Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

Banzai charges

Discussion in 'Land Warfare in the Pacific' started by Class of '42, Jun 16, 2020.

  1. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    9,504
    Likes Received:
    3,037
    Hmmm...bit dubious on the nukes...American nukes have been on Australian soil, riding on the platforms (sea and air) for decades. It would be a difficult task to make them in Australia and keep it secret, so they would likely have to be bought...and by today’s standards it can be difficult to identify a nuke (particularly a small tactical nuke) by sight (“I saw a nuke”)...what does that mean? Prior to Trump, we wouldn’t even need them as the US would supply any “needed” nukes themselves...
    As a weapon for defence however, tactical nukes would be worth their weight in gold.
     
  2. Christopher67

    Christopher67 Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2020
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    30
    I questioned her...and she backed off. I think she was telling the truth. I've got no way of proving it, have I? And who would believe me anyway?
     
  3. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    9,504
    Likes Received:
    3,037
    I’ve heard plenty of stories from soldiers, (I’m a smoker) and they beleive what they are saying too...scuttlebutt or furphies are rife in the services. Everywhere in the world...I’m not pretending to know either way, just what is (far) more likely.
     
  4. Christopher67

    Christopher67 Member

    Joined:
    May 25, 2020
    Messages:
    88
    Likes Received:
    30
    if theres one couuntry that needs nukes for self defense it's Australia. 1,000s of kilometers of coastline, far too few people to fight a modern war of attrition, Our ammunition alone would not last the distance, and what are fifty tanks and 75 Fa-A 18s going to achieve?

    I personally think we should do the same thing as New Zealand. Downsize our conventional forces to almost nothing.

    The logical next step would be to purchase or construct 10 nuke submarines, with warheads included. Going public would make our much bigger neighbours think twice, and we might even be able to fight off an attack from China as well, without any help needed from the good ol Yanks.

    New Zealand balanced their budget a long time ago. We are at the economic mercy of the Chinese. That needs to change, and going nuclear might just be the very move that balances our budget, so that we can tell the Chinese to "stuff it".

    We spent a TRILLION dollars on constructing replacements for our Collins class submarines, and the replacements are going to be diesal electrics....outdated

    We could have bought nuke subs from the yanks for 30 billion each, and saved ourselves a whole lot of cash, an incidentally acquired a proven weapons system to boot.
     
  5. CAC

    CAC Ace of Spades

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2010
    Messages:
    9,504
    Likes Received:
    3,037
    And you start an arms race in the Asia-pacific...and everything that goes with that path.
     
  6. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ..so Ichiki's unit was more or less wiped out and you say it wasn't disorganized??!!!!
     
    Last edited: Jun 20, 2020
  7. belasar

    belasar Court Jester

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    8,515
    Likes Received:
    1,176
    I think you are looking at this backwards. Certainly any unit that suffers that many casualties will become 'disorganized' by those losses. The question is was the detachment disorganized prior to contact with the Marines or were they poorly deployed due to poor intelligence on Ichiki's part. My reading on the matter was that Ichiki had not expected to meet a organized defense where he did with it only being a advanc patrol of outpost/picket.
     
  8. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    You wrote it was a "disorganized assault", implying that the assault was carried out in a disorganized fashion.

    You did not write "the Ichiki Detachment was disorganized after his assaults failed." Which is now what you are now saying.

    So which is it?
    1.) A disorganized assault

    Or

    2.) Disorganized after it's assaults failed.
     
  9. Class of '42

    Class of '42 Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2020
    Messages:
    492
    Likes Received:
    217
    The Japanese banzai attack on Attu Island in the Aleutians in May 1943, caught the Americans by surprise and came very very close in succeeding their objective.

    Battle of Attu
     
  10. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    both
     
  11. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Well they, you are wrong on the first count, but right on the second.
     
  12. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    night time/jungle/etc = disorganized ...you even said ''poor intelligence'' ....
    ...it's hard enough to stay organized in the day time in the jungle, when you can see....
    ..think realistically--not like it's a board game

    Do or Die Men ..page 166/etc:
    ''it was pitch black''
    ''they [ the Japanese ] didn't even have scouts out''
    ''the Ichiki attack was just plain dumb''

    ...they ran into the barbed wire--couldn't have been that organized
    jungle--pitch black-there is going to be disorganization....just like at Edson's Ridge
     
  13. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Not if you are trained for night combat, as the Ichiki Detachment was.

    Nope, not me. I said "poor planning".

    Ichiki's intelligence was actually excellent. The Japanese had an observation outpost that was radioing back to Rabaul daily reports. They provided not only the Marines defensive layout, but also accurate positions of the Marine artillery.

    Now comes the fly in the ointment...
    A large Marine patrol comes across Ichiki's commo outfit laying phone wire, and attacked, killing most of them. Amongst the captured items were several detailed maps showing the Marine defenses & Ichiki's plan of attack the weak defenses of the Tenaru/Ilu River. When the patrol returned with their finds, Vandegrift immediately strengthened those particular defenses.

    Thus, when Ichiki hit the area, it was not a weak spot, but a strong point.

    Well, the Ichiki Detachment seems to have been fairly well organized. The attack opened with mortar and machine gun fire. Once that barrage lifted, Ichiki's first wave charged across.

    Does any one have scouts out for a bayonet charge? Never heard of that before.

    Scouts were not present, because they had already arrived. There was sporadic firing fire some time before the attack got underway.

    Was the attack plan dumb? Certainly for attacking a strong point it was. However, Ichiki did not know this weak point had been reinforced. Still, had the position not be reinforced, the Japanese most likely would have carried the night. But, that is the fog of war for you.

    I believe Japanese SOP was to have troops lay on the wire while the rest run on top of the backs of those troops. Cutting the wire is time consuming and will delay the attack. I doubt it is much fun for the guy laying on the wire.

    Your joking right?

    Ichiki had a simple straight forward plan - attack a weak point at night, destroy it, then continue on to recapture the airfield.

    Kawaguchi is a different kettle of fish.

    He was under time pressure, Rabaul demanded that his attack be carried out that day. He came up with a complicated plan involving 3 simultaneous attacks. However, he conceived this plan while he was still in the Shortlands, before even seeing Gudalcanal. Moving his troops through the jungle and swamps of Guadalcanal took far longer than he intended. Further, communications were lost between the three prongs, as the radios proved problematic. As such, the three-pronged simultaneous attack came off in as two separate attacks-one unit was hopelessly out of place and never did attack.

    Edited for spell checking errors.
     
    Last edited: Jun 22, 2020
    belasar likes this.
  14. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ...night time attack in a jungle is going to be disorganized no matter what .....
    ..you are confusing good planning with the actual/realistic battle/movements/etc
     
  15. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ..no, no ,no .....it doesn't concern the three prongs--it concerns the squads, platoons, companies of any of the prongs---the companies/etc were and are going to have difficulty navigating and traversing the difficult jungle terrain --you are not going to have an organized assault by the whole units .....

    '''''Due to the devilish jungle, the brigade was scattered all over and was completely beyond my control. In my whole life I have never felt so disappointed and helpless''''
    Battle of Edson's Ridge - Wikipedia
    bold mine
    Ichiki same problems
     
  16. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Except, Ichiki was not attacking through jungle, he was attacking across a sand bar - if you go right your in water, if you go left your in water - kinda narrows down what direction you should be heading in. Further, Ichiki trained his force specifically for night bayonet charges, it was a tactic he favored. Also, his force was far smaller than Kawaguchi's making it far easier to control. Ichiki had his unit together at the start of the attack. Kawaguchi's 3 battalions of his main attack prong were spread all over, with only one battalion actually in place to start the attack(Kawaguchi's battalion and IIRC, Ota's were not in position.)

    How am I confusing "good planning", when I said the attack was poorly planned?

    Let me ask you this...How was Ichiki's attack disorganized?
     
    belasar likes this.
  17. Takao

    Takao Ace

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2010
    Messages:
    10,103
    Likes Received:
    2,574
    Location:
    Reading, PA
    Ichiki had 900 men and he kept them together. Kawaguchi had 6,200 men and he split them up into 3 assault units. Kawaguchi also let his own assault unit fall apart. Now, which commander is going to have a much harder time controlling the whole? Which commander is going to have a much easier time controlling the whole?

    Ichiki is attacking across a sand bar, Kawaguchi is attacking through jungle.
    Is it harder to get lost on a sand bar, or is it harder to get lost in the jungle?

    '''''Due to the devilish jungle, the brigade was scattered all over and was completely beyond my control. In my whole life I have never felt so disappointed and helpless''''
    Battle of Edson's Ridge - Wikipedia
    bold mine
    Ichiki same problems[/QUOTE]
    Ichiki did not have the same problems.

    Ichiki had 900 men vs Kawaguchi's 6,200.

    Ichiki had 1 unit vs. Kawaguchi's 3 units.

    Ichiki had trained his men thoroughly in night bayonet charges, they were his specialty. Kawaguchi did not.

    Ichiki kept his detachment together. Kawaguchi let a battalion get away from him.

    Ichiki attacked across a sand bar. Kawaguchi attacked through jungle.

    Do I need to make this all in bold & caps so that you will understand the many differences between the two?
     
  18. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    Ichiki did not have the same problems.

    Ichiki had 900 men vs Kawaguchi's 6,200.

    Ichiki had 1 unit vs. Kawaguchi's 3 units.

    Ichiki had trained his men thoroughly in night bayonet charges, they were his specialty. Kawaguchi did not.

    Ichiki kept his detachment together. Kawaguchi let a battalion get away from him.

    Ichiki attacked across a sand bar. Kawaguchi attacked through jungle.

    Do I need to make this all in bold & caps so that you will understand the many differences between the two?[/QUOTE]


    this is very simple and undeniable
    1. the battle was one-sided!!! the USMC massacred the Japanese--you do agree with this, yes?
    2. here's the big one---once they hit the barbed wire--that's it baby!!!!!! disorganization
    ---no more organization--not only disorganization, but the momentum is halted--and when the momentum fails--more disorganization --which leads to a -------------------------------------massacre = disorganization--just like Custer

    from Hell's Island by Jersey page 209:
    as I stated before --- ''''the night was pitch black and it was raining''''
    ----- if you have ever been in a pitch black jungle, you know you can't keep your unit organized, especially in an assault.....this isn't 2020 where everyone has cell phone communication

    page 209 again:
    ''''the marines'' [ sic ], however, had a primitive secret weapon that was effective only at dark----a band of rusty barbed wire'''

    page 210--here is the critical point for my #2 above:
    '''in the darkness, at least two companies of the attackers became partly enmeshed in the barbed wire''''

    .......two companies enmeshed in the wire--and you say it was an organized assault??!!--again--two companies enmeshed in the wire---
    ----the Japanese didn't know it was there and/or could not see it = massive disorganization/disorganized assault
    ...I remember reading many times the effectiveness of the barbed wire

    ..he kept his unit '''together'' UNTIL the assault = so what??!!...--once the assault began, it became disorganized for the many reasons I initially have stated -so--the assault was disorganized as I stated in the first place and you disagreed with

    here is what I said, and stated during the whole thread:
    ''''.I'm saying not every Japanese soldier directly assaulted'''
    ''''please prove that every one of Ichikis Japanese soldiers assaulted/attacked....''''


    ....directly regarding the OP and my points = many were stopped at the barbed wired = many did not make it to the point of using bayonets/banzai--because of the many reasons stated = barbed wired/terrain/pitch black conditions/afraid/disorganization/etc
    ...this is exactly what I stated about assaults/banzais/bayonet charges ..again--it's not a board game

    ...two companies enmeshed in the barbed wire---wow----not 2 or 3, or a dozen soldiers.....but two companies---game over--this is exactly what I've been stating the whole time

    bold/caps mine for emphasis only
    ..I see you don't back up or strengthen your points with quotes/links/etc.......?
     
    Last edited: Jun 27, 2020
  19. harolds

    harolds Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    1,898
    Likes Received:
    372
    Excuse me for getting into this discussion, but I think both of you are basically saying that neither commander exactly distinguished themselves by their tactical acumen. I've long held the opinion that JIA commanders, with some notable exceptions, were not nearly as good as their American/British/German and even Soviet counterparts.
     
  20. bronk7

    bronk7 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2013
    Messages:
    4,753
    Likes Received:
    328
    Location:
    MIDWEST
    ..another thing--at least at Bloody Ridge, they pushed the Marines back --while Ichiki just got massacred
    ..more to come--thanks
     

Share This Page