Posted on 06/19/2005 6:47:14 PM PDT by blam
Japan honours US dead at Iwo Jima
By Colin Joyce in Tokyo
(Filed: 20/06/2005)
Junichiro Koizumi yesterday became Japan's first serving prime minister to visit Iwo Jima in what analysts say is an effort to counter his image as a nationalist and revisionist.
Mr Koizumi paid his respects alongside bereaved Japanese and representatives of the American army
He made his visit during a ceremony marking one of the Second World War's most symbolic battles in which American troops first captured Japanese territory 60 years ago. The moment was caught in an iconic photograph of troops hoisting the Stars and Stripes on the island's peak, Mount Suribachi.
Mr Koizumi joined about 100 bereaved Japanese and representatives of the American army in Japan to pay his respects.
He said: "Over 28,000 Japanese and American lives were lost on Iwo Jima. I believe today's peace and prosperity is built on their noble sacrifice. Since the Second World War, Japan has never once participated or become involved in war and has maintained peace.
"From now on, too, we must never forget the tragic lessons of war. We must progress towards friendly relations between nations and must actively strive to create lasting world peace."
Mr Koizumi also laid a wreath at the island's memorial to the 7,000 American soldiers killed in the one month battle in February 1945. The tiny island, around 800 miles south of Tokyo, is now a Japanese military base. The islanders were moved to the mainland after the war.
Iconic: the moment American troops conqered Iwo Jima
Mr Koizumi has been attacked, especially in China, for repeatedly visiting Tokyo's controversial Yasukuni shrine. The shrine commemorates executed war criminals alongside 2.5 million Japanese war dead.
He has sought to explain that Japan is a pacifist country and that he visits Yasukuni only to pray for world peace and for the souls of all those killed
His visit to Iwo Jima is also seen as an attempt to stress that he is a man of peace rather than an admirer of Japan's wartime leaders. He has recently paid respects at Tokyo's Chidorigafuchi memorial to unknown soldiers, which is not tainted with the controversy of nearby Yasukuni.
Mr Koizumi went to Moscow for VE Day last month, which previous Japanese prime ministers have not attended. Next week he will visit Okinawa, south-western Japan, where memorial services traditionally emphasise the waste of lives caused by Japanese militarism.
There was a long and controversial thread on that subject some months ago.
Gist of it is, the idea that the conquest of Iwo Jima meant the difference between every one member of those bomber crews living or dying is patently ridiculous.
In any rational analysis more Americans died taking the island than aircrew saved by having the island.
That's a good report. Thanks.
Sounds like he's doing the right thing.
Sadly, I don't think his desire for peace will overcome where I think China is ultimately headed.
Considering Japan's past, I appreciate their attempts to avoid participation in war efforts.
You miss the point. Without Iwo, regardless of the casuelties, we had no base to launch 1000 bombers effectively.
Most of the planes which landed on Iwo were performing training missions.
Also, the re-raising of the flag was not the moment of conquest, as shown by the death in later fighting of several of the Marines and Navy Corpsman who re-raised the flag.
The Army fought on long after that flag raising. The Marines were crucial in the initial landing, and then, what was left of them were switched over to Mt. Suribachi.
The soldiers, corpsmen and Marines were fighting without the knowledge of the Atomic Bomb. For all they knew, we would have to continue on to take over the entire Japanese Islands. Iwo Jima was their task, for that moment, and they, if they thought about it, would look forward to many other such tasks.
The Japanese also didn't expect the war to end soon. They intended to continue to fight, and were willing to spend 30 million casualties if they could inflict 1,000,000 US casualties. Their goal was a negotiated treaty. The US was reading the Imperial Japanese diplomatic codes pretty regularly, reporting the information gained as "MAGIC".
"From now on, too, we must never forget the tragic lessons of war. We must progress towards friendly relations between nations and must actively strive to create lasting world peace."
Actually, it's "the tragic lessons of peace", but nevertheless, and regardless of motives, he is doing the right thing.
The B-29 missions were launched from Saipan, not Iwo. Though in theory the Japanese could have based fighters there, there were other ways to limit their effectiveness (carrier fighter sweeps, fighter escorts, and naval shelling).
The night raids on the mainland, had their defensive armament stripped, and accordingly would have had smaller crews. Even if a B-29 has augered in rather than landing on Iwo Jima, the crews could have jumped, or gotten out after ditching. They would have had a pretty good chance of survival, and could have been picked up by Submarine. There were other options.
Iwo was not, in the end necessary. Noone knew that because of the fog of war. The major accomplishment of Iwo was that fantastic picture, and I submit that is a poor payback for US lives lost.
Additionally, the US arsenal of nuclear weapons after Nagasaki wasn't nearly as continuously supportable as was the island hopping campaign in bringing US firepower to Japan's doorstep.
I am not sure what you mean by continuously supportable. Saipan was the main base of the nuclear planes, as well as the conventional bombers.
The island hopping campaign was necessary for both. The early nuclear bombs were large, and could not be launched from a carrier based plane, or even the B-25 which was carrier based in 1942. (a one time deal, I think all of them were lost on that mission.)
I don't believe the US had any more nukes after the first two were deployed for at least another 6 months.
Maybe.....If you look at it from that single dimension.
The location and the fact that there were two Japanese airfields on the island also meant that it was a base for Japanese fighters that could intercept U.S. bombers on their way to Japan.
Its capture also meant that U.S. fighters could be stationed there as escorts for bombers over Japan.
The dangers of leaving a major Japanese air base directly in your rear during the planned invasion of Japan would also have to be factored into any decision to bypass it.
I think we figured the necessity for more would be a non issue after the japs saw what we did to their cities.
Iwo Jima beachead looking toward Mt. Suribachi. February 1945
Fifth Marines break for religious services on Iwo Jima. (Sgt. L. R. Burmeister)
There were 6 made, one Uranium (which was low risk of working) one plutonium was tested at Trinity. (the US dropped the first nuclear weapon on its own soil!)
The Indianapolis brought 4 bombs over less the cores. 2 were brought by air.
All the cores were brought by air, and the third core arrived about the same time that Bock's Car returned from Nagasaki.
The Japanese physicists analyzed soil samples from Hiroshima, and advised the Japanese government that it was a bad miracle, a one time catastrophe, based on the difficulty of separating U235 from U238.
The same team of physicists found Plutonium reaction products in soil samples from Nagasaki. They knew that plutonium could be chemically separated from Uranium, and that there was no limit to the number of bombs that could be made.
Also the Japanese 14th army group had been overrun by the Soviets. They had counted on that army to prevent use of Chinese manpower against the home islands. No only was that hope gone, but the resources of the Soviet Union were now arrayed against them from the north, taking Saklin Island from the north.
The Japanese strategy at that time assumed that if they took 30 million casualties, they could force the US to negotiate. Based on the 30-1 exchange rate on Okinawa, they were sure that the US would not accept a million more casuaties. The combination of nuclear weapons (any defensive line would be immediately broken) and the larger manpower reserves of the Soviet Union, added to China and the US, meant that strategy had failed.
We knew all this because of US proficiency in reading the Japanese diplomatic codes. (MAGIC)
Japanese fighters didn't have much in the way of fuel at that time. The fighters teeth were pulled, with the only aircraft being fueled were kamakazi. Not a lot of repeat missions there.
Again, all this was unsure. It was a conservative thing to take Iwo. We hadn't been that conservative, because we couldn't be. After the defeat of Germany, we got more conservative.
The B-25 was never carrier-based. There was one incident (with many modifications required) where a group of B-25's flew off the deck of the carrier Hornet. This is the famous 'Doolittle Raid'. It was a psyclological raid on Tokyo. Some of the planes flew (real low) over the imperial palace but, with orders not to cause damage to it. It was a one-way trip where the pilots were to ditch in friendly Chinese territory. Some made it, many didn't.
Japan * ping * (kono risuto ni hairitai ka detai wo shirasete kudasai : let me know if you want on or off this list)
I agree, the B-25 was not carrier based. It was, that time, carrier launched, which is different. Good catch, and sorry about my loose expression.
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.
