Japan attacked Pearl Harbor
- Thread starter mathman
- Start date
Well, that's nice.
What does it say, and what are your thoughts on the matter?
What does it say, and what are your thoughts on the matter?
It's refreshing to have a thread that isn't a conspiracy theory for once.
Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. Yes they did.
Let's have more of this.
Japan attacked Pearl Harbour. Yes they did.
Let's have more of this.
There is always the alternative to conspiracy theories. We could run with the "bastards deserved it" thingy.
Well the Japanese claims they had to attack pearl harbor and declare war on the US because of US sanctions against them at the time, sanctions which prevented access to much needed oil, so the Japanese need to expand to take what they needed. Now why were there sanctions on Japan at the time? Well the public answer is that Japan had invaded china as was frankly a killing machine of such berserker viciousness to the Chinese that even the Nazis found a hard time stomaching the horrors. Underneath that there was perhaps some yellow pearl fears amongst the Americans, its complected. Short answer is Japan attack Pearl Harbour.
An essential point was that the Japanese leadership was ambivalent about going to war against the U.S. Saving face was the motivation that prevented many anti-war people from pressing their objections.
One example: during negotiations with the U.S. (summer 1941), the U.S. appeared to be willing to ease up on the embargo if the Japanese would get out of the southern part of Indo-China (Vietnam) and break Japan's alliance with Germany. Even though neither of these items was important to Japan, the more hawkish leaders refused.
Interesting.
I hadn't heard that before, but it sounds credible.
I hope you get someone to discuss the subject with.
I hadn't heard that before, but it sounds credible.
I hope you get someone to discuss the subject with.
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
I was born during that war, and when I got old enough to ask questions that explanation is pretty much the way my parents explained it to me.
The U.S. understood Japan well enough to realize that if they really wanted to make the transition to a modern, industrial nation, they would do it right and do it well, putting all of the country's effort into it. They might well have ended up eclipsing the U.S. as the world's largest economic power. I don't think we were that yet, but with the Europeans resolutely destroying each other's industrial bases, we certainly would be by the end of the war, and we didn't want to be overshadowed by Japan.
We were (probably rightly) convinced that the U.S. mainland could not be seriously attacked, so unlike the European nations we would emerge from the war with our infrastructure intact and an economy that had been pumped into high gear by the manufacture of aircraft and other weapons. So we blocked Japan's access to the oil fields of Indonesia. This risked war, but we were quite certain that we'd win, turning Japan into a gigantic refugee camp. (I don't know how many Americans expected us to develop nuclear weapons, but even without them the result would have been the same, although with a much higher body count on both sides. We would have to invade the country and fight with conventional weapons until we captured the capitol, since the Japanese considered surrender to be a dishonor they could not bear.)
This was indeed what happened. Our economy boomed for thirty years after WWII. Much of that was due to our continued manufacture of aircraft and other weapons. This was justified by the Cold War against our former ally the USSR. For us, the Cold War was an opportunity to make a lot of money, but for them it siphoned off about half of their GDP and was, arguably, the reason their economy ultimately imploded and Perestroika happened.
Meanwhile Japan's rewritten constitution prohibited the nation from ever again establishing a mighty military, and in any case their defense was guaranteed by their new best friend the USA--politics sure is strange. So they built an economy based entirely on consumer goods. Rebuilding from the ashes of the war (with loans provided by their generous new best friend), they had the most modern industrial infrastructure of any nation--well perhaps along with their wartime ally Germany, which was also rebuilding itself into an economic powerhouse with American money--did I already say that politics is strange?
I don't think anyone who was alive during WWII would understand how the world got to be the way it is today, much less understand that this happened because of WWII! My parents lived into the 1990s and they never stopped scratching their heads, and asking me if I understood what was going on and why?
Well on Ћ question if Ћ nuke were necessary I don't think they were. Ћ Japanese emperor and civilian echelon were already looking for ways to surrender, further blockading and conventional bombing would likely have gotten them to surrender without Ћ need for a land invasion from Ћ USA. Ћ Soviet invasion though would have likely been enough, they already lost Sakhalin and would have probably lost Hakkoda to Ћ Soviets by November of 1945 had they not surrendered when they did. Further more Japan had extreme food problems even after they surrender, if that surrender had been delayed even a few months because Ћ Bomb had not been used Ћ added death toll from starvation would likely have gone into Ћ millions. So in short Ћ Atomic bombs probably were not necessary for surrender, a land invasion by Ћ USA probably was not necessary if Ћ Bomb was not used, but Ћ Bombs probably made surrender happen earlier then it would have, which saved Japan Ћ lose of Hakkoda to Ћ soviets and untold numbers of lives from starvation.
You are asserting a lot of maybes about what Japan might have done. But the fact remains that even after two A bombs were used and Soviet Union entered the war, the leadership was split 3-3 on whether or not to surrender. When it became known that the emperor broke the tie, there was an attempt by a group of die-hards to take control and prevent the surrender.
It seems to me that the same sort of mind set that got Japan into the war was still in play and I don't believe they would have surrendered without the bomb. Conventional air raids before the A bombs had destroyed so much of Japan's cities that there was little choice left for picking out suitable targets (cities that hadn't been attacked already) for A bombs.
the US government was taking steps to entering the war prior to 12-7-1941.
it (the gov) was already selling arms on a cash and carry basis, you came HERE, purchased the arms and shipped them yourself.
the US, at the time of pearl harbor, was not prepared for war, almost none of its industry was geared up for an all out effort.
the "bomb" in my opinion was justified in the fact that we (the US) wasn't on the defensive although we were when we entered the war.
the decision to use "the bomb" was made AFTER the US had lost many, many of it's youth and the desire to end the world conflict.
i doubt if "waiting out the japanese" ever entered the minds of ANYONE at the time.
japan, as small as she was, was STILL a formidable foe, determined and resolute.
it (the gov) was already selling arms on a cash and carry basis, you came HERE, purchased the arms and shipped them yourself.
the US, at the time of pearl harbor, was not prepared for war, almost none of its industry was geared up for an all out effort.
the "bomb" in my opinion was justified in the fact that we (the US) wasn't on the defensive although we were when we entered the war.
the decision to use "the bomb" was made AFTER the US had lost many, many of it's youth and the desire to end the world conflict.
i doubt if "waiting out the japanese" ever entered the minds of ANYONE at the time.
japan, as small as she was, was STILL a formidable foe, determined and resolute.
I'm pretty sure it was not either, but there is a good chance that before Operation Downfall in October and Operation Olympic in November began, that Japan would have surrendered by then. So it likely there would have been no need to "wait out" Ћ Japanese.
No they were crushed, lets not assume bravado meant actually strength. Their navy was obliterated, their airforce decimated, their armies demoralized and over a million of which curbstumped by Ћ Soviets in Manchuria and Sakhalin in a matter of days! All Ћ Bombs did was speed up their inevitable surrendered. Had they argued internally for even a month longer then they did they would have likely lost Hokkaido, as Ћ soviets had plans to begin invading Hokkaido by Ћ last week of August 1945.
Now I'm not saying the USA was wrong to drop the bombs, chances are it saved more human lives then it took, I'm only saying not to oversell what they did.
highly doubtful.
the battles of iwo jima and okinawa happened towards the end of the war and we had to slaughter them all.
less than 10% surrendered at iwo and the majority of those were natives, the rest were either killed or committed suicide.
these 2 battles were strong indicators that the japanese would indeed defend their home islands to the last man.
no, the bomb was needed.
the really nasty thing about the bomb was/is the lingering effects long after the war ended.
i honestly believe that if we invaded japan we would have been guilty of genocide because they simply would not have surrendered.
What does that have to do with Ћ people that rule japan? Ћ Japanese goverment internally had begone serious discussions over surrender weeks before Ћ bombings. For example sending Prince Konoe to try to get the soviets to mediate a surrender in July of 1945. Here is another example from prime mister Togo to Ambasserter Sato:
"The foreign and domestic situation for the Empire is very serious, and even the termination of the war is now being considered privately. Therefore the conversations mentioned in my telegram No. 852 are not being limited solely to the objective of closer relations between Japan and the U.S.S.R., but we are also sounding out the extent to which we might employ the U.S.S.R. in connection with the termination of the war. "
Ћ problem was the Japanese military, whose leaders are zealots intent on death before surrender (many of whom did just that after the emperor surrendered) but their zealotry was increasingly growing weaker, Ћ soviet invasion, Ћ bomb, eventually they fell to hari kari. If it had not been for Ћ bomb it would have only been a matter of time and further defeats and conventional bombings. Like I said they would have probably lost Hokkaido by October, a lose of one of Ћ 4 main island of japan would have been more devastating then the bomb, it would proven no chance of victory against invasion and have had lasting impact to this day, perhaps resulting a communistic north japan and capitalist south japan, that would have been quite a lingering effect.
that's what usually happens in times of war, the military "takes over".
i find it hard to believe that the military can mount the kind of offenses japan did without the support of the people.
at okinawa japan was calling on barely legal servicemen to fly their bombs into ships, and she found them, willing to give their lives.
it's hard to say which happened first, loss of servicemen or planes but their effort at okinawa was a valiant one indeed, another 30 days and okinawa might not have fallen.
the above is from an american perspective, i don't know the nuances of japan.
i find it hard to believe that the military can mount the kind of offenses japan did without the support of the people.
at okinawa japan was calling on barely legal servicemen to fly their bombs into ships, and she found them, willing to give their lives.
it's hard to say which happened first, loss of servicemen or planes but their effort at okinawa was a valiant one indeed, another 30 days and okinawa might not have fallen.
the above is from an american perspective, i don't know the nuances of japan.
Fraggle Rocker
Staff member
A typical statement of that is, "The war would have continued until the last five-year-old girl was shot down while charging a batallion of U.S. Marines with her dead daddy's samurai sword."
The concept of honor has a much different effect on Oriental cultures than on ours.
Even if they had eventually surrendered, a land war would have taken the lives of hundreds of thousands of American soldiers. We didn't want that either.
Like most Oriental nations, Japanese culture has a strong Confucian influence. Respect for one's elders is ingrained in the people. Very few of them would have challenged the wisdom of the emperor and his government.
I really don't think there would have been a land war on Japan proper (the 4 main islands) if the bomb had not been dropped. The Japanese government were sending out "feelers" for peace several weeks before the bomb dropping, in the last days of the war there was internal fighting breaking out between McArthur, Nimitz and King on the viability of Operation Downfall and Olympic, as well as US Airforce looking at a new strategy of conventional bombing mining and train transports. The Japanese suffered horrendous food shortage problems when they surrendered when they did if they had waited say two mouths more and had their transportation systems wiped out, they would have been dying off by the millions by December. No one going to to fight when they are starved to death, no matter their honor! Will of spirit can't defeat a need for calories, all japanese determination did was insure the methods used against them were ones designed to break wills if not exterminate all together! And as we know as matter of historical fact their wills were breakable, at least that of their leaders. The fire bombing alone killed half a million, more then both atomic bombings, so the atomic bombing was not necessary, invasion was not necessary, all that was need in was more time to burn, starve and break their spirits, the atomic bomb only hastened the inevitable.
Yes it is, but the Japanese leadership had no other alternative with less than 90 days of petroleum consumption, by just the military, left.
They took a long, low probably of success, despirate try to stay in power. The British fleet, based in Singapore, did most of the blocking or Japanese oil tankers trying to get thru the narrow St. of Malacca that borders Singapore and the royal naval intelligence had assured the political leadership that Singapore could not fall, but it did to the Japanese with several thousand Brits escaping NW into the jungle.
The US Navy leadership was impressed and realize it would take nearly every warship in the Pacific to drive the Japanese, now occupying Singapore, out and must soon sail forth as the greatest armada the world had ever seen. The US command and the political leaders, assured by US intelligence services, were very confident that Pear Harbor was safe - much too far from Japan for the Japanese to attack it. - Again terribly under estimating the capacity of the Japanese Navy, as the British intelligence had done but the industrial might of the US won the war in the end, despite the great losses at Pear Harbor.
Last edited by a moderator:
"In the Shadow of the Bomb", by Silvan S. Schweber
USA attacked Japan
Book entitled "In the Shadow of the Bomb" by Silvan S. Schweber gives a most comprehensive description of the workings of the USA leadership leading up to the holocaust of millions of civilian population of Hiroshima and Nagasaki of Japan.
USA attacked Japan
Book entitled "In the Shadow of the Bomb" by Silvan S. Schweber gives a most comprehensive description of the workings of the USA leadership leading up to the holocaust of millions of civilian population of Hiroshima and Nagasaki of Japan.