 2013, 02:58:51 PM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #66 on: April 25, 2013, 04:06:00 PM »

Guys I dunno if you saw this:



So like the war's over and we can stop

This is why this is a history discussion and not one of current events.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #67 on: April 25, 2013, 04:31:09 PM »

They were effective insofar as they destroyed more of their enemy - which is the goal in war.

Go tell that to Pyrrhus.

I've already dealt with that. Pyrrhus was not about wasting his own men. Japan and, Vietnam were.

You keep applying western-values and judging the enemy's plans by your values... which as I noted, is why the US lost in Vietnam. They were utterly convinced that they were winning by measuring body-counts.


It seems your posts are simply to keep repeating endlessly your own western values. It's why the US might well lose again if you can't learn from your mistakes.

I think Kerdy is on the right track, though.  One of the universal concepts of war is that a tactic must have a high Return on Investment - ROI.  Basically, you have to put in less of whatever resource you are using than you destroy of the enemy.  This is more qualitative than quantitative.  The resources are valued at what you and your enemies put into it.

In Vietnam, the US valued the lives of it's people more than the Vietnamese did.  This is not a moral statement but one of policy.  The Vietnamese Communists - PAVN, VC, and the Viet Minh before them - all had been fighting wars of attrition.  They had the manpower and they also had the will to fight in this manner - accepting losses of 10 Vietnamese to every dead American.  The manpower is less of an issue.  The US had far more men they could throw into the fight.  The problem was, the American people did not have the willpower to accept these kinds of losses.  The North Vietnamese were at a severely bad spot after the Tet Offensive.  But with the support of General Ho Chi Brokaw, they were able to sap the will of the American people to fight. 

Keep in mind, that from Industrial War on, it has not been a contest of armies but rather of populations.  This was the same in WWII as well, though with the advent of Maneuver Warfare the armies began having better options, but it was still a matter of American and Soviet grinding that won rather than German maneuvers and Japanese martial spirit. 

So with your example of the terror bombings - the US killed swathes of Japanese with their bombs but still had not broken their will to fight.  What we did was, we broke their ability to build quality materials of war.  They were building Arisakas in their basements for Rommel's sake!  The Japanese had the will to lose 10 men for every dead American.  Fine.  If they don't even have the equipment to facilitate killing that one when we have artillery, tanks, ships, fighter-bombers, and all the other fun war-toys to kill 20 of theirs, their will becomes inconsequential.  They had the strength of will and the dedications to fly their planes into our ships.  Fine. For starts, they didn't really do all that much damage to the ships they hit, and when they did, there were three or four more behind that one.  All the while they were done yet another pilot and yet another plane and our firebombs were making it so that while they could replace the pilot they could not replace the plane.  And every Zero that became a flaming grease spot on the deck of a USN destroyer was not a pilot defending the skies over Japan, protecting their fleet, or protecting their torpedo bombers which actually would have had a chance at sinking our ships.

Basically, the Japanese were willing to pay the price, but we were able to absorb their expenditure and still be on top.  The ROI of banzai charges and kamikazi attacks was too high to be effective.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #68 on: April 25, 2013, 06:04:28 PM »

Guys I dunno if you saw this:



So like the war's over and we can stop

This is why this is a history discussion and not one of current events.

I was very good at history at school.







Oh, no. Wait a minute. No I wasn't!
 Roll Eyes
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #69 on: April 25, 2013, 06:07:50 PM »

They were effective insofar as they destroyed more of their enemy - which is the goal in war.

Go tell that to Pyrrhus.

I've already dealt with that. Pyrrhus was not about wasting his own men. Japan and, Vietnam were.

You keep applying western-values and judging the enemy's plans by your values... which as I noted, is why the US lost in Vietnam. They were utterly convinced that they were winning by measuring body-counts.


It seems your posts are simply to keep repeating endlessly your own western values. It's why the US might well lose again if you can't learn from your mistakes.

I think Kerdy is on the right track, though.  One of the universal concepts of war is that a tactic must have a high Return on Investment - ROI.  Basically, you have to put in less of whatever resource you are using than you destroy of the enemy.  This is more qualitative than quantitative.  The resources are valued at what you and your enemies put into it.

In Vietnam, the US valued the lives of it's people more than the Vietnamese did.  This is not a moral statement but one of policy.  The Vietnamese Communists - PAVN, VC, and the Viet Minh before them - all had been fighting wars of attrition.  They had the manpower and they also had the will to fight in this manner - accepting losses of 10 Vietnamese to every dead American.  The manpower is less of an issue.  The US had far more men they could throw into the fight.  The problem was, the American people did not have the willpower to accept these kinds of losses.  The North Vietnamese were at a severely bad spot after the Tet Offensive.  But with the support of General Ho Chi Brokaw, they were able to sap the will of the American people to fight. 

Keep in mind, that from Industrial War on, it has not been a contest of armies but rather of populations.  This was the same in WWII as well, though with the advent of Maneuver Warfare the armies began having better options, but it was still a matter of American and Soviet grinding that won rather than German maneuvers and Japanese martial spirit. 

So with your example of the terror bombings - the US killed swathes of Japanese with their bombs but still had not broken their will to fight.  What we did was, we broke their ability to build quality materials of war.  They were building Arisakas in their basements for Rommel's sake!  The Japanese had the will to lose 10 men for every dead American.  Fine.  If they don't even have the equipment to facilitate killing that one when we have artillery, tanks, ships, fighter-bombers, and all the other fun war-toys to kill 20 of theirs, their will becomes inconsequential.  They had the strength of will and the dedications to fly their planes into our ships.  Fine. For starts, they didn't really do all that much damage to the ships they hit, and when they did, there were three or four more behind that one.  All the while they were done yet another pilot and yet another plane and our firebombs were making it so that while they could replace the pilot they could not replace the plane.  And every Zero that became a flaming grease spot on the deck of a USN destroyer was not a pilot defending the skies over Japan, protecting their fleet, or protecting their torpedo bombers which actually would have had a chance at sinking our ships.

Basically, the Japanese were willing to pay the price, but we were able to absorb their expenditure and still be on top.  The ROI of banzai charges and kamikazi attacks was too high to be effective.

The Japanese were already planning (within their means) at repelling the expected invasion, including to the point of giving people sharpened bamboo poles... according to the book "Operation Downfall"

The entire population would become 'the army'.

They would have kept fighting, regardless of not having the 'industrial' capacity to do so.

So your rebuttal still does not take that into account

You are basing your assessment on the effectiveness of kamazai attacks on the wrong criteria
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #70 on: April 25, 2013, 06:17:30 PM »

Japanese naval superiority was largely a function of (a) surprise and (b) the Germans forcing part of the US fleet to stay in the Atlantic. At the beginning of the war, the US and Japanese had rough parity in naval forces (the Japs had more carriers, but only a few of them were comparable to the American bird farms), and if the Americans had been paying attention at Pearl, Yamomoto's forces would have gotten pretty beat up. As soon as the Americans started to respond, the Japanese started to lose at sea.

On land, the Japanese advantage basically consisted of being in dug in defensive positions on a series of volcanic islands. You can call it "tough", or you can call it stupidity. They were never a significant offensive force against a well-equipped enemy.


Japanese had superior tactics, and one of the best fighters at that time (best, when confronting antiquated tactics; of getting into a dog-fight with the Zero)

Initially America had a lot of poor performing planes, including the Brewster F2A Buffalo, Douglas TBD Devastator.

They had marginal planes such as the Kittyhawk and Wildcat

America had inferior torpedoes, and poorer naval tactics regarding night fighting - as demonstrated at battles such as Savo Island.

Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #71 on: April 25, 2013, 06:54:32 PM »

Regarding superior tactics above...

Claire Chennault had, for the Flying Tigers a better set of aerial tactics using the same 'average performance' plane; the Kittyhawk.




I knew someone who was a member of the 2nd AIF (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2nd_AIF) who told me that before Japan entered the war he and other Aussies were trained to believe that the Japanese were inherently inferiror; all being short, all with 'slitty eyes' that meant that they couldn't fly planes properly, etc.)

One of the cardinal sins is to under-estimate the enemy
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #72 on: April 26, 2013, 09:14:36 AM »

They were effective insofar as they destroyed more of their enemy - which is the goal in war.

Go tell that to Pyrrhus.

I've already dealt with that. Pyrrhus was not about wasting his own men. Japan and, Vietnam were.

You keep applying western-values and judging the enemy's plans by your values... which as I noted, is why the US lost in Vietnam. They were utterly convinced that they were winning by measuring body-counts.


It seems your posts are simply to keep repeating endlessly your own western values. It's why the US might well lose again if you can't learn from your mistakes.

I think Kerdy is on the right track, though.  One of the universal concepts of war is that a tactic must have a high Return on Investment - ROI.  Basically, you have to put in less of whatever resource you are using than you destroy of the enemy.  This is more qualitative than quantitative.  The resources are valued at what you and your enemies put into it.

In Vietnam, the US valued the lives of it's people more than the Vietnamese did.  This is not a moral statement but one of policy.  The Vietnamese Communists - PAVN, VC, and the Viet Minh before them - all had been fighting wars of attrition.  They had the manpower and they also had the will to fight in this manner - accepting losses of 10 Vietnamese to every dead American.  The manpower is less of an issue.  The US had far more men they could throw into the fight.  The problem was, the American people did not have the willpower to accept these kinds of losses.  The North Vietnamese were at a severely bad spot after the Tet Offensive.  But with the support of General Ho Chi Brokaw, they were able to sap the will of the American people to fight. 

Keep in mind, that from Industrial War on, it has not been a contest of armies but rather of populations.  This was the same in WWII as well, though with the advent of Maneuver Warfare the armies began having better options, but it was still a matter of American and Soviet grinding that won rather than German maneuvers and Japanese martial spirit. 

So with your example of the terror bombings - the US killed swathes of Japanese with their bombs but still had not broken their will to fight.  What we did was, we broke their ability to build quality materials of war.  They were building Arisakas in their basements for Rommel's sake!  The Japanese had the will to lose 10 men for every dead American.  Fine.  If they don't even have the equipment to facilitate killing that one when we have artillery, tanks, ships, fighter-bombers, and all the other fun war-toys to kill 20 of theirs, their will becomes inconsequential.  They had the strength of will and the dedications to fly their planes into our ships.  Fine. For starts, they didn't really do all that much damage to the ships they hit, and when they did, there were three or four more behind that one.  All the while they were done yet another pilot and yet another plane and our firebombs were making it so that while they could replace the pilot they could not replace the plane.  And every Zero that became a flaming grease spot on the deck of a USN destroyer was not a pilot defending the skies over Japan, protecting their fleet, or protecting their torpedo bombers which actually would have had a chance at sinking our ships.

Basically, the Japanese were willing to pay the price, but we were able to absorb their expenditure and still be on top.  The ROI of banzai charges and kamikazi attacks was too high to be effective.

The Japanese were already planning (within their means) at repelling the expected invasion, including to the point of giving people sharpened bamboo poles... according to the book "Operation Downfall"

The entire population would become 'the army'.

They would have kept fighting, regardless of not having the 'industrial' capacity to do so.

So your rebuttal still does not take that into account

You are basing your assessment on the effectiveness of kamazai attacks on the wrong criteria

But you aren't getting my point.  What is the trade off?  How effective would those sharpened sticks have been?  They could throw wave after wave at us and so long as we were still willing to kill them, they'd run out of people eventually.  We had the will to put a plan into effect that could have cost us the lives of half a million Americans.  By that point I bet we could have pretty much eradicated the Japanese people from the face of the planet.

And what we didn't kill the Russians would have.

And it didn't really matter because now we are getting into real history rather than what-if's.  The Emperor was tired of seeing his people die needlessly.  We just needed to give him a good reason to surrender.  Hiroshima and Nagasaki later, he did.  With the Emporer went the people.

So what I am saying about kamikazis is, they didn't affect the US.  They probably helped in bringing the war to a quicker conclusion with fewer Americans dead.  Even if the Japanese didn't mind the loss, nor did we!  And they lost more irreplaceable material than we did.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #73 on: April 26, 2013, 09:17:55 AM »

What effect sharpened sticks?

I thought we all understood the term resolve here
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Iconodule
Uranopolitan
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA (Diocese of Eastern Pennsylvania)
Posts: 7,082


"My god is greater."


« Reply #74 on: April 26, 2013, 09:24:17 AM »

This whole argument started with someone claiming that the kamikaze attacks were an effective tactic (clearly they weren't) and that Japan might have gotten better results by employing such tactics at the beginning of the war (actually it would have hastened their defeat.)
Logged

"A riddle or the cricket's cry
Is to doubt a fit reply." - William Blake
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #75 on: April 26, 2013, 09:27:40 AM »

What effect sharpened sticks?

I thought we all understood the term resolve here

You can resolve to smash a brick wall down with your forehead.  My money is on your head popping first.  Likewise, I'll bet the Japanese would tire of getting killed long before we tired of killing them.
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,235


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #76 on: April 26, 2013, 09:55:58 AM »

What effect sharpened sticks?

I thought we all understood the term resolve here

You can resolve to smash a brick wall down with your forehead.  My money is on your head popping first.  Likewise, I'll bet the Japanese would tire of getting killed long before we tired of killing them.


Lots and lots and lot of sharpened sticks vs. lots of rifles, artillery, machine guns, bombs, etc.?  Sticks lose.
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,455



« Reply #77 on: April 26, 2013, 09:59:28 AM »

This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  Roll Eyes
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #78 on: April 26, 2013, 10:05:39 AM »

This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  Roll Eyes

Then you haven't looked hard enough!   Wink
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,455



« Reply #79 on: April 26, 2013, 10:21:04 AM »

This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  Roll Eyes

Then you haven't looked hard enough!   Wink

It started out interesting and then dissolved into a peeing contest about sharpened sticks and kamikazi attacks.  laugh
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #80 on: April 26, 2013, 10:31:46 AM »

This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  Roll Eyes

Then you haven't looked hard enough!   Wink

It started out interesting and then dissolved into a peeing contest about sharpened sticks and kamikazi attacks.  laugh

I'm sorry, but if you cannot find the humour in sharpened sticks then that's on you, brah!
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
Marc1152
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Rocor
Posts: 13,312


Probiotic .. Antibiotic


« Reply #81 on: April 26, 2013, 10:35:47 AM »

What effect sharpened sticks?

I thought we all understood the term resolve here

You can resolve to smash a brick wall down with your forehead.  My money is on your head popping first.  Likewise, I'll bet the Japanese would tire of getting killed long before we tired of killing them.



Lots and lots and lot of sharpened sticks vs. lots of rifles, artillery, machine guns, bombs, etc.?  Sticks lose.

The Imperial Army still had plenty of guns and ammo left. The civilian thing was a reserve meant to harass us, just like in Vietnam.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2013, 10:36:39 AM by Marc1152 » Logged

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm
TheTrisagion
Armed Feline rider of Flaming Unicorns
Warned
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 9,455



« Reply #82 on: April 26, 2013, 10:53:37 AM »

This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  Roll Eyes

Then you haven't looked hard enough!   Wink

It started out interesting and then dissolved into a peeing contest about sharpened sticks and kamikazi attacks.  laugh

I'm sorry, but if you cannot find the humour in sharpened sticks then that's on you, brah!

Nothing humorous about sharpened sticks in a peeing contest!  Shocked
Logged

Have you considered the possibility that your face is an ad hominem?
Somebody just went all Jack Chick up in here.
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,235


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #83 on: April 26, 2013, 11:25:43 AM »

This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  Roll Eyes

Then you haven't looked hard enough!   Wink

It started out interesting and then dissolved into a peeing contest about sharpened sticks and kamikazi attacks.  laugh

I'm sorry, but if you cannot find the humour in sharpened sticks then that's on you, brah!

Nothing humorous about sharpened sticks in a peeing contest!  Shocked

It would depend on who has them and where they're pointing, I would think.  Grin
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
J Michael
Older than dirt; dumber than a box of rocks; colossally ignorant; a little crazy ;-)
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Byzantine Catholic
Posts: 10,235


Lord, have mercy! I live under a rock. Alleluia!


« Reply #84 on: April 26, 2013, 11:26:35 AM »

This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  Roll Eyes

Then you haven't looked hard enough!   Wink

+1
Logged

"May Thy Cross, O Lord, in which I seek refuge, be for me a bridge across the great river of fire.  May I pass along it to the habitation of life." ~St. Ephraim the Syrian

"Sometimes you're the windshield.  Sometimes you're the bug." ~ Mark Knopfler (?)
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,974



« Reply #85 on: April 26, 2013, 11:50:06 AM »

This is probably the silliest argument thread I have ever read.  Roll Eyes

Then you haven't looked hard enough!   Wink

It started out interesting and then dissolved into a peeing contest about sharpened sticks and kamikazi attacks.  laugh

I'm sorry, but if you cannot find the humour in sharpened sticks then that's on you, brah!

Nothing humorous about sharpened sticks in a peeing contest!  Shocked

It would depend on who has them and where they're pointing, I would think.  Grin

When you have the suicidal bravery of a Japenese infantryman in a banzai charge, you laugh off such threats!
Logged

Das ist des Jägers Ehrenschild, daß er beschützt und hegt sein Wild, weidmännisch jagt, wie sich’s gehört, den Schöpfer im Geschöpfe ehrt.
Keble
All-Knowing Grand Wizard of Debunking
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 3,436



« Reply #86 on: April 26, 2013, 10:12:19 PM »

Japanese had superior tactics, and one of the best fighters at that time (best, when confronting antiquated tactics; of getting into a dog-fight with the Zero)

I don't know where you are getting this "superior tactics" thing. The Thach Weave (to take an example) compensated for the Zero's then-superiority by Midway.

When talking about Savo Island, it should be kept in mind that, for all the naval losses, the Japanese failed to put a significant crimp in the Guadalcanal campaign.
Logged
Strongylocentrotus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: I am an atheist, but I do have faith in a good horse...
Jurisdiction: Baptised in the Bulgarian Orthodox Church
Posts: 47


With Overlook Cocquette - my favorite mare 1984


« Reply #87 on: May 25, 2013, 07:16:35 AM »

Japanese naval superiority was largely a function of (a) surprise and (b) the Germans forcing part of the US fleet to stay in the Atlantic. At the beginning of the war, the US and Japanese had rough parity in naval forces (the Japs had more carriers, but only a few of them were comparable to the American bird farms), and if the Americans had been paying attention at Pearl, Yamomoto's forces would have gotten pretty beat up. As soon as the Americans started to respond, the Japanese started to lose at sea.

On land, the Japanese advantage basically consisted of being in dug in defensive positions on a series of volcanic islands. You can call it "tough", or you can call it stupidity. They were never a significant offensive force against a well-equipped enemy.


Initially America had a lot of poor performing planes, including the Brewster F2A Buffalo, Douglas TBD Devastator.

They had marginal planes such as the Kittyhawk and Wildcat




America used F2A-3 in WWII.  This was a heavier version of the F2A-1 which was used so effectively in Findland against Soviet airforce.  Problem at Midway was mostly the operational inexperience of US aircrews.  The F2A-3 thus served as a sort of scapegoat for lack of experience of American Pilots.   This was displayed by most of the American air units participating in battle, with the exception of the carrier Yorktown and some elements of Enterprise.  F4F-3 and F4F-4, as well as P-40 series were effective in holding the line until newer types began arriving in 1943, once the pilots figured out how to fight with them.  It think in the beginning it was more a matter of marginal pilot skill (compared to Japanese) than marginal airplanes.   I think, the biggest disparity in equipment quality was in the torpedoes.  The Japanese torpedos were much better designed and the American torpedoes frankly sucked.  As for the torpedo bombers, the Nakijima B5N was best in the world at this time, and the TBD was badly outclassed in comparison, but even the better designed TBF came up short at Midway.  This was mostly because of air operational failure, poorly trained aircrews (most of VT-8 never even launched a torpedo in training before taking on the Nihon Kaigun), and sucky torpedoes, rather than aircraft failure.  TBD did well enough at Coral Sea attacking Shoho and I don't think a TBF ever a sank ship with a torpedo.   Of course what does it say about all of us Orthocks, that we have so many informed opinions about Pacific War?
Logged

If you cain't stand the stink, then don't kick the skunk!
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #88 on: May 25, 2013, 10:51:42 AM »

Brewster Buffalos also performed poorly in Malaya when used by British and Australian forces.

« Last Edit: May 25, 2013, 10:53:20 AM by montalban » Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Strongylocentrotus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: I am an atheist, but I do have faith in a good horse...
Jurisdiction: Baptised in the Bulgarian Orthodox Church
Posts: 47


With Overlook Cocquette - my favorite mare 1984


« Reply #89 on: May 26, 2013, 12:46:10 AM »

Brewster Buffalos also performed poorly in Malaya when used by British and Australian forces.



Yup.  The British used the export version of the same F2A-3 that the Marines were stuck with in Midway.  Just like the Marines, the British airmen, mostly from Australia and New Zealand were inexperienced in combat air operations.  In addition, their version was even more underpowered with refurbished Wasp radials from DC-3 airliners.  These radials had a problem with oil leaks, which was aggravated by the tropical operating condtitions.  The British lost many Brewsters to accidents, poor maintenance and ground Japanese ground attacks. 

In the East Indies, the Brewsters were slightly different from what the British were using, the Dutch version was slightly lighter and was equiped with better WASP engines.  The biggest problem faced by the Dutch was that they were heavily outnumbered in the Japanese onslaught.  They were however, more successful than the British in their air operations, and even used the Brewster with some success as a dive bomber against Japanese troopships, before they were finally overwhelmed by superior numbers.

A great account of both British and Dutch air operations in Malaysia, Burma and the East Indies is volume one of the three volume A Bloody Shambles series, which describes just how unprepared those forces were in fighting the Japanese.

In contrast to American, Dutch and British experiences, the Finns were altogether successful with their Brewsters.  Like the British and Dutch, the Finns also used a de-navalized version of the F2A, but theirs was the F2A-1 model which initially was lighter, but then they added armor plate and four 12.7 mm M/G which reduced the Finnish model's performance, so that it was actually slower than the F2B-3 version used by the Brits and Dutch.  The Finns also had the same problem with oil leaks from the refurbished WASPs, but they solved it by inverting one of the cylinder rings in each cylinder.  I have no idea why this worked, but it apparently did and maybe the arctic operating conditions helped also.  More importantly, the Finns benefited from the mistakes of others and figured how to fight the Brewster to its best advantage, by making slashing dive attacks on Soviet bombers using the heavy M/G to rip the Soviet aircraft apart.  They also took advantage of the Buff's long range (the Buff had a wet wing and had an range comparable to a A6M2), and consequent fight endurance to loiter and make repeated attacks on Soviet formations.  Finally, one cannot overstate the contribution to Finnish succes by the poor aircrew quality and inept air operations of the Soviet airforce, whose most experienced members were exterminated during Stalin's purges.  Consequently, In Finnish hands the Brewster achieved a kill ratio of 26:1, ironically making the type both one of the worst and yet one of most most successful types deployed in WWII.   Trivia:  One Brewster airframe in Finnish service alone accounted for over forty confirmed kills at the hands of its various pilots, making it the single highest scoring fighter airframe so far in aviation history.  Finnish Brewsters were finally scrapped in 1953.

**Other countries that purchased Brewster in WII were the French and Belgians.  Oddly enough the USAAF took advantage of the Buffalo's long range to operate the type as a photo recon aircraft from Australia early in 1942.
Logged

If you cain't stand the stink, then don't kick the skunk!
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #90 on: May 26, 2013, 08:19:06 AM »

Brewster Buffalos also performed poorly in Malaya when used by British and Australian forces.



Yup.  The British used the export version of the same F2A-3 that the Marines were stuck with in Midway.  Just like the Marines, the British airmen, mostly from Australia and New Zealand were inexperienced in combat air operations.  In addition, their version was even more underpowered with refurbished Wasp radials from DC-3 airliners.  These radials had a problem with oil leaks, which was aggravated by the tropical operating condtitions.  The British lost many Brewsters to accidents, poor maintenance and ground Japanese ground attacks. 

In the East Indies, the Brewsters were slightly different from what the British were using, the Dutch version was slightly lighter and was equiped with better WASP engines.  The biggest problem faced by the Dutch was that they were heavily outnumbered in the Japanese onslaught.  They were however, more successful than the British in their air operations, and even used the Brewster with some success as a dive bomber against Japanese troopships, before they were finally overwhelmed by superior numbers.

A great account of both British and Dutch air operations in Malaysia, Burma and the East Indies is volume one of the three volume A Bloody Shambles series, which describes just how unprepared those forces were in fighting the Japanese.

In contrast to American, Dutch and British experiences, the Finns were altogether successful with their Brewsters.  Like the British and Dutch, the Finns also used a de-navalized version of the F2A, but theirs was the F2A-1 model which initially was lighter, but then they added armor plate and four 12.7 mm M/G which reduced the Finnish model's performance, so that it was actually slower than the F2B-3 version used by the Brits and Dutch.  The Finns also had the same problem with oil leaks from the refurbished WASPs, but they solved it by inverting one of the cylinder rings in each cylinder.  I have no idea why this worked, but it apparently did and maybe the arctic operating conditions helped also.  More importantly, the Finns benefited from the mistakes of others and figured how to fight the Brewster to its best advantage, by making slashing dive attacks on Soviet bombers using the heavy M/G to rip the Soviet aircraft apart.  They also took advantage of the Buff's long range (the Buff had a wet wing and had an range comparable to a A6M2), and consequent fight endurance to loiter and make repeated attacks on Soviet formations.  Finally, one cannot overstate the contribution to Finnish succes by the poor aircrew quality and inept air operations of the Soviet airforce, whose most experienced members were exterminated during Stalin's purges.  Consequently, In Finnish hands the Brewster achieved a kill ratio of 26:1, ironically making the type both one of the worst and yet one of most most successful types deployed in WWII.   Trivia:  One Brewster airframe in Finnish service alone accounted for over forty confirmed kills at the hands of its various pilots, making it the single highest scoring fighter airframe so far in aviation history.  Finnish Brewsters were finally scrapped in 1953.

**Other countries that purchased Brewster in WII were the French and Belgians.  Oddly enough the USAAF took advantage of the Buffalo's long range to operate the type as a photo recon aircraft from Australia early in 1942.


They weren't British airmen from Australia! They were Australian airmen from Australia!
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Strongylocentrotus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: I am an atheist, but I do have faith in a good horse...
Jurisdiction: Baptised in the Bulgarian Orthodox Church
Posts: 47


With Overlook Cocquette - my favorite mare 1984


« Reply #91 on: May 26, 2013, 12:07:29 PM »

Brewster Buffalos also performed poorly in Malaya when used by British and Australian forces.





They weren't British airmen from Australia! They were Australian airmen from Australia!

You right.  What I know?  To me they are all British Empire forces.  RAF, RNZAF, RAAF, RCAF.  Too many abbreviations.  Dutch not Dutch either, Royal Netherlands Army Airforce (Luchtvaartafdeling).  they are ML-KNIL(Military Air Service of the Royal Netherlands East Indian Army). So what?  I not write wikipedia article.
Logged

If you cain't stand the stink, then don't kick the skunk!
montalban
Now in colour
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 1,813



« Reply #92 on: June 02, 2013, 07:08:36 AM »

What you know?

Well it's wrong.
Logged

Fàilte dhut a Mhoire,
tha thu lan de na gràsan;
Tha an Tighearna maille riut.
Strongylocentrotus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Faith: I am an atheist, but I do have faith in a good horse...
Jurisdiction: Baptised in the Bulgarian Orthodox Church
Posts: 47


With Overlook Cocquette - my favorite mare 1984


« Reply #93 on: October 28, 2014, 10:16:08 PM »

Also, Star Trek had a sequence where the USS Enterpirse and the USS Yamato are involved because the producers wished to note in the future we all get along; a ship with an antecedent in a US WWII vessel, and a ship with an antecedent in the Japanese Imperial Navy. I thought - what next? The USS Heinrich Himmler?
[/quote]

Not quite Brother.  Yamato is the ancient name of Japan (the region where Japan was born, I think) and Heinrich Himler is the name of a war criminal.  The Yamato's sister-ship Musashi, was also an ancient Japanese place name of the province around Tokyo.  The Nihon Kaigun (Imperial Japanese Navy) often had poetic names for their war ships.  The names of the six carriers that attacked Pearl Harbor were Akagi (Red Castle) Kaga (Increased Joy) Hiryu (Flying Dragon) Soryu (Green Dragon) Shokaku (Dragon Flying in Heaven) Shokaku (Crane Flying in Heaven)  Zuikaku (Lucky Crane).  But my favorites are the names of their destroyers, here is a sample of the Kamikaze Class (from http://www.combinedfleet.com/ijnnames.htm):

Kamikaze: "Divine Wind"
Asakaze: "Wind from the Sea after Sunrise"
Harukaze: "Spring Wind"
Matsukaze: "Wind in the Pines"
Hatakaze: "Flag-flying Wind"
Asanagi: "Morning Calm"
Yunagi: "Evening Calm"
Oite: "Tailwind"
Hayate: "Storm Gale"
Logged

If you cain't stand the stink, then don't kick the skunk!
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.378 seconds with 121 queries.