Axis

Members: 5,716
Threads: 17,446
Posts: 217,553
Online: 226

Newest Member:
Alpharius

 
 
 
Go Back   World War II Forums > Theaters of the Second World War > War in the Pacific
Register FAQ Gallery Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


War in the Pacific The Sino-Japanese War, the attack at Pearl Harbor to the atomic bombing of Nagasaki

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old October 23rd, 2006, 11:25 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: utah
Posts: 918
Salute!: 0
Saluted 0 Times in 0 Posts
chromeboomerang is an unknown quantity at this point
Post

The tunnels were seemingly unknown to the Americans the History channel documentaries say, but I find that a bit hard to believe since this sort of thing was done before by the Japanese, tunnels that is.

So, with that in mind, what might've been a better approach to the Island? Tallboys?

As an aside, Sakai mentioned in his book that the island was easy for the taking much earlier, but the Americans waited which allowed tunnels & defenses to be built up.
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old October 26th, 2006, 08:27 PM
Ted Ted is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 55
Salute!: 0
Saluted 0 Times in 0 Posts
Ted is an unknown quantity at this point
Post

Well first off we knew about defensive structures and tunnels to some extent. We flew recon missions over the island and took pics as in all operations. But the defenses were built into the side of the mountains and were so well camoflaged that we only identified a few emplacements in the photos. We knew that the Japanese incorporated caves and tunnels into their defenses but this was still a relatively new discovery. And we suspected that there would be some on Iwo, but we had no idea that they would be so elaborate and massive. It was a complete shock. We still don't know to what extent the tunnels go. No one's ever gone down them, most of them have been sealed, and their are no guides or maps available. All we have are japanese first hand accounts and crude drawings and sketches to give us some idea. But we do know that no tunnel system has ever come close the sheer size and complexity of the tunnels on Iwo. Except maybe for the vietcong.

As for Sakai's book, which I have not read. But judging from what you quoted from his book. Yes the island itself was easier to take early on before the defenses were built up. But he's forgeting that Iwo Jima is only about 300 miles from japan. It was well behaind enemy lines. We had to go through everything else in the Pacific before we reached Iwo. We had to work our way up the islands like stepping stones before we got to Iwo. That gave the defenders more than 3 years to prepare. We couldn't have just sent an invasion force through the pacific, steaming behind enemy lines in 1942 to attack Iwo. Saying that we should have took Iwo earlier is like saying that Russia should have attacked Berlin in 1943, before the germans were able to build up their defenses of the city.
__________________
"The only man who never makes a mistake is the man who never does anything." Teddy Roosevelt
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old October 28th, 2006, 03:03 AM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: utah
Posts: 918
Salute!: 0
Saluted 0 Times in 0 Posts
chromeboomerang is an unknown quantity at this point
Post

Sakai meant just before the invasion. A few months earlier, & there would have been little preparation done.

Point taken on tunnels being shock. I was thinking chemical drops. Make em sick before landing. Something like that.
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old March 23rd, 2007, 04:30 PM
Col. Hessler's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 593
Salute!: 0
Saluted 0 Times in 0 Posts
Col. Hessler will become famous soon enough
Default Re: Iwo Jima, a different approach?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chromeboomerang View Post
The tunnels were seemingly unknown to the Americans the History channel documentaries say, but I find that a bit hard to believe since this sort of thing was done before by the Japanese, tunnels that is.
The tactics used by the Japanese on Iwo were relatively new. By the Summer of '44, seeing that the war was lost, the Imperial General HQ ordered it's troops to take up "Fukkaku Positions" (translated means Endurance Engagement) in the hopes that they could inflict enough casualties that the Americans would settle for a negotiated peace. General Kuribayashi while in Tokyo many months prior to the invasion had been told, "If America's casualties are high enough, Washington will think twice before launching an another invasion against Japanese territory."

The United States was unaware of the new Jap strategy. We were expecting them to fight us like they had throughout the rest of the Pacific, but the days of banzai charge after banzai charge were over. The Japs were expected to hold their ground and ordered to kill 10 Americans before they themselves were allowed to be killed. You can see this as early on as the Battle for Peleliu and later on Okinawa. Documents were captured revealing this new Japanese defensive strategy, but unfortunately were not translated until the end of the war.

Quote:
So, with that in mind, what might've been a better approach to the Island? Tallboys?
I believe that the island was captured the only way possible: with the courage and the sacrifice of young Marines. The complex tunnel system was invulnerable to any type of bombardment, from the sea or air. There were 3 levels of tunnels that ran throughout the entire 16 mile island with 1,500 undergound rooms 30-50 feet deep. Kuribayashi's HQ was an incredible 75 feet below the ground with 5 foot thick walls and a 10 foot thick roof. As James Bradley, author of Flags of Our Fathers, put it, "..the Japanese were not on Iwo Jima. They were in Iwo Jima."
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old March 24th, 2007, 02:49 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Holly, Michigan
Posts: 221
Salute!: 0
Saluted 1 Time in 1 Post
John Dudek is on a distinguished road
Default Re: Iwo Jima, a different approach?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Col. Hessler View Post
The tactics used by the Japanese on Iwo were relatively new. By the Summer of '44, seeing that the war was lost, the Imperial General HQ ordered it's troops to take up "Fukkaku Positions" (translated means Endurance Engagement) in the hopes that they could inflict enough casualties that the Americans would settle for a negotiated peace. General Kuribayashi while in Tokyo many months prior to the invasion had been told, "If America's casualties are high enough, Washington will think twice before launching an another invasion against Japanese territory."

The United States was unaware of the new Jap strategy. We were expecting them to fight us like they had throughout the rest of the Pacific, but the days of banzai charge after banzai charge were over. The Japs were expected to hold their ground and ordered to kill 10 Americans before they themselves were allowed to be killed. You can see this as early on as the Battle for Peleliu and later on Okinawa. Documents were captured revealing this new Japanese defensive strategy, but unfortunately were not translated until the end of the war.

I believe that the island was captured the only way possible: with the courage and the sacrifice of young Marines. The complex tunnel system was invulnerable to any type of bombardment, from the sea or air. There were 3 levels of tunnels that ran throughout the entire 16 mile island with 1,500 undergound rooms 30-50 feet deep. Kuribayashi's HQ was an incredible 75 feet below the ground with 5 foot thick walls and a 10 foot thick roof. As James Bradley, author of Flags of Our Fathers, put it, "..the Japanese were not on Iwo Jima. They were in Iwo Jima."
That probably explains why Japanese "hold-outs" were able to live on the island for several years after its capture, totally unaware of the Imperial Japanese Government's surrender.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Google
 

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:41 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5
Copyright © 2000 - 2007, the World War II Network, all rights reserved.Ad Management by RedTyger

Allies