Posted on 04/20/2018 9:55:26 AM PDT by ExpatCanuck
Just wondering if that would have put a halt to the Japanese aggression and given them a sense of what they were up against and what we were willing to do. Could it have saved thousands of American lives in the South Pacific? As an alternative history buff I’m curious about the opinions here.
We carpet bombed North Vietnam, how did that work out?
With what? From where?
Didn’t have the logistics available to do that.
We would still have went in there to help them rebuild. So, you might think that by not carpet bombing Japan, it just made it easier for us to go in there and help them out.
They were out of range until the B29 was completed and even then, engine failures were a constant problem.
Capturing Iwo Jima was what made it possible.
We didn’t have the range.
Shangri-La
We initially had no bases close enough to Japan to deploy heavy bombers. In the 1940’s there was no mid-air refueling capability. later in the war, we were able to move heavy bombers such as B-29s and B-24s close enough to be in range of Japanese cities.
great point. I hate woulda-coulda-shoulda!
IF we had dropped the same tonnage in bowling balls, as we did bombs in NV, we’d have stopped them.
Bombs moved dirt and they moved it back.
They would never have been able to move bowling balls out of the way.
Every expert historian I’ve ever read about tells us that the Pacific conflict would have dragged on for many years later if it were not for Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
Carpet bombing would have been futile.
We had to drop TWO nuclear bombs to get them to surrender. They were dropped days apart and they still weren’t sure
The B-17’s at Clark might have been able to bomb southern Japan at extended range if they hadn’t been blown up the 1st day.
From air bases located where? Bomber range is what?
Oh, you want carrier based air strikes? How many carriers you want to use?
Nope. That would not have happened until we got the bases and bombers.
not possible at the time. did not have tools to do so.
that is why Doolittle had to fly b-25 off the deck of the Hornet to bomb tokyo, et al. lack of a long range bomber, and an airfield to fly them from.
the “what-if” is fun to debate over a beer, but is essentially a waste of time.
Even after Fatman and Little Boy, a lot of the Japanese still didn’t want to surrender.
Some even suggested bumping off Hirohito and making him a “martyr” and continuing the fight.
In 1941-42 our strategic bomber force was small, massively engaged in Europe. And frankly amateurish and learning the ropes.
After years of hard won experience in Europe, and with FAR better aircraft in the B-29, Japan was very difficult to bomb with the same effectiveness.
We did - 1944-1945. Before then we had no way of getting bombers to Japan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.