Otherwise know as Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet, the United States plan for the invasion of Japan. Estimates of American deaths range from several tens of thousands into the hundreds of thousands. Estimated Japanese deaths have a top end in the millions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall

Alternatives ranged from a multi-year naval blockade to the eventual solution, the atom bomb.

Lots of unanswered here:

- What had the invasion gone ahead as planned?
- Support on the homefront was waning after the defeat of Hitler.
- Transferring troops home just to send them back to war on the other side of the planet.
- If you follow the "Iwo Jima" casualty model then its going to be bad
- Soviet domination of mainland Asia and possibly Soviet invasion of the Japanese northern island of Hokkaido

DISCUSS!!!!

(06-05-2014 03:08 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Otherwise know as Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet, the United States plan for the invasion of Japan. Estimates of American deaths range from several tens of thousands into the hundreds of thousands. Estimated Japanese deaths have a top end in the millions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall

Alternatives ranged from a multi-year naval blockade to the eventual solution, the atom bomb.

Lots of unanswered here:

- What had the invasion gone ahead as planned?
- Support on the homefront was waning after the defeat of Hitler.
- Transferring troops home just to send them back to war on the other side of the planet.
- If you follow the "Iwo Jima" casualty model then its going to be bad
- Soviet domination of mainland Asia and possibly Soviet invasion of the Japanese northern island of Hokkaido

DISCUSS!!!!

Soviet Union had no intention of messing g with Japan. And the atomic bomb or a relentless bombing are really the only two logical options. I don't think the invasion would have ever happened, but more Japanese lives would have been lost in the long run.

Soviet Union would have loved for us to stand off and let them continue
their Asian conquests and even would have gone into all of Japan that
they could if we didn't act.

Eh, I know it isn't PC these days but but dropping the atom bombs was the right thing to do, at least from the US's side. A Japan mainland invasion would have been bloody as all get out becuase you know they would not have surrendered. I mean, look at how they fought to the death on random pacific islands, imagine their mindset defending their homeland.

Having said that, I do no believe in a "proportioanl response doctrine" so Japan had no say in how we attacked them seeing as they attacked us first.

The Soviets attacked Japan in the waning days of WWII, although it was probably more of a politically kicking a dead horse thing.

(06-05-2014 03:08 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Otherwise know as Operation Olympic and Operation Coronet, the United States plan for the invasion of Japan. Estimates of American deaths range from several tens of thousands into the hundreds of thousands. Estimated Japanese deaths have a top end in the millions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall

Alternatives ranged from a multi-year naval blockade to the eventual solution, the atom bomb.

Lots of unanswered here:

- What had the invasion gone ahead as planned?
- Support on the homefront was waning after the defeat of Hitler.
- Transferring troops home just to send them back to war on the other side of the planet.
- If you follow the "Iwo Jima" casualty model then its going to be bad
- Soviet domination of mainland Asia and possibly Soviet invasion of the Japanese northern island of Hokkaido

DISCUSS!!!!

There are some that insist that Russian involvement is what truly pressed Japan into surrendering to America. I find it interesting that it is nigh impossible to get to ground truth regarding the mindset of Japanese leadership in the waning days of the war.

But in a scenario where the A-bomb doesn't exist, I think the US conducts bombing operations that make Dresden and Tokyo look like fireworks displays before putting a single person ashore.

(06-06-2014 09:14 AM)AngryAphid Wrote:  The Soviets attacked Japan in the waning days of WWII, although it was probably more of a politically kicking a dead horse thing.

The Russian had promised to attack Japan within three months of V-E day. They kept attacking for a week after Japan surrendered. Russians took a huge swath of land. Many times with the Japanese troops just surrendering.

The Russians would have loved for the Chinese/Japanese to continue to fight one another. As noted by GoApps, the Russia attack on the Japanese was only part of the treaty to get them to work with the Allies following V-E day.

THe Chinese, Russians, and Japanese all had a serious hatred (not just a dislike) of each other, even back before WWII...

I have read elsewhere that one of Stalin's greatest fears was that Hitler and the Nazis would hold out longer than the Japanese, thus shutting the Soviets out of the partition of Asia.

For his many faults one of the smartest things Douglas MacArthur ever did was keeping the Soviets out of Japan post-war. Stalin wanted Japan to be divided much like Germany, and Truman was considering allowing it. MacArthur fought against that happening and succeeded.

We bombed Hiroshima 6 Aug 1945
The Soviet Union declared war on Japan and invited Manchuria 8 Aug 1945
We bombed Nagasaki 9 Aug 1945

Most historians appear to believe that the Soviet actions were not in response to the nuclear attack, but rather based on Stalin's commitment to declare war against Japan within 3 months after VE Day.

So if it didn't affect Stalin, how did that timing affect Truman's decision? How much did he fear that a prolonged invasion of Japan would give the Soviets time to get involved in a major way and create puppet states?

(06-14-2014 04:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  I have read elsewhere that one of Stalin's greatest fears was that Hitler and the Nazis would hold out longer than the Japanese, thus shutting the Soviets out of the partition of Asia.

For his many faults one of the smartest things Douglas MacArthur ever did was keeping the Soviets out of Japan post-war. Stalin wanted Japan to be divided much like Germany, and Truman was considering allowing it. MacArthur fought against that happening and succeeded.

The Russians had beat back the Japanese twice really bad. This was probably one reason the Japanese never attempted taking them on again during WWII. It also allowed Stalin to transport troops to help save Moscow from the Germans.

After the war the US took possession of Japanese submarines designed to launch aircraft. The Russians requested one of
them for study. We sank them instead. Things like this may have helped convince the Russians to back North Korea's invasion of South Korea so much, and to send pilots and Migs to them.

(06-18-2014 08:33 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(06-14-2014 04:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  I have read elsewhere that one of Stalin's greatest fears was that Hitler and the Nazis would hold out longer than the Japanese, thus shutting the Soviets out of the partition of Asia.

For his many faults one of the smartest things Douglas MacArthur ever did was keeping the Soviets out of Japan post-war. Stalin wanted Japan to be divided much like Germany, and Truman was considering allowing it. MacArthur fought against that happening and succeeded.

The Russians had beat back the Japanese twice really bad. This was probably one reason the Japanese never attempted taking them on again during WWII. It also allowed Stalin to transport troops to help save Moscow from the Germans.

After the war the US took possession of Japanese submarines designed to launch aircraft. The Russians requested one of
them for study. We sank them instead. Things like this may have helped convince the Russians to back North Korea's invasion of South Korea so much, and to send pilots and Migs to them.

I wonder if they might have tried to do something against the Russians even so, if they weren't already bogged down in China.

(06-18-2014 04:42 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-18-2014 08:33 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(06-14-2014 04:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  I have read elsewhere that one of Stalin's greatest fears was that Hitler and the Nazis would hold out longer than the Japanese, thus shutting the Soviets out of the partition of Asia.

For his many faults one of the smartest things Douglas MacArthur ever did was keeping the Soviets out of Japan post-war. Stalin wanted Japan to be divided much like Germany, and Truman was considering allowing it. MacArthur fought against that happening and succeeded.

The Russians had beat back the Japanese twice really bad. This was probably one reason the Japanese never attempted taking them on again during WWII. It also allowed Stalin to transport troops to help save Moscow from the Germans.

After the war the US took possession of Japanese submarines designed to launch aircraft. The Russians requested one of
them for study. We sank them instead. Things like this may have helped convince the Russians to back North Korea's invasion of South Korea so much, and to send pilots and Migs to them.

I wonder if they might have tried to do something against the Russians even so, if they weren't already bogged down in China.

The Russians handled the Japanese at the Battle of Lake Khasan in 1938 and the Battle of Khalkhin Gol in 1939 because the Japanese were stuck with World War I tank tactics and tanks designed for that war. Specifically, tanks to support infantry against other infantry, otherwise known as "light tanks". They also didn't have the same number of tanks as their Soviet opponent. Soviet medium tanks (what we'd call a main battle tank today) and tank specific tactics took the Japanese by surprise.

Their reaction to this lesson; considering the Chinese had no real tanks to oppose them, and anywhere else they wanted to invade was likely to also contain none to few pieces of mobile armor; was to leave the Soviets alone and concentrate on other weapon systems that would work well against the Chinese and navy/island based war with the United States.

(06-19-2014 12:22 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  

(06-18-2014 04:42 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-18-2014 08:33 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(06-14-2014 04:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  I have read elsewhere that one of Stalin's greatest fears was that Hitler and the Nazis would hold out longer than the Japanese, thus shutting the Soviets out of the partition of Asia.

For his many faults one of the smartest things Douglas MacArthur ever did was keeping the Soviets out of Japan post-war. Stalin wanted Japan to be divided much like Germany, and Truman was considering allowing it. MacArthur fought against that happening and succeeded.

The Russians had beat back the Japanese twice really bad. This was probably one reason the Japanese never attempted taking them on again during WWII. It also allowed Stalin to transport troops to help save Moscow from the Germans.

After the war the US took possession of Japanese submarines designed to launch aircraft. The Russians requested one of
them for study. We sank them instead. Things like this may have helped convince the Russians to back North Korea's invasion of South Korea so much, and to send pilots and Migs to them.

I wonder if they might have tried to do something against the Russians even so, if they weren't already bogged down in China.

The Russians handled the Japanese at the Battle of Lake Khasan in 1938 and the Battle of Khalkhin Gol in 1939 because the Japanese were stuck with World War I tank tactics and tanks designed for that war. Specifically, tanks to support infantry against other infantry, otherwise known as "light tanks". They also didn't have the same number of tanks as their Soviet opponent. Soviet medium tanks (what we'd call a main battle tank today) and tank specific tactics took the Japanese by surprise.

Their reaction to this lesson; considering the Chinese had no real tanks to oppose them, and anywhere else they wanted to invade was likely to also contain none to few pieces of mobile armor; was to leave the Soviets alone and concentrate on other weapon systems that would work well against the Chinese and navy/island based war with the United States.

Yea that's true, their tanks weren't up to it. There still seemed to be a fair amount of discussion about fighting the Russians even then. Which is surprising to me. Though they did beat the Russian navy in 1905. To some extent I think they were still revelling in that victory, even though that was navy and not army.

(06-19-2014 01:01 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-19-2014 12:22 PM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  

(06-18-2014 04:42 PM)NIU007 Wrote:  

(06-18-2014 08:33 AM)GoApps70 Wrote:  

(06-14-2014 04:05 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  I have read elsewhere that one of Stalin's greatest fears was that Hitler and the Nazis would hold out longer than the Japanese, thus shutting the Soviets out of the partition of Asia.

For his many faults one of the smartest things Douglas MacArthur ever did was keeping the Soviets out of Japan post-war. Stalin wanted Japan to be divided much like Germany, and Truman was considering allowing it. MacArthur fought against that happening and succeeded.

The Russians had beat back the Japanese twice really bad. This was probably one reason the Japanese never attempted taking them on again during WWII. It also allowed Stalin to transport troops to help save Moscow from the Germans.

After the war the US took possession of Japanese submarines designed to launch aircraft. The Russians requested one of
them for study. We sank them instead. Things like this may have helped convince the Russians to back North Korea's invasion of South Korea so much, and to send pilots and Migs to them.

I wonder if they might have tried to do something against the Russians even so, if they weren't already bogged down in China.

The Russians handled the Japanese at the Battle of Lake Khasan in 1938 and the Battle of Khalkhin Gol in 1939 because the Japanese were stuck with World War I tank tactics and tanks designed for that war. Specifically, tanks to support infantry against other infantry, otherwise known as "light tanks". They also didn't have the same number of tanks as their Soviet opponent. Soviet medium tanks (what we'd call a main battle tank today) and tank specific tactics took the Japanese by surprise.

Their reaction to this lesson; considering the Chinese had no real tanks to oppose them, and anywhere else they wanted to invade was likely to also contain none to few pieces of mobile armor; was to leave the Soviets alone and concentrate on other weapon systems that would work well against the Chinese and navy/island based war with the United States.

Yea that's true, their tanks weren't up to it. There still seemed to be a fair amount of discussion about fighting the Russians even then. Which is surprising to me. Though they did beat the Russian navy in 1905. To some extent I think they were still revelling in that victory, even though that was navy and not army.

In the Russo-Japanese War the Japanese dominated on sea and land for the entire war. This was mostly due to the fact that the Trans-Siberian Railway was at best an intermittent means of travel/communications in those days. Plus the Tsar's forces in the Amur region were woefully unprepared for war (mostly because the Eurocentric Russians couldn't fathom the Japanese being a real threat). Except for the Russian Pacific Fleet, which was crippled and contained in the opening day of the war, and the garrisons at Port Arthur and Vladisvostok; there were no significant land forces already in place in the Amur to oppose the Japanese Army. They had to ship their land forces across that fragile railway over 3000 miles and only a fraction of their forces thanks to the fact that they had potential aggressors on their European borders to worry about as well.

Add in the Tsarist bureaucracy's notorious mismanagement style and the results seem predictable.

Stalin didn't make that same mistake. He park a significant force in the Amur "just-in-case" and all he had to ship down a significantly improved Trans-Siberian Railway were supplies and replacements.

Japan never should have entered the war against the US. That never made sense why they did that.

Had they concentrated on China they could have overthrown the government there and installed a puppet while keeping Korea and Manchuria as territories.

In the long term the US probably would have gone for a friendly Japan with Korea and Manchuria that was a bulwark against Communism in Asia. It could have been the Japanese in Vietnam fighting Communism in the backyard instead of the US.

(06-20-2014 05:53 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Japan never should have entered the war against the US. That never made sense why they did that.

Had they concentrated on China they could have overthrown the government there and installed a puppet while keeping Korea and Manchuria as territories.

In the long term the US probably would have gone for a friendly Japan with Korea and Manchuria that was a bulwark against Communism in Asia. It could have been the Japanese in Vietnam fighting Communism in the backyard instead of the US.

You can't run a war, even in 1930's China, without oil and metal; two things the Japanese certainly didn't have at home or in the lands they had conquered up to that point. When the Japanese invaded French Indochina Roosevelt imposed a scrap metal embargo against the Japanese and also closed the Panama Canal to their shipping. 75% of Japanese scrap metal and 95% of all copper (electrical wires) came from the U.S. In the Summer of '41 they added an oil embargo which would completely shut down the Japanese military and economy within months. That's why Nomura and Kurusu were still negotiating with Cordell Hull up to December 7th.

(06-20-2014 11:23 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  

(06-20-2014 05:53 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Japan never should have entered the war against the US. That never made sense why they did that.

Had they concentrated on China they could have overthrown the government there and installed a puppet while keeping Korea and Manchuria as territories.

In the long term the US probably would have gone for a friendly Japan with Korea and Manchuria that was a bulwark against Communism in Asia. It could have been the Japanese in Vietnam fighting Communism in the backyard instead of the US.

You can't run a war, even in 1930's China, without oil and metal; two things the Japanese certainly didn't have at home or in the lands they had conquered up to that point. When the Japanese invaded French Indochina Roosevelt imposed a scrap metal embargo against the Japanese and also closed the Panama Canal to their shipping. 75% of Japanese scrap metal and 95% of all copper (electrical wires) came from the U.S. In the Summer of '41 they added an oil embargo which would completely shut down the Japanese military and economy within months. That's why Nomura and Kurusu were still negotiating with Cordell Hull up to December 7th.

Pearl Harbor attack by Japan was then a move in desperation?

(06-20-2014 05:14 PM)Kittonhead Wrote:  

(06-20-2014 11:23 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  

(06-20-2014 05:53 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Japan never should have entered the war against the US. That never made sense why they did that.

Had they concentrated on China they could have overthrown the government there and installed a puppet while keeping Korea and Manchuria as territories.

In the long term the US probably would have gone for a friendly Japan with Korea and Manchuria that was a bulwark against Communism in Asia. It could have been the Japanese in Vietnam fighting Communism in the backyard instead of the US.

You can't run a war, even in 1930's China, without oil and metal; two things the Japanese certainly didn't have at home or in the lands they had conquered up to that point. When the Japanese invaded French Indochina Roosevelt imposed a scrap metal embargo against the Japanese and also closed the Panama Canal to their shipping. 75% of Japanese scrap metal and 95% of all copper (electrical wires) came from the U.S. In the Summer of '41 they added an oil embargo which would completely shut down the Japanese military and economy within months. That's why Nomura and Kurusu were still negotiating with Cordell Hull up to December 7th.

Pearl Harbor attack by Japan was then a move in desperation?

Well they certainly thought so.

Roosevelt's reaction to them taking French Indochina convinced them the U.S.'s only move if they made grabs for further resource-rich territories was going to be war; so they thought why not get the jump on us and knock our Pacific Fleet (really the better quality part of 65% of our naval strength) out of action. Then they would have a free hand to grab the oil fields of the Dutch East Indies (today's Indonesia).

In hindsight, the Japanese could have grabbed the Dutch East Indies, British Malaya and Burma, even move into British India and we'd probably have done nothing but cut off all trade with them entirely. The Pacific wasn't the war Roosevelt wanted to get into (Europe first proved that). Plus it would have been really hard to convince the American people of 1941 that they should send their sons to die to keep Britain's, France's and The Netherlands' colonies in their possession. As long as the Japanese sailed past Guam and the Philippines nicely then Roosevelt's only military option would have been to move the old battlewagons to Subic Bay and put signs up in Kanji saying "bomb here please".

(06-06-2014 09:59 AM)vandiver49 Wrote:  There are some that insist that Russian involvement is what truly pressed Japan into surrendering to America.

That's interesting, I've never heard anybody suggest that before. But no matter how many people do believe it or consider it a plausible option, I am firmly convinced that Japan surrendered because of the two atomic bombs, and nothing else. Japan had no way of knowing how many other such bombs America possessed (in fact, very few if any were ready to be dropped on August 10) and simply could not withstand the idea of such bombs being dropped repeatedly on all of their population centers.

The Soviet Union was exhausted and I really doubt they would have participated in any kind of amphibious landing on Japan's home-islands. Stalin's declaration came about the time we dropped the atomic bombs and was all show, IMHO.

Quote:I find it interesting that it is nigh impossible to get to ground truth regarding the mindset of Japanese leadership in the waning days of the war.

This. Those men quite obviously adhered to the idea that death was preferable to any outward admission of failure or defeat.

Quote:in a scenario where the A-bomb doesn't exist, I think the US conducts bombing operations that make Dresden and Tokyo look like fireworks displays before putting a single person ashore.

Absolutely, yes.

The simple truth is that dropping the atomic bombs on Japan (thus forcing the Japanese surrender) spared millions of Japanese lives, because the alternative (an Iwo-Jima-style struggle for every square inch of territory) would have been incalculably worse.