Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers.

Moderators: wdolson, Don Bowen, mogami

User avatar
Klahn
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 8:26 pm

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by Klahn »

ORIGINAL: House Stark

The Soviet invasion definitely was a major factor in Japan's surrender, and the fact that the bombs followed right on its heels just helped even more. It was a brutal 1-2 punch to a collapsing country.

The Soviet declaration of war came after the atomic bombing of Hiroshima. It occured the same day as the Nagasaki attack.
User avatar
John 3rd
Posts: 17458
Joined: Thu Sep 08, 2005 5:03 pm
Location: La Salle, Colorado

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by John 3rd »

ORIGINAL: House Stark

The Soviet invasion definitely was a major factor in Japan's surrender, and the fact that the bombs followed right on its heels just helped even more. It was a brutal 1-2 punch to a collapsing country.

It took Hirohito stepping in to end it. Period. Many of the Imperial Command would have fought on no matter what. The Soviets and A-Bombs simply took it to a new level where, thank God, the Emperor saw that the madness had to end. Only he had the power to make it happen and even then it might not have occurred...

Would really like to read Downfall. It is on my to buy list but I haven't had the chance yet. What are other's opinions on this book?
Image

Member: Treaty, Reluctant Admiral and Between the Storms Mod Team.
User avatar
5thGuardsTankArmy
Posts: 89
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2011 12:36 pm

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by 5thGuardsTankArmy »

ORIGINAL: Terminus

It really isn't worth the bandwidth. He's just re-hashing stuff that anybody who knows 0.5% more about WWII than the ever-shrinking standard has known forever.


Ok Termiwuzz thanks for your opinion, now be quiet please.
User avatar
Klahn
Posts: 200
Joined: Tue May 08, 2007 8:26 pm

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by Klahn »

ORIGINAL: msieving1

ORIGINAL: Ryvan

Interesting factoid: The Japanese people weren't generally aware they had been hit by atomic weapons until after the nation surrendered. Knowledge of what had actually occured was limited to government officials.

Not sure that this is true. I read Hiroshima Diary many years ago. As I recall, the doctor recorded in his diary that Japanese officials announced that Hiroshima was destroyed by an atomic bomb a few days after the bombing. The officials also said that Japan had long had an atomic bomb of their own, and that they had destroyed San Francisco in retaliation.

People in the area of the actual attacks may have been aware. I'm in a hotel right now and I'm not sure which book I pulled it from, but I remember reading that the emperor's radio broadcast was the first time that most civilians had heard that there was anything different about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks.
User avatar
Cap Mandrake
Posts: 20737
Joined: Fri Nov 15, 2002 8:37 am
Location: Southern California

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by Cap Mandrake »

If the Japanese Ambassador to Berlin had not fled to Bavaria when the Russians showed up, he MIGHT have been able to to get a message to Tokyo that the outcome was very bad.


On the other hand, an 80,000 foot high mushroom cloud from a single B-29 could sacrcely have been noticed.

http://www.ourcivilisation.com/smartboa ... /bomb2.jpg
Image
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: 5thGuardsTankArmy

Well, I have said this all along.  Nice to finally see a representative from a US university drawing the same conclusions as i said for 2 years ago on this very forums.

The Soviet Union won WW2, not the Allies. Claiming other just proves your a victim to Western Propaganda.
Soviet Union Defeated the German's, the Land Leace did indeed help them (despite that research done in the 2000's scale down its effect a bit) and the Soviets entry into the Pacific scared the shit out of the Japs.

The Soviets got their nation terrorized, but comed out of it as a  unified and strong nation with greater industrial potential then ever before, its political strength in 1946+ can't Evan be compared to its  pre war political influence.


I'd have to disagree with this statement, as the Soviet Union was one of the "Allies". And without the parcipatation of the Western Allies, a Soviet victory over Germany was far from assured. The most correct way of stating it would be to say that the Soviet Union was the major factor in defeating Germany. Of course, the Nazi-Soviet Pact was also a major cause of the War in Europe..., and only England dared to stand up to Hitler alone. There's enough "credit" to go around.
User avatar
m10bob
Posts: 8583
Joined: Sun Nov 03, 2002 9:09 pm
Location: Dismal Seepage Indiana

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by m10bob »

ORIGINAL: 5thGuardsTankArmy

"The Soviet Union won WW2,  not the Allies."

I suppose an indoctrination in your education would prevent you from remembering the Soviet Union was one of the Allies?
Image

User avatar
crsutton
Posts: 9590
Joined: Fri Dec 06, 2002 8:56 pm
Location: Maryland

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by crsutton »

This thread can not end well.....[8|]
I am the Holy Roman Emperor and am above grammar.

Sigismund of Luxemburg
whippleofd
Posts: 617
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 1:40 am

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by whippleofd »

Would really like to read Downfall. It is on my to buy list but I haven't had the chance yet. What are other's opinions on this book?

It's not "light" reading. It's also VERY good. Take your time, take notes and google is your friend.

Whipple
MMCS(SW/AW) 1981-2001
1981 RTC, SD
81-82 NPS, Orlando
82-85 NPTU, Idaho Falls
85-90 USS Truxtun (CGN-35)
90-93 USS George Washington (CVN-73)
93-96 NFAS Orlando
96-01 Navsea-08/Naval Reactors
User avatar
Bradley7735
Posts: 2073
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2004 8:51 pm

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by Bradley7735 »

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: 5thGuardsTankArmy

Well, I have said this all along.  Nice to finally see a representative from a US university drawing the same conclusions as i said for 2 years ago on this very forums.

The Soviet Union won WW2, not the Allies. Claiming other just proves your a victim to Western Propaganda.
Soviet Union Defeated the German's, the Land Leace did indeed help them (despite that research done in the 2000's scale down its effect a bit) and the Soviets entry into the Pacific scared the shit out of the Japs.

The Soviets got their nation terrorized, but comed out of it as a  unified and strong nation with greater industrial potential then ever before, its political strength in 1946+ can't Evan be compared to its  pre war political influence.


I'd have to disagree with this statement, as the Soviet Union was one of the "Allies". And without the parcipatation of the Western Allies, a Soviet victory over Germany was far from assured. The most correct way of stating it would be to say that the Soviet Union was the major factor in defeating Germany. Of course, the Nazi-Soviet Pact was also a major cause of the War in Europe..., and only England dared to stand up to Hitler alone. There's enough "credit" to go around.

Mike, didn't France stand up as well? Sure, she got knocked out pretty fast, but she and England both declared war when Germany invaded Poland, right? (Pacific is my expertise, not Europe)
The older I get, the better I was.
mike scholl 1
Posts: 1265
Joined: Wed Feb 17, 2010 8:20 pm

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by mike scholl 1 »

ORIGINAL: Bradley7735

Mike, didn't France stand up as well? Sure, she got knocked out pretty fast, but she and England both declared war when Germany invaded Poland, right? (Pacific is my expertise, not Europe)

You are correct..., both France and England went to war over the German invasion of Poland (which the Nazi-Soviet Pact made possible). But when France fell, England stood as the ONLY nation at war with Hitler for almost a full year (until the Nazis attacked the Soviets).
User avatar
ChezDaJez
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:08 am
Location: Chehalis, WA

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by ChezDaJez »

ORIGINAL: mike scholl 1

ORIGINAL: 5thGuardsTankArmy

Well, I have said this all along.  Nice to finally see a representative from a US university drawing the same conclusions as i said for 2 years ago on this very forums.

The Soviet Union won WW2, not the Allies. Claiming other just proves your a victim to Western Propaganda.
Soviet Union Defeated the German's, the Land Leace did indeed help them (despite that research done in the 2000's scale down its effect a bit) and the Soviets entry into the Pacific scared the shit out of the Japs.

The Soviets got their nation terrorized, but comed out of it as a  unified and strong nation with greater industrial potential then ever before, its political strength in 1946+ can't Evan be compared to its  pre war political influence.


I'd have to disagree with this statement, as the Soviet Union was one of the "Allies". And without the parcipatation of the Western Allies, a Soviet victory over Germany was far from assured. The most correct way of stating it would be to say that the Soviet Union was the major factor in defeating Germany. Of course, the Nazi-Soviet Pact was also a major cause of the War in Europe..., and only England dared to stand up to Hitler alone. There's enough "credit" to go around.

I agree with you. Mike. The Soviet Union did inlfict more casualties on the European Axis than did the Anglos during the war but without the Anglos tying down large formations of German troops in the west, the Soviet Union might well have been overrun before they could move their industry east of the Urals. Plus, massive amounts of Lend Lease equipment from the US helped stabilize their desparate shortage of weapons, aircraft and trucks the Soviets experienced after the initial onslaughts.

Chez
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
User avatar
ChezDaJez
Posts: 3293
Joined: Fri Nov 12, 2004 7:08 am
Location: Chehalis, WA

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by ChezDaJez »

Not sure I agree with the other assorted conclusions though. The implication of an atomic bomb being equal to fire bombing is ludicrous, not matter what the "profs" say. They overlook a critical fact: fire bombing requires the accurate and coordinated delivery of tens of thousands of pieces of ordnance, an atomic bomb requires a single delivery system. Then and now, this one fact is the fundamental difference and is what creates all the concern.

Probably didn't appear that ludicrous from the Japanese viewpoint. The logistics of the delivery of 1 bomb or thousands probably didn't concern them much. They couldn't stop delivery either way.

Chez
Ret Navy AWCS (1972-1998)
VP-5, Jacksonville, Fl 1973-78
ASW Ops Center, Rota, Spain 1978-81
VP-40, Mt View, Ca 1981-87
Patrol Wing 10, Mt View, CA 1987-90
ASW Ops Center, Adak, Ak 1990-92
NRD Seattle 1992-96
VP-46, Whidbey Isl, Wa 1996-98
elxaime
Posts: 334
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:37 pm

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by elxaime »

I think Hasegawa's thesis is most relevant to how the historiography of WW2 was harnessed to serve the political needs of the Cold War. The idea of a Japanese surrender primarily motivated by US military might in the form of the atomic bomb was useful post-war:

- the US and its allies were engaged in a world wide struggle for influence with the Soviet Union and its allies; we did not want to give Stalin and his murderous system any more than the most grudging credit for the defeat of either Nazi Germany and/or Japan

- Hence, the story in most US public school textbooks focused almost exclusively on Midway, D-Day and the dropping of the atomic bomb as key events in WW2; this wasn't just the usual national pride - textbooks had only passing mention of the Eastern Front and the Soviet invasion of Manchuria was treated as an afterthought since the war had already been won by US might

- Japan went along with the US version to appease their new US conquerors and also to save face; it was easier to accept surrender was due to an elemental force of nature (the bomb) as opposed to a military collapse at the hands of the Allies and Soviets; the Germans evolved a similar fantasy to explain the end of WW1, namely that it was a political collapse at home as opposed to the very real disintegration of German military resistance under the hammer blows of the Foch offensives. No military likes to admit it was defeated by conventional force of arms and the Japanese military apologists are no different

- for their part, the Soviets also massaged history to their own end; talk to any Russian today who grew up under the Soviet school system and they will tell you how they learned that Allied aid to the Soviet Union during WW2 was negligible and the Red Army saved the world almost single-handed

- furthermore, the Atom Bomb uber alles version helped fuel public support for the linchpin of post-war US nuclear deterrence strategy and fueled the Cold War military buildup based almost exclusively on this theory; certainly atomic bombs are destructive on a scale never before imagined, but it helped immensely to secure public support for their building if we could make a clean example of how they had ended Japanese resistance; the role of the Soviet invasion muddied things up uncomfortably and was better banished

Often times it takes many decades before historians can parse out what really happened. And sometimes we will never truly know. But this tale of the end of WW2 doesn't just speak to those events, but also to the way historiography adapts to pressing political needs, in this instance the Cold War. It is a sobering thought, since interpretation of such events still drives national policy. In some cases, the current theories, military and political, are based on mistaken premises of what actually happened in the past.

Other areas where I suspect there will be revision some day is the theory that British and French Governments prior to Churchill and De Gaulle were all feckless appeasers and that Roosevelt gave up the whole show at Yalta. In the former case, too little weight is given to the horrendous toll of WW1 on both societies and also the fact that, when it came to it, both governments did indeed declare war on Nazi Germany (while the US stayed neutral). In the latter case, Roosevelt was dealing with the realities of a massive Soviet military presence and a US public with no stomach for another new war (Patton notwithstanding).
JVJ
User avatar
LoBaron
Posts: 4775
Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2003 8:23 pm
Location: Vienna, Austria

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by LoBaron »

ORIGINAL: 5thGuardsTankArmy
The Soviet Union won WW2,  not the Allies. Claiming other just proves your a victim to Western Propaganda.

Damn, and all those years I thought the P51 won the war. This is so confusing... [X(]
Image
User avatar
oldman45
Posts: 2325
Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 4:15 am
Location: Jacksonville Fl

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by oldman45 »

ORIGINAL: LoBaron

ORIGINAL: 5thGuardsTankArmy
The Soviet Union won WW2,  not the Allies. Claiming other just proves your a victim to Western Propaganda.

Damn, and all those years I thought the P51 won the war. This is so confusing... [X(]

It was not the P51, it was the M1 rifle and the R2800 engine [;)] oh and spam [:'(]

User avatar
JohnDillworth
Posts: 3102
Joined: Thu Mar 19, 2009 5:22 pm

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by JohnDillworth »

History is written by the victors.  In the pacific, that was the United States.  Perhaps it is correct, perhaps not, but that is the way it will be remembered.  Sometimes enough rigorous intellectual re-examination of the facts will change the way history is understood (Shattered Sword anyone?)by the well informed (that might be us), but most people will recall the popular memory.
Today I come bearing an olive branch in one hand, and the freedom fighter's gun in the other. Do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. I repeat, do not let the olive branch fall from my hand. - Yasser Arafat Speech to UN General Assembly
User avatar
JWE
Posts: 5039
Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 5:02 pm

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by JWE »

Time for this thread to be locked. And time for that tank army fellow to have his login permanently removed.
User avatar
ilovestrategy
Posts: 3611
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2005 8:41 pm
Location: San Diego
Contact:

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by ilovestrategy »

All I saw was another "US bad, Japanese noble victims" post. Hell, my wife's 30 year old niece thinks we were evil for dropping the bomb and we should have talked to the Nips. And yes, I said Nips.

The Japanese Military were a cruel, sadistic, and vicious people that were just as cruel to their own people as well as their prisoners. Okinawa was a sign that they were prepared to fight on. The bomb was a shock value that saved a ton of lives on both sides.

The Soviets did not win WW2 single handed like that dude says. I bet you dollars to donuts Stalin would have never declared war if we werent at Japans doorstep with the largest fleet the world had ever seen. They were nothing but Johnny Come Latelys to the Pacific Theater.

Sorry for misspellings, I'm on my phone.
After 16 years, Civ II still has me in it's clutches LOL!!!
Now CIV IV has me in it's evil clutches!
Image
User avatar
Pascal_slith
Posts: 1654
Joined: Wed Aug 20, 2003 2:39 am
Location: back in Commiefornia

RE: Interesting Aricle In todays Boston Globe

Post by Pascal_slith »

ORIGINAL: Ryvan


People in the area of the actual attacks may have been aware. I'm in a hotel right now and I'm not sure which book I pulled it from, but I remember reading that the emperor's radio broadcast was the first time that most civilians had heard that there was anything different about the Hiroshima and Nagasaki attacks.

I believe it was also the first time the Japanese had actually heard the voice of the Emperor.
So much WitP and so little time to play.... :-(

Image
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”