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

To: Tennessean4Bush
I disagree. Look at the most recent, magisterial work on Midway done by two Japanese Navy geeks: "Shattered Sword." They conclude, rightly in my view, that even if the U.S. had lost at Midway, the war in the Pacific only would have lasted one more year---that the Japanese was so incredibly overstretched and already using up their tiny pool of resources that it was never a question of "if," only "when."

Remember, Nimitz and MacArthur operated on a mere 20% of all U.S. military resources, and that was AFTER Manhattan Project skimmed off the top.

115 posted on 10/21/2006 9:50:17 AM PDT by LS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies ]


To: LS
Good morning.
"They conclude, rightly in my view, that even if the U.S. had lost at Midway, the war in the Pacific only would have lasted one more year"

The two Japanese authors were wrong about Japan's ability to continue fighting.

The battle of Midway took place in 1942. Even with the crushing victory we inflicted on the Japanese at Midway, those brave Marines had to take Iwo Jima and we had to drop the Bomb to end it in 1945.

Michael Frazier
133 posted on 10/21/2006 10:52:03 AM PDT by brazzaville (no surrender no retreat, well, maybe retreat's ok)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]

To: LS

You may be right. I will have to read some more on that. I had always read that it was not a forgone conclusion early on that we would win.


158 posted on 10/21/2006 7:40:00 PM PDT by Tennessean4Bush (I would never belong to any club that would have someone like me as a member.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]

To: LS
"war in the Pacific"

You are correct. The big brass had decided that the Pacific war was less important than first defeating the Germans. If the Japanese had known what materiel and other resources the Americans (and the Brits and the Australians) were going to throw at them, maybe they would have not launched the war.

Not only did we have far more men and materiel, we had much better materiel. The Japanese weapons were far inferior by the end of the war to ours. Even the Zero, which outclassed all American fighters at the start, was outclassed and severely outnumbered by the end. Japan simply didn't have the manufacturing capability or other resources. Their troops had great esprit de corp (even WWII ex-Marine William Manchester, who still disliked Japan years later, admitted that no soldier was braver than the Japanese soldier), but that wasn't enough.

198 posted on 02/20/2007 9:33:12 PM PST by driftless2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | 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