Gentlemen, calm down!

Here is a question for our US postees. Why did the USAAF conduct "pure" strategic bombing in Europe against the Germans yet in the Pacific conducted area bombing in daylight? Why was there this doctrinal change?

Secondly, Mito has a point about the state of Japan in 1945. The US has never really evaluated the situation in Japan in mid-45, partly because the evidence presented about the costs of invasion and the Japanese capacity to resist was over-inflated. An acceptance that the Japs were weaker then opens up all the questions about whether the Bomb was necessary. It has become almost an article of faith in the US that it was: probably borne out ogf guilt if the alternative was the case. I've posted about this before, my opinion is well known. I think, apart from some fanatics, the Japs would have surrendered quicker than most people think: Hirohito was ready for it: an invasion would have been a trigger for his peace party to force the issue. If they were so fanatical, why didn't they flee to the hills in 1945 anyway? Were there raids against US occupation forces?

Jumbo

__________________
"Capital! We're nearly out of ammunition! Now we can get at them with the bayonet!" General Paddy Gough, 1st Sikh War

Hi Jumbo: The change in bombing was partly due to the type of enemy the US was encountering.

As far as an actual invasion versus the A-bomb, the potential casualty list warranted using the bombs instead. The Japanese had proven time and again that they were fanatical in their fighting and were not about to let US forces land on mainland Japan without a fight. Take Iwo Jima for example, the defenders there knew there would be no help coming yet 22,000 Japanese held off 70,000 US Marines for 36 days while inflicting 25,851 casualties (1 in 3 would be killed or wounded). The time needed for US troops to take mainland Japan would have been longer than 36 days therefore sending the casualty list into the stratosphere. It is already a fact that America was not happy with the casualty results from Iwo Jima and one can imagine how they would have felt about taking Japan itself. Therefore, the bombs gave the US the victory they wanted without having to sacrifice more lives. Also, the casualties would have been higher for the Japanese had an actual invasion taken place.

__________________
The soldier above all others prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war. General Douglas Macarthur

Steve

What was the difference? Why was the USAAF prepared to undertake carpet bombing of Japan but not of Germany? Saying that they wew "different" doesn't wash.

Again it is not the soldiers you are trying to convince to make peace but the Japanese leadership.

Personally I think that the US should have just starved the buggers out, but I've had this argument elsewhere and I tire of repeating myself.

Jumbo

__________________
"Capital! We're nearly out of ammunition! Now we can get at them with the bayonet!" General Paddy Gough, 1st Sikh War

i didn't think the US did purely strategic bombing in Germany...they contantly bombed population centers. They did the same thing in Japan, bombing Japanese population centers in and around industrial areas. As for Tokyo...that was no different then carpet bombing of Berlin.

hmmmm yeah i don't think that would have happened right away...but when casualties were mounting and the country was getting eaten up i think the emporer would probably have done something...but i can't even begin to guess how soon or deep into the invasion that would have been! As for being fanatical, i think they were basically that way at the order of the emporer. Once the emporer commanded them to peace...that command along with the mob mentality created the peaceful scene that happened. Also i think the Japanese culture played a big role in why the country followed the surrender to the dime.

__________________
Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events. -- Sir Winston Churchill

Ron

In Germany the USAF bombed as accurately as possible against industrial targets and quite deliberately shied from any form of area bombing. If there was low cloud cover they would try to bomb by radar (often inaccurate but at least they were trying) and I can't think of an instance where they delibertately targeted housing or civilian areas. The RAF had, by 1941, become wedded to area bombing at night.

Now over to the Pacific, where we have massive firebomb raids on Japanese cities. My question remains Why? Was it racist? Did the US still see the Germans as civilised whilst the Japanese were not (see pre-war treatment and Bugs Bunny cartoons no longer shown)? Was there a doctrinal reason? I don't know but would like some serious evidence.

As for Olympic or A-Bomb I'm not sure how much of US historiography is a smokescreen and how much is prepared to throw out preconcieved ideas. It's rather like saying Britain never considered Peace with Hitler or the Dunkirk myth: the need for these historical "comfort blankets" is an annoying cloak behind which we can often find a different version of events.

Jumbo

__________________
"Capital! We're nearly out of ammunition! Now we can get at them with the bayonet!" General Paddy Gough, 1st Sikh War

If you want to know if the Japanese soldier was civilized, ask any Allied combat soldier that served in the Pacific and see what they say. As far as carpet bombing, Roosevelt and Churchill had already declared that the war would be brought to the enemy. Japan now had to take what they had been giving out.

[ 06 September 2002, 05:19 PM: Message edited by: Steve ]

__________________
The soldier above all others prays for peace, for he must suffer and bear the deepest wounds and scars of war. General Douglas Macarthur