A few questions about WW2.

[MontyB]

I've made the same comment in other Forums! :-D I guess it's because incineration is an established way of killing vs vaporization, or because it's overshadowed by the New Tech attacks (publicity of Hiroshima/Nagasaki vs Tokyo fire bombing)

It is not because of vaporisation it is because the atomic bombs were still killing years after the war.

I agree with the general principle that the use of the atomic bombs was justifiable on the grounds that an invasion would have cost both sides far more lives than the bombs did although there is of course the argument that Japan was on the verge of surrendering anyway once the Emperors role was secured but we wont go there.

 

[udaka]

If US troops land on Japan full scale , it need to moblise 3 millions or 5 millions soldiers at least .The question is,where the US could find so huge amounts soldiers under good training and battle expeirnce?

In pacific battlefield the US marine under good training took on the duty on gound conflict. If land on Japan, the US and British only use millions of recruits never expreince the cruel battle.

You can imagine what happen?

 

[udaka]

US fleet were using 450mm guns blow the Japs on Okinawa, Iwo Jima.

It was the main firepowwer support means of US in pacific. I want to know, the US ever use these horrable weapon bombard the German on Normandy beach?

 

[udaka]

In pacify battlefield, the Japanese VS west countries ,play a final battle on navy and air power, the land force of both side just support roles in paficify war.

In China battlefied, Chinese army VS Japanese, play many cruel campaigns of Chinese troops and Japanese land force. The land force were leading role.

 

[VDKMS]

If there would have been an invasion of Japan by allied troops it certainly would be very bloody but also victorious. B-29's would level every Japanese city if necessary. Japanese society would have been on the brink of extinction. The A-bombs prevented that. Hirohito took a wise decision and layed the first foundation of what would become the third largest economic power in the world today.

 

[udaka]

[FONT=宋体]Sorry, I find another date from internet, steel productions of Japan homeland were 2.05 millions tons in 1945,not 0.98 millions. Perhaps 2.05 millions were production of whole year. 0.98 mill[/FONT][FONT=宋体]i[/FONT][FONT=宋体]ons were until Aug[/FONT][FONT=宋体]u[/FONT][FONT=宋体]st of 1945.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体] [/FONT]
[FONT=宋体] Ok ,even use 0.98 millions ton steel ca[/FONT][FONT=宋体]l[/FONT][FONT=宋体]culate ,If I am a Japanese -I would:[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]1 use 100 of thousands steel built 50000 75mm-150mm cannons and mortars.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]2 use 100 of thousands steel built rifles and machines-guns. Even on 10 kilograms make two rifles,1 tons steel can made 200 rifles. 100 of thousands of tons can 20 millions rifle.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]3 use 100 of thousands tons steel made tanks. Presume on tanks consume 20 tons steel. It can built 5000 tanks.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]4 use 50 of thousands tons steel made plane. On one plane consume 3 tons steel, It can bui[/FONT][FONT=宋体]ld[/FONT][FONT=宋体] 16666 planes.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]5 use 150 of thousands of tons built the transport submarine, not the battle subma[/FONT][FONT=宋体]r[/FONT][FONT=宋体]ines. Beca[/FONT][FONT=宋体]s[/FONT][FONT=宋体]se many transport ships were sunk by US in ww2.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]In contrast, use transport submarine is hard to discover by ally navy. more safe than transport ships. According to one submarine consume 2000 tons,it can be bu[/FONT][FONT=宋体]i[/FONT][FONT=宋体]l[/FONT][FONT=宋体]d[/FONT][FONT=宋体]s 75 submarines.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体] [/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]6 use 500 of thousands tons of steel manufacture armors,include shells,bullets,mine,water mines.In 1942, Japanese product 27 millions shells of cannon and mortars. [/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体] [/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]Of course, my ca[/FONT][FONT=宋体]l[/FONT][FONT=宋体]culation just best of condition merely.In fact ,in air st[/FONT][FONT=宋体]r[/FONT][FONT=宋体]ike condition and blocked by US navy, many factories of Japan were d[/FONT][FONT=宋体]e[/FONT][FONT=宋体]stroyed. In that condition, the Japanese hard to built 16666 planes in 1945.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]

 

[udaka]

[FONT=宋体]If Japanese built 150000 tons transp[/FONT][FONT=宋体]or[/FONT][FONT=宋体]t submarines , they can ship the resou[/FONT][FONT=宋体]rc[/FONT][FONT=宋体]e from their colonies. Ship irons and coals from Manchuria and [/FONT][FONT=宋体]K[/FONT][FONT=宋体]orea[/FONT][FONT=宋体]n[/FONT][FONT=宋体]. Ship petrol[/FONT][FONT=宋体]eum[/FONT][FONT=宋体],Palm oil,,Copper, tin, aluminum, manganese from South-east[/FONT][FONT=宋体] [/FONT][FONT=宋体]Asia,like Vietnam ,Filipin[/FONT][FONT=宋体]o[/FONT][FONT=宋体],Indon[/FONT][FONT=宋体]esia[/FONT][FONT=宋体] ,Tailand.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体] [/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]On my ca[/FONT][FONT=宋体]l[/FONT][FONT=宋体]culation, 150000 tons transport submarines can ship 50000 tons supplies one sail. From Japan homeland ship to [/FONT][FONT=宋体]K[/FONT][FONT=宋体]orea and Manchuria need 1 day. one sail (come and back) need two days. One months can finish 15 voyages. 15* 50000=0.75 million tons supplies in one month. That is said ,the Japan could maintain his war machines even in the 1945.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]
[FONT=宋体] [/FONT]
[FONT=宋体] [/FONT]
[FONT=宋体]Conclusion, the US want to defeat the Japan was very very hard if no atomic bombs.[/FONT][FONT=宋体][/FONT]

 

[pottsy]

Of course, the Yankees dare not to face final battle on Japanese homeland, killing 200,000 civilians with nuclear weapons, this wasn't a commendable and honorable act.

There was never going to be a final battle...


Did you know that 40 years after the 'bombings' brain cancers went threw the roof in Hiroshima and nagasaki? That the true number of casulties has a zero or two more on the end than the one publicised?

Japan had no ability to make war, was surrounded by russia, britian, ausytrali and america, could of been starved out. Earlier on the americans had experiemented with fire bombing, they used planes designed to fly above flack to do it, their commanders complained at the needless waste of thier crews to evaluate the effectivness of low level fire bombing. Something similar happenned with the two nukes, a new form of warfare was being evaluated.
Alot of money had been invested in the manhattan project, the investors needed to see results.

Its sad that 70 years later we're still; wasting our time debating a lie..

 

[lljadw]

Stop whining and blaming and whitewashing the Japanese : they started the war,they would suffer the consequences . The bombs were a legal and justified weapon against a legal and justified object,because they were saving allied weapons ;even after Horoshima/Nagasaki,the Japanese were murdering allied POW's.

 

[pottsy]

Stop whining and blaming and whitewashing the Japanese : they started the war,they would suffer the consequences . The bombs were a legal and justified weapon against a legal and justified object,because they were saving allied weapons ;even after Horoshima/Nagasaki,the Japanese were murdering allied POW's.

Then why was overlord put back a year and the divisions involved cut back by 2/3rds?


If the ending of the pacific war in such a dramatic way was legal and justified? Surely in 43 we should of ended germany as quickly as possible?

 

[BritinBritain]

In my opinion the Japanese deserved everything they got, having lost a family member to Japanese barbarism when he was a POW at Sandekan. My Granddad and Grandmother never got over his death, it tore them apart. I worked with a former Jap POW, he was always in pain and off sick, he died well before his time due to the inhumane treatment handed out by the bastards. As far as I am concerned Japan should have been nuked until it sank under the sea.

I don't give a toss that you don't agree with me, so don't bother with a come back.

 

[lljadw]

Then why was overlord put back a year and the divisions involved cut back by 2/3rds?


If the ending of the pacific war in such a dramatic way was legal and justifi


1)Overlord is of topic for Hiroshima

2)Overlord was not put back a year: Overlord was delayed in 1943 because a successful Overlord was not possible in 1943

 

[pottsy]

Then why was overlord put back a year and the divisions involved cut back by 2/3rds?


If the ending of the pacific war in such a dramatic way was legal and justified

1)Overlord is of topic for Hiroshima

2)Overlord was not put back a year: Overlord was delayed in 1943 because a successful Overlord was not possible in 1943

No overlord has everything to do with this thread, i can't see how you could possibly think otherwise,considering the OP and how the discussion has panned out??

Even more to do with your claim the atomic bombing of hiroshima was legal and justified.The americans scaled back the militarisationof thier economy almost a year before the planeed 1943 invasion of western europe.Heck they were waiting for as long as possible before hitting Italy,

So there is no reason why Japan couldn't of been embargoed.They were less of a threat to the world in july 45 than germany was in late 42 /early 43 when America scaled back its military economy.

 

[pottsy]

In my opinion the Japanese deserved everything they got, having lost a family member to Japanese barbarism when he was a POW at Sandekan. My Granddad and Grandmother never got over his death, it tore them apart. I worked with a former Jap POW, he was always in pain and off sick, he died well before his time due to the inhumane treatment handed out by the bastards. As far as I am concerned Japan should have been nuked until it sank under the sea.

I don't give a toss that you don't agree with me, so don't bother with a come back.

Some victim or ancestor of a victim of british attrocities before Sandakan could very post thier take on it and say as far as they're concerened they deserved all they got.

That will do nothing to help educate and prevent future attrocities and the avoidance and understanding of war.

 

[lljadw]

No overlord has everything to do with this thread, i can't see how you could possibly think otherwise,considering the OP and how the discussion has panned out??

Even more to do with your claim the atomic bombing of hiroshima was legal and justified.The americans scaled back the militarisationof thier economy almost a year before the planeed 1943 invasion of western europe.Heck they were waiting for as long as possible before hitting Italy,

So there is no reason why Japan couldn't of been embargoed.They were less of a threat to the world in july 45 than germany was in late 42 /early 43 when America scaled back its military economy.

An embargo of Japan (you mean : a blockade?) would not result in a quick Japanese surrender,and meanwhile US soldiers would day,and allied POW's were murdered(there is a picture available onthe web of the decapitation of a Australian POW,AFTER the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki)

H + N were not only legal and justified,it was also the damned duty of Truman in his function of US commander in chief.It was his damned duty to use everything that could hasten the end of the war and save the lives of US sodiers .Otherwise he would be guilty of derelict .

 

[lljadw]

In my opinion the Japanese deserved everything they got, having lost a family member to Japanese barbarism when he was a POW at Sandekan. My Granddad and Grandmother never got over his death, it tore them apart. I worked with a former Jap POW, he was always in pain and off sick, he died well before his time due to the inhumane treatment handed out by the bastards. As far as I am concerned Japan should have been nuked until it sank under the sea.

I don't give a toss that you don't agree with me, so don't bother with a come back.

Of course,he will accept the same argument from a survivor of My Lai = exterminate all Americans,of a Kenyan survivor of the atrocities during the MauMau war,of a survivor of Bloody Sunday,etc,etc .

The conclusion is that he is pleading for the depopulation of the planet earth .

 

[BritinBritain]

Some victim or ancestor of a victim of british attrocities before Sandakan could very post thier take on it and say as far as they're concerened they deserved all they got.

That will do nothing to help educate and prevent future attrocities and the avoidance and understanding of war.

Quite frankly, you are an idiot.

Of course,he will accept the same argument from a survivor of My Lai = exterminate all Americans,of a Kenyan survivor of the atrocities during the MauMau war,of a survivor of Bloody Sunday,etc,etc .

The conclusion is that he is pleading for the depopulation of the planet earth .

At least we agree on something.

 

[JOC]

Best ground attack aircraft WW2

1. Why didn't the allies reverse engineer the 88mm flack gun? It seems to have been an amazing weapon.

2. Did the Allies not worry about tanks as tank killers so much but just for Infantry support because they had air superiority and good anti tank artillery?

3. The mg 42 had a rapid rate of fire. Did this cause any problems in carrying enough ammunition because of the speed in going through it?

4. Which was the best ground attack aircraft? The Stormovic or the Mustang?

5. Did Goering lose a testicle in the beer hall revolt in Munich in 1920? Did the morphine he became addicted to because of this, become the cause of his many errors as a leader? If so, is this the most damage one testicle has ever caused in history?

4) The best ground attack aircraft in WW2 was the P-47 Thunderbolt. The Germans feared this plane which had was heavily armed with eight 50 caliber machine guns and could carry could explosive rockets with a force similar to a 105 mm artillery shells or a significant bomb load of 2,500 pounds. The plane could also take massive punishment and was by far the toughest fighter bomber of WW2. It was also produced in massive numbers between 43 to 45.;-)

 

[George]

The P-47 was better because the P-51 had a water cooled engine that resulted in a radiator that was vulnerable on ground attack missions.

 

[JOC]

P47 ruled the battlefield

The best American ground attack plane was the P47 Thunderbolt. Radial engines could absorb a lot and still bring you home. The P47 was a flying tank, able to absorb a lot and very fast. In fact if you mounted the gatling gun that the A10 Thunderbolt has on it and could shoot thru the prop, it might surprise a few tanks , even today.

I agree. The P -47 had 8 machine guns and could carry 2500 pounds of bombs or 5 (127 mm) high velocity rockets. This plane with bulletproof glass could take tremendous punishment and was the best ground attack plane in WW2. Thunderbolt pilots claimed to have destroyed 86,000 railroad cars, 9,000 locomotives, 6,000 armored fighting vehicles, and 68,000 trucks. It was also an excellent fighter and produced > 3750 air to air kills.