• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

World War II |OT|

Status
Not open for further replies.
What evidence was there of an immenent surrender? Even as Hirohito was to signal a surrender there was a failed attempt of a coupe by Japanese generals to stop the surrender and continue fighting. Okinawa and Iwo Jima showed just how far the military was willing to go in the face of imminent defeat. 200k is an enourous number but put that in comparison to figure of 1000000 + on the allied side alone and you have a tough choice but one that is lesser of two evils. Also if you look at photos of the aftermath of Hiroshima/ Nagasaki and. Compare it to any other allied target city and the difference would be minimal. The main difference was the A-bomb was in 1 strike. It was the factor of the end of the war and ensured the end of the conflict. Looking back in hindsight maybe the Japanese would have surrendered without it, but the choice of the A-bomb was the best at the time.

That figure of a million allied soldiers dying in a land invasion of Japan is no longer considered accurate, you know. But you are right about the other bombings of Japan being just as (or more) devastating as the A-bombs. It was just the timing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the end result they produced that seem questionable to many people today, I think.
 

Kabouter

Member
Oh and inb4 someone posts the statistical summary from the Winter War (Finland v. Russia).
Psssh.

JvAPa.jpg
 

Zophar

Member
Arguing the justification of the atom bombs is a moot point. The same can be said for a lot of things in war (and some entire wars, too.)

They happened. It's over and done with. Can't be taken back. It comes up in every WW2 discussion, and an impasse is always reached. Let's discuss something else, please.
 
Actually something which has always interested me. We know Germany did well in the area of rocket technology (V1, V2 rockets etc), and indeed this knowledge was used as the basis for many applications by East and West during the Cold War (e.g. the space race).

What about nuclear technology? Was there any emphasis on this by Germany? Hell would they have even had access to the materials required?
 

yacobod

Banned
I think you should add Dan Carlin's epic 4 part podcast on the Eastern Front of World War 2 to the OP. The Ghosts of the Ostfront is amazing and certainly worth a download and a listen. The Hardcore History archive is here.

And the European Theater was won on the Eastern Front by the Soviets. I think the significance of D-day is overrated here by the west when Germans were more or less defeated by the end of 1943.
 
I think you should add Dan Carlin's epic 4 part podcast on the Eastern Front of World War 2 to the OP. The Ghosts of the Ostfront is amazing and certainly worth a download and a listen. The Hardcore History archive is here.

A thousand times yes. Although it's more of an audiobook than a podcast, really.
 
I think you should add Dan Carlin's epic 4 part podcast on the Eastern Front of World War 2 to the OP. The Ghosts of the Ostfront is amazing and certainly worth a download and a listen. The Hardcore History archive is here.

And the European Theater was won on the Eastern Front by the Soviets. I think the significance of D-day is overrated here by the west when Germans were more or less defeated by the end of 1943.

It wasn't simply D-day, it was the point of splitting the Nazis on 3 fronts (France, Italy, Russia) that defeated the Nazis in the end. The largest campaign in human history was the Eastern European front, but the defeat of the Germans was due to splitting the Nazis 3 ways.
 

Kinyou

Member
And the European Theater was won on the Eastern Front by the Soviets. I think the significance of D-day is overrated here by the west when Germans were more or less defeated by the end of 1943.
In terms of losses made the east surely the greatest sacrifice.
My history teacher also once told me that the West was partly holding the invasion of the Normandy back because the wanted the soviet union to be more weakened after the war.

I don't know how fact based that is but it would make sense.
 

Llyranor

Member
WW2 is one of my favorite topics.

Here's a random (fairly lengthy) article I really enjoyed reading recently about the bombing of Switzerland. Fascinating read.
http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/airchronicles/apj/apj00/sum00/helmreich.html

=============

When I travel to Europe, I make sure to hit some important WW2 landmarks. Here's some shots I took:

Juno Beach:
T6a8q.jpg


Pegasus Bridge (the original):
5ASHN.jpg


This is the last functional Tiger tank at Bovington Tank Museum (unfortunately, it was undergoing maintenance/repair, so I couldn't see it in action when I was there)
OFU2g.jpg


Arnhem Bridge:
iRDRh.jpg
 

yacobod

Banned
Destroyed_Warsaw%2C_capital_of_Poland%2C_January_1945.jpg


85% of Warsaw was destroyed under Nazi control. Check out the wikipedia article on the Warsaw Uprising, one of the worst atrocities of the war. Over 200,000 Polish civilians were killed by the Nazis.

Here's a link to a good book on the subject by Norman Davies.

I think Poland really got the shortest straw from both sides of WW2. The Allies went to war for Poland, but were powerless to help them (or they didn't really want to), and eventually the Allies sold Poland out after the war to the Soviet Union. A real shame.
 

Llyranor

Member
In terms of losses made the east surely the greatest sacrifice.
My history teacher also once told me that the West was partly holding the invasion of the Normandy back because the wanted the soviet union to be more weakened after the war.

I don't know how fact based that is but it would make sense.

America wanted to do Normandy first. It was the British that convinced them to do North Africa/Italy first. I think those were important stepping stones in learning how to do amphibious landings.
 

Black-Box

Member
What evidence was there of an immenent surrender? Even as Hirohito was to signal a surrender there was a failed attempt of a coupe by Japanese generals to stop the surrender and continue fighting. Okinawa and Iwo Jima showed just how far the military was willing to go in the face of imminent defeat. 200k is an enourous number but put that in comparison to figure of 1000000 + on the allied side alone and you have a tough choice but one that is lesser of two evils. Also if you look at photos of the aftermath of Hiroshima/ Nagasaki and. Compare it to any other allied target city and the difference would be minimal. The main difference was the A-bomb was in 1 strike. It was the factor of the end of the war and ensured the end of the conflict. Looking back in hindsight maybe the Japanese would have surrendered without it, but the choice of the A-bomb was the best at the time.

I thought by that time Japan was nearly out of food

...MINIMAL difference? you CAN NOT compare a bombed city too a city that was nuked.
 

MechDX

Member
Do you people who think dropping the bomb was the right thing to do realize that Japan was basically already willing to surrender before Hiroshima, and certainly before Nagasaki? A lot of historians these days seem to prescribe to the notion that the US rushed in with the bomb to stop the Soviets from having any say in the surrender and occupation of Japan, which isn't exactly a good justification for killing over 200,000 innocent civilians.

They were not prepared for surrender. Truman told them before the first one that a swift end would come if they did not surrender. Of course they didnt and the first bomb was dropped. Even after the first one the Japanese STILL would not surrender after Truman told them flat out ANOTHER would be dropped.

This thread is going to evolve into a nuke/no nuke debate like every other WWII thread does.
 

SteveWD40

Member
WW2 featured the birth of the modern special forces, I always was most interested in the Africa campaign, despite my Grandfather serving in the RAF over Germany (he was a flight Engineer on the Lancasters in the Pathfinder squadron).


sas-north-africa.jpg


SAS and LRDG (long range desert group) had the Germans convinced there was a Battalion tearing up their airfields, when it was about 30 men in all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Stirling
 
I thought by that time Japan was nearly out of food

...MINIMAL difference? you CAN NOT compare a bombed city too a city that was nuked.

Out of food, bullets, and medicinal supplies were same conditions in Okinawa and Iwo Jima. They did not surrender then.

Also one photo is Osaka one is Tokyo and one is Hiroshima. Look at the three, the destruction is nearly the same.

hiroshima_wideweb__430x323.jpg


10.-Osaka.jpg


bombed_out_tokyo.jpg
 

Bellamin

Member
Let's keep pretending the Japanese were in any way willing to negotiate a peace treaty and overlook their "to the last man" fighting mentality. Let's continue to overlook Japanese Death Camps and events like the Bataan Death March (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_Death_March). Let's keep letting modern Japan jade our perception of what the generals in WWII were dealing with.

This x1000. The Japanese military were involved with medical experimentations on prisoners of war, cannibalism, and practices of barbarity that claimed more lives than Fat Man and Little Boy. If you want to feel bad about something, feel bad that the war began in the first place. It birthed more horrors than just atomic weaponry.
 

Sober

Member
Why isn't Canada mentioned in that infograph? I am pretty sure Canada decided to help and declared war against the axis on our own terms and not like in World War I where we were in a war because England was in war.
Canada never even had any meaningful conscription (mostly at the tail end of the war when it didn't really matter) so everyone was pretty much a volunteer.

I also read somewhere that on the Italian Front, Germans were scared shitless of certain Canadian regiments. Can't remember what though.

That plus we just strolled past Juno Beach like bosses on bicycles and stuff. I think I still remember a few Canadian-isms from WW2, but forgot all of it a long time ago. Hopefully it'll come back.
 

KillGore

Member
Great topic, will contribute more when things get a little bit more heated up, but here foes my thought:

Although it's unfortunate, I think I agree with dropping the bombs. It was either them or us, that's how humanity works (unfortunately). If the Japanese would've continued, who knows how many more people, including civilians, would they have killed throughout Asia. I never understood how it's "bad" to drop two bombs that kill hundreds of thousands of people and it's "ok" to drop thousands of bombs, send thousands of troops to kill hundreds of thousands of people. Is it because they killed civilians? The Japanese weren't discriminating between civilians and military people so why shouldn't the Americans do the same? I LOVE Japan and the Japanese culture/people but not even they can deny their people were pretty ruthless before. They were, and still are, a country with a LOT of pride and they preferred to kill themselves than being killed by the enemy. We could see that train of thought ever since the samurais, up until the kamikaze.
 

TheNatural

My Member!
I just watched the World at War documentary for about 20 something hours a few weeks ago. Wow, it really is a must watch for anyone. It really puts things into perspective on how war really is and how the fog of war and with what goes on during war, you can barely distinguish between the good and the bad. All I know is Hitler was responsible for the most deaths in human history because he used his army like pawns, and then the world reacted to that, and people on both sides of the line had their lives cut short because of him.

There's no "clean and virtuous" way to win a war, and all involved have innocent blood on their hands and that was the only way to win the war.
 

MutFox

Banned
I love how Americans justify the Atomic Bombs...
The justification in 1, maybe... Both?
The 2nd didn't need to be dropped, they just did it for the sake of doing it.
Lives mean nothing to some people.

Just glad my Grandfather survived the Nagasaki bomb, being 1.4KM away.
(I wouldn't have been born if he didn't survive.)
 
Canada is always criminally underrated when it comes to WW2 discussions.

Love this thread though - will follow intently.
 

Kabouter

Member
I love how Americans justify the Atomic Bombs...
The justification in 1, maybe... Both?
The 2nd didn't need to be dropped, they just did it for the sake of doing it.
Lives mean nothing to some people.

Just glad my Grandfather survived the Nagasaki bomb, being 1.4KM away.
(I wouldn't have been born if he didn't survive.)

What makes you believe it's just Americans?

Canada is always criminally underrated when it comes to WW2 discussions.

Love this thread though - will follow intently.

Don't worry, <3 Canada. Village I grew up in has a Canadian war cemetery, so there would be veterans visiting every year and lots of decorations everywhere with Canadian flags and what not. Don't worry, this country (the Netherlands) hasn't forgotten that much of it if not most of it was liberated by Canadian troops.
 

Az987

all good things
Hey, does anyone know any website where I could look up a specific (US) WWII vet's combat history for free?

I've always wondered what my grandfather did to get his medals but I can't find anything really.
 

TheNatural

My Member!
I love how Americans justify the Atomic Bombs...
The justification in 1, maybe... Both?
The 2nd didn't need to be dropped, they just did it for the sake of doing it.
Lives mean nothing to some people.

Just glad my Grandfather survived the Nagasaki bomb, being 1.4KM away.
(I wouldn't have been born if he didn't survive.)

You think a bombing raid on a land invasion in Japan wouldn't have resulted in just as many deaths?

The Japanese were a brutal, unforgiving army that frowned on any type of surrender at all. The battle for Burma showed callous disdain for British surrender and treated the POW's like dirt. They enslaved them, and ran them until their flesh was gone and they were nothing but bone and dead.

I feel bad for any innocent people that died, but that was everywhere. The time for consideration for your populace was before the war, and the Japanese Empire threw that out the window as soon as they had designs on taking over Asia and bombing the US naval fleet to do it. The blood was on those people in charges hands at the time, not anyone elses.
 

Kabouter

Member
I guess watching documentaries on the subject have skewed my view.
Guessing there are many who share the same view.

Yes, there are, and I feel you should blame Japan's leaders at the time for the bombs, and the war as a whole, not the United States. Japan's leaders were delusional, to quote myself from a 2011 thread:

I always liked this quote by the Japanese foreign minister's aide who was present at the signing of the official surrender:

I saw many thousands of sailors everywhere on this huge vessel, and just in front of us were delegates of the victorious powers in their military uniforms, glittering with gold. Looking at them I wondered how Japan ever thought she could defeat all those nations

It seems like such an obvious truth in retrospect, yet one undoubtedly not so obvious to a nation at war for so long, and under the influence of militarists for longer still.
 

yacobod

Banned
I love how Americans justify the Atomic Bombs...
The justification in 1, maybe... Both?
The 2nd didn't need to be dropped, they just did it for the sake of doing it.
Lives mean nothing to some people.

Just glad my Grandfather survived the Nagasaki bomb, being 1.4KM away.
(I wouldn't have been born if he didn't survive.)

That being said it was probably a more humane then what happened to Berlin at the end of the war.
 

MutFox

Banned
Yes, there are, and I feel you should blame Japan's leaders at the time for the bombs, and the war as a whole, not the United States.

Oh I definitely blame the leaders, but the 2nd bomb didn't have to be dropped.
Though if it wasn't dropped, I wouldn't have been born.
 

Darklord

Banned
When Darwin was being bombed my Grandpa was there. They didn't have enough guns so they gave them brooms to march with so Japanese planes would think they were all armed. Apparently one of my great uncles(is that a thing?) was in one of the most brutal battles for the Australians but never mentioned.

I love how Americans justify the Atomic Bombs...
The justification in 1, maybe... Both?
The 2nd didn't need to be dropped, they just did it for the sake of doing it.
Lives mean nothing to some people.

Just glad my Grandfather survived the Nagasaki bomb, being 1.4KM away.
(I wouldn't have been born if he didn't survive.)

I fully support it. They invaded Australia, to hell with them(not now obviously). They warned them to surrender, they refused, they warned they'd drop it, they did. They warned AGAIN they'd drop it on a city, they did. Blame Japan for refusing to surrender. The lives lost by a full scale invasion of Japan would have been MASSIVE.
 

MutFox

Banned
Don't worry, <3 Canada. Village I grew up in has a Canadian war cemetery, so there would be veterans visiting every year and lots of decorations everywhere with Canadian flags and what not. Don't worry, this country (the Netherlands) hasn't forgotten that much of it if not most of it was liberated by Canadian troops.

I think Canada still receives Tulips every year from the Netherlands due to this.
 

TheNatural

My Member!
It's amazing that the Germans used them and the Romanians to guard their flanks at Stalingrad. Operation Uranus took them out and it was the beginning of the end for the Wehrmacht

The beginning of the end when Hitler was doggedly insistent to shell Stalingrad into the ground to take it, and Russians fought tooth and nail hand to hand combat in the hselled ruins of the city to prevent it. At one point, they had most of Stalingrad taken, and Hitler was at a diner bragging about how he had taken a city with Stalin's name on it.

I wonder what would have happened if Hitler deferred and saved his army from being encircled there, they probably could have taken Moscow they were so close to it.
 

demon

I don't mean to alarm you but you have dogs on your face
I love how people act as though Hiroshima and Nagasaki were the only cities destroyed by bombings with tens of thousands of people dead in WWII, Japanese or otherwise.
 

MechDX

Member
I would like to contribute the greatest fighter plane ever created:
The P51D Mustang. The plane was a thing of beauty and openly represented the Allied powers of Great Britian and the United States. When the mustang was orginally introduced to the RAF, its pilots felt it was a great plane but underpowered. So after several modifications it evolved into the P51D. While the base plane was designed in the U.S. the engine was a British built Rolls Royce engine that was used in the Spitfire.

It finally gave the Allied powers a long range escort fighter for the Lancaster and B17 Flying Fortress bombing squads over Germany. Which prompted this awesome quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang

The numerical superiority of the USAAF fighters, superb flying characteristics of the P-51 and pilot proficiency helped cripple the Luftwaffe's fighter force. As a result, the fighter threat to US and later British bombers, was greatly diminished by July 1944. Reichmarshal Hermann Göring, commander of the German Luftwaffe during the war was quoted as saying, "When I saw Mustangs over Berlin, I knew the jig was up

north-american-p-51-mustang-2.jpg

GA-S%20KH774.jpg

613768-bigthumbnail.jpg
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom