Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tanknetter

Gee, four submarines capable of launching a dozen kamikazes at the Panama Canal was a serious threat to the United States and would have won the war for Japan? Be serious.

Japan was on it's last legs. It had run out of raw materials, oil, and the capacity to suppply or eveacuate the remnants of it's army scattered across the Pacific and Asian landmass.

Funny, but the original argument began between dsc and I on the efficacy of strategic bombing, that you have chimed in and completely missed the irony: The real damage to Japan was done at SEA: without a navy to defend the home islands, to protect merchant shipping, no hulls to bring raw materials home or to transport forces across vast distances, the Japanese were sitting ducks in an age of mobile warfare. Strategic bombing did very little to defeat the Japanese (except continue to kill mostly civilians until the end of the war) since they had already lost that war at sea.

As to whether or not strategic bombing has ever worked, I found it fascinating yesterday when the Military Channel showed a documentary (Wings over the World) that dealt specifically with this argument. Did you know that Hamburg was bombed 170 times during the war? Berlin itself over 200?
We can assume (I can prolly dig the exact figures out given time) that the vast majority of German cities were similarly visited at least 50 times, too? Either strategic bombing in the 1940's had an extremely poor return on investment, required far more time than the span afforded by 1940-45, or was an outright fallacy in terms of an effective strategy, and merely an excuse to engage in terror.

One of the major problems with strategic bombing was that the allies consistently confused the results of a raid (i.e. sheer size of an area leveled or destroyed) with the effect (i.e. amount of real damage done to actual German war production). Some people are still maming that mistake, it seems.


287 posted on 06/01/2006 10:32:25 AM PDT by Wombat101 (Islam: Turning everything it touches to Shi'ite since 632 AD...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 247 | View Replies ]


To: Wombat101
If the American public ever found out we had a A-bomb and didn't use it to avoid ground combat in retaking Japan Inc., it would be the end of the Democrat party.

Ugly as it was, (the use of a nuke) it did give the Japanese a 'face saving' way to end the war.

And in the vernacular of rural Oregon, "It learned'em up real good".
290 posted on 06/01/2006 10:46:18 AM PDT by investigateworld (Abortion stops a beating heart)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies ]

To: Wombat101
As to whether or not strategic bombing has ever worked, I found it fascinating yesterday when the Military Channel showed a documentary (Wings over the World) that dealt specifically with this argument. Did you know that Hamburg was bombed 170 times during the war? Berlin itself over 200? We can assume (I can prolly dig the exact figures out given time) that the vast majority of German cities were similarly visited at least 50 times, too? Either strategic bombing in the 1940's had an extremely poor return on investment, required far more time than the span afforded by 1940-45, or was an outright fallacy in terms of an effective strategy, and merely an excuse to engage in terror.

One thing to note in this regard is the impact strategic bombing of German cities had on the ability of Hitler/Goering to deploy the Luftwaffe to counter allied land and naval movements. Every FW-190/Me-109/Me-262/etc that had to be pulled back to defend the skies over the Fatherland was one less aircraft available to go after things like Overlord.

Something similar happened during the early phase of the Pacific War. The Doolittle Raid on Tokyo resulted not only in Japanese forces being pulled back to defend the home islands (later impacting the ability of the Japanese to effectively defend places like Guadalcanal), it also spurred changes in Japanese strategic planning (causing the Japanese to go after Midway in early June of 1942 ... with disasterous results).
291 posted on 06/01/2006 10:48:49 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies ]

To: Wombat101
Gee, four submarines capable of launching a dozen kamikazes at the Panama Canal was a serious threat to the United States and would have won the war for Japan? Be serious.

You need to reread your history. There's a LOT of evidence out there that when the attacks on the Panama Canal were scrubbed, the mission was changed to attacks on US West Coast cities using radiological bombs.
294 posted on 06/01/2006 10:53:21 AM PDT by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 287 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson