The Zero's Maneuverability (8 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

Japan emerged from isolation into an era of global colonisation, things like the scramble for Africa, with its message of get modern and powerful or be taken over. It continued colonial behaviour into the 20th century after it became unfashionable in other world powers, evolving a system of attacking, keeping things when the worked, sending in the diplomats and blaming hot heads when it didn't. Many Japanese did care why its activities were seen as so bad. In the struggle between those wanting the military solution and those wanting more peaceful methods Japan managed to acquire a reputation for dishonesty as parts of the Government would say one thing but other parts would do another.

Think also of how many empires (or countries) were created by individuals going off and taking control of areas then "presenting" them to the government. With their original expeditions having somewhere between no and full official support. The British Colonial office in the 19th century was very anti colonial in the early period, since it seemed to them adventurers would go off, claim the area, upset the inhabitants and leave the British Government to pick up the costs and colonies were a financial drain. At the end of the 19th century the attitude had radically changed.

Japan taking Korea from China, the Russo-Japanese War (though a number of Japanese gains were taken by European powers after the settlement), the spoils of WWI plus the 21 demands on China. Japan was the last to leave what became the USSR, dreams of expansion into Siberia existed. There was strong support for the idea a great power had a big military and a colonial empire and that Japan deserved to be a great power. Asia ruled by Japan had plenty of support in Japan. The depression and subsequent trade barriers hurt Japan, helping the radical's cause, there was real anger over the poverty in Japan when compared with the west and the way the west was perceived as rigging the rules to keep it that way.

When it comes to the 20+ years of decisions from 1918 on there were plenty of people involved and their ideas and reasons changed over time, as did circumstances. The Japanese Government was a military and civilian government given the Navy and Army ministers had to be serving officers. That gave the Army and/or Navy veto powers. The Japanese Diet was democratic and the story of the 1930's for Japan is the struggle between those that wanted it as a western style legislature and those that wanted it neutered and/or stacked with radicals.

On 14 May 1932 the Japanese Prime Minister was assassinated, the killers found many supporters, their trials became a platform for them to state their beliefs, light sentences, many later reduced.

In Tokyo early morning 26 February 1936, the rebels begin to kill their targets. At 9.00 am the Emperor interrupts the Army officer reading out what was a list of justifications for the killings, with a request to stop the rebellion. So troops and ships were mobilised to surround the rebel held areas, meantime the Army command tried to figure out a way to, in effect, endorse the rebellion or at least get the rebels minimal punishment. On 28 February the final pleas for clemency came in from the Army leaders, including a request for an Imperial agent authorising the rebels to commit suicide. On 29 February the troops finally moved, starting at about 8.00am. The list of conspirators were 1,475 army, 8 civilians and 0 navy. The courts martial were held without publicity, lasted around an hour each and the ringleaders, military and civilian, were executed. The purge was also helped by the fact so many of those killed were navy men, and their killers were army. Post rebellion the new Prime Minister Koki Hirota then was able to stare down the Army's attempts at a blacklist of potential cabinet members. The Diet was more moderate and therefore more able to put a brake on the radicals. Japan's drift to major war was slowed but not stopped. The threats of violence helping supress dissent about radial solutions, the war but not a war with China from July 1937 another reason to clamp down on dissent and push the expansion case, support the troops, it is patriotic.

The "2-26" incident was much more a genuine uprising, the generals did not order it, even if they largely agreed with the demands. Note the demands of the rebels were to annihilate people in power who were hindering "the divine Showa Restoration", these included, military officers, elder statesmen, bureaucrats, political party leaders and "other criminals".

It seems clear Japan could make war on China with minimal risk of intervention from other powers, something evident at the time, The IJA invaded Manchuria in September 1931 and by the end of the year had occupied the area. The Shanghai incident ran from 18 January to 3 March 1932, where the IJN tried to use force to stop the Chinese boycott of Japanese goods. Effectively a division of IJA troops was sent in February. The Japanese officially created their Manchurian colony on 25 August 1932. On 31 August 1932 the Japanese invoked their version of the Monroe Doctrine. In March 1933 the IJA occupied key areas of Jehol province. On 27 March 1933 Japan announced it was withdrawing from the League of Nations. In 1934 IJA troops entered Chahar (inner Mongolia) and Hopei (the province Beijing was in). During 1934 the Japanese worked up their plan for a war with the USSR, using 27 out of 30 divisions. Which required the situation in China to be quiet. In Spring 1935 pro Japanese Chinese troops drove the Chinese forces out of Jehol. The Japanese also demanded Chinese troops withdraw from Hopei, which they did.

Tension in northern China was on the rise as the Nationalists closed in on the (semi) independent warlords there, forcing them to choose between fighting the nationalists or joining them. The Japanese expansionists were not happy about the idea they could face a united China, instead of a collection of warlords they could manipulate or easily defeat. The colonial faction was not happy about the long term threat a united China would pose to the Japanese colonies on the mainland. The excuse for intervention of lawlessness was going away.

Inside the military there was the Kodo ha (Imperial Way) faction aiming for a military dictatorship under the Emperor (The civilians with their links to big business had plenty of corruption scandals to parade) and the Tosei ha or control faction who wanted the army in the field to be controlled by GHQ and were less interested in a military dictatorship.

Kodo ha, 100% soldier, Emperor higher than the law, "direct rule of the Emperor", divine origin believers, anti communist, politicians no good, no compromise, unhappy with peace, battlefield men, Nazi type sympathisers.

Tosei ha, more law abiding, lay stress on merit, respect status quo, believe in cooperating with politicians and businessmen, consider international cooperation important.

The trouble for the officers in charge were the increased radicalisation of subordinates, "Rule from Below"

According to the Japanese statistical yearbook the official Japanese expenditure by the war and navy departments goes like this, in million yen, year, war, navy

1930 201 / 242
1931 227 / 227
1932 374 / 313
1933 463 / 410
1934 459 / 483
1935 497 / 536
1936 511 / 567
1937 591 / 645
1938 488 / 679
1939 825 / 804
1940 1,192 / 1,034
1941 1,156 / 1,497

Total Japanese government expenditure grew from 1,558 million yen in 1930 to 8,134 million yen in 1941. Note the struggle for parity between the army and navy. The problem is to capture all the expenditure on defence, not just the departmental budgets. According to Japan's War Economy by Erich Pauer in 1930 the Japanese government spent 28.6% of its budget on defence and 17.7% on debt. By 1935 it was 46.3% and 17.6% respectively, in 1940 50.3% and 15.5%. Government liabilities in the first 5 years of the 1930s came to 3.7 billion yen, the next 5 years 20.5 billion yen. (the 1941-45 period 168.5 billion yen)

In June 1937 there was a USSR border incident which was resolved largely without fighting, but when Japan signed the anti Comintern pact the USSR stepped up its support to China.

China incident first shots fired 7 July 1937, fighting from then on. The army had become radicalised enough to conduct massacres as well as running around wielding swords.

In July 1938 the Japanese demanded control of all disputed border areas with the USSR and Manchuria. This was supported by a corps level attack to take one area and the local commanders, as near usual, kept going beyond their ordered stop line and were then kicked back out in 3 days, with 500 Japanese dead and 1,000 wounded. Then came Nohomon in June and July 1939, including a major attack against the Emperor's express orders, the result was a Japanese division nearly annihilated. With things like Japanese air strikes on Siberian airfields, after the fighting and armistice the Kwantung Army command was purged. It seems there was a faction who planned China then the USSR, and they were very discomforted by the Hitler-Stalin agreement in August 1939. Even in December 1941 about 25% of the army strength was in Manchuria.

In 1940/41 China was asking for US help in having Japan to the peace table. Japanese terms, China would recognise the new Inner Mongolia Government (Can you say Japanese colony), Japan could enlarge garrisons in Northern China. No Anti Japanese officials would be appointed in North China. The Shanghai DMZ would be enlarged (equals more Japanese troops in Shanghai). All anti Japanese policies eliminated, with Japan determining anti Japanese. China would join the Anti Comintern pact. China would cut tariffs for Japanese goods. China would respect foreigners rights and interests in China. (Japan would take or do what it wanted). Later came merging the Nationalist and Japanese sponsored governments.

The risks are of course obvious from hindsight, in 1940 the great risk was the European Empires with colonies in Asia might be breaking up and failure to fill that power vacuum would mean Japan losing a great opportunity to instantly have big and wealthy additions to the Empire. Additions that would make it dominant in the rubber and tin trade and provide all the oil the country needed as well as plenty of food. Powerful and successful allies had been found in Europe, the Red Army Counter attack near Moscow started on 5 December 1941, well after Japan's war decision. Japan told itself it had easily won all its modern wars, even when badly out numbered. The military control of the government meant military solutions and requirements tended to come first. The amount of political violence in Japan meant many thought there was a real risk of civil war, making some decide better to fight an external enemy and possibly lose than defeat yourselves and end up destroyed anyway.

A war between Japan and the US became as close to inevitable as possible when Japan signed the Tripartite Pact in September 1940, with its conditions about what to do if another major power entered the then existing European war, the US had a copy almost immediately. During 1940 it became clear Japan was stockpiling strategic resources, helping that was a bad move, especially before operation Barbarossa as it risked materials making it to Europe, or being used in any attack on South East Asia in support of the Axis. The Japanese judged the US would enter the war as soon as Japan attacked South East Asia, or soon after, derailing the offensive.

By 1940/41 there had been plenty of moves and counter moves, depending on the chosen start date it is easy to decide one was the driver and the other doing the reacting.
 
And if you had asked the average Japanese man, women, or child if Japan would ever attack the USA the answer would have been a resounding no. If you had been able to ask them if they supported the war against America before or soon after Pearl Harbor the answer would have been NO.
The RAF "dehousing" approach to strategic air war was supposed to cause the outraged German people to rise up and overthrow the Nazis. Did not happen. Did not come even close to happening. As the British book, "The Bombers and the Bombed" puts it, the German were already more scared of their own government than they were of Allied bombing. The RAF got pretty darn good at dehousing, and the Luftwaffe was badly embarrassed at their inability to defend their country (a fact which had its uses, especially for the USAAF), but dehousing never worked. Even Harris finally admitted that if the dehousing attacks had been directed at the oil industry it would have done far more good at ending the war.

The same was true in Japan. The B-29 fire raids were not just industrial attacks but also were for dehousing. But the Japanese people did not rise up and overthrow the Army, or even come close to doing so. Admittedly, the attacks did a pretty nice job of forcing the Japanese to realize that other philosophies and lifestyles might just be superior to theirs and with that in mind they did a damn fine job of building a new country, one that has taught us more than few useful things.

Now, if you will excuse me, I will go out and finish recoating the bedliner on my beautiful 1999 Toyota 4X4 pickup truck.
 
In 1973, following the Yom Kipper War, in which the Arabs lost badly after attacking Israel, they cut off oil to the US in retaliation, resulting in a major gasoline shortage. The US did not respond by attacking the Arabs.
2004-01-02 04:00:00 PDT London -- The U.S. government seriously contemplated using military force to seize oil fields in the Middle East during the Arab oil embargo of 30 years ago, according to a declassified British government document made public on Thursday.
The top-secret document reveals that the U.S. government, under President Richard Nixon, was prepared to act more aggressively than previously thought to secure America's oil supply, if tensions between Israel and its Arab neighbors continued to escalate after the October 1973 Mideast war or the oil embargo did not abate. In fact, the embargo did dwindle, by March 1974.
If this "dark scenario" played out, the British memorandum continued, the United States would consider launching airborne troops to seize oil fields in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Abu Dhabi. The use of military force would be a measure of "last resort," the document said.
https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Document-reveals-Nixon-plan-to-seize-Arab-oil-2818821.php
 
Japan emerged from isolation into an era of global colonisation, things like the scramble for Africa, with its message of get modern and powerful or be taken over. It continued colonial behaviour into the 20th century after it became unfashionable in other world powers, evolving a system of attacking, keeping things when the worked, sending in the diplomats and blaming hot heads when it didn't. Many Japanese did care why its activities were seen as so bad. In the struggle between those wanting the military solution and those wanting more peaceful methods Japan managed to acquire a reputation for dishonesty as parts of the Government would say one thing but other parts would do another.

Think also of how many empires (or countries) were created by individuals going off and taking control of areas then "presenting" them to the government. With their original expeditions having somewhere between no and full official support. The British Colonial office in the 19th century was very anti colonial in the early period, since it seemed to them adventurers would go off, claim the area, upset the inhabitants and leave the British Government to pick up the costs and colonies were a financial drain. At the end of the 19th century the attitude had radically changed.

Japan taking Korea from China, the Russo-Japanese War (though a number of Japanese gains were taken by European powers after the settlement), the spoils of WWI plus the 21 demands on China. Japan was the last to leave what became the USSR, dreams of expansion into Siberia existed. There was strong support for the idea a great power had a big military and a colonial empire and that Japan deserved to be a great power. Asia ruled by Japan had plenty of support in Japan. The depression and subsequent trade barriers hurt Japan, helping the radical's cause, there was real anger over the poverty in Japan when compared with the west and the way the west was perceived as rigging the rules to keep it that way.

When it comes to the 20+ years of decisions from 1918 on there were plenty of people involved and their ideas and reasons changed over time, as did circumstances. The Japanese Government was a military and civilian government given the Navy and Army ministers had to be serving officers. That gave the Army and/or Navy veto powers. The Japanese Diet was democratic and the story of the 1930's for Japan is the struggle between those that wanted it as a western style legislature and those that wanted it neutered and/or stacked with radicals.

On 14 May 1932 the Japanese Prime Minister was assassinated, the killers found many supporters, their trials became a platform for them to state their beliefs, light sentences, many later reduced.

In Tokyo early morning 26 February 1936, the rebels begin to kill their targets. At 9.00 am the Emperor interrupts the Army officer reading out what was a list of justifications for the killings, with a request to stop the rebellion. So troops and ships were mobilised to surround the rebel held areas, meantime the Army command tried to figure out a way to, in effect, endorse the rebellion or at least get the rebels minimal punishment. On 28 February the final pleas for clemency came in from the Army leaders, including a request for an Imperial agent authorising the rebels to commit suicide. On 29 February the troops finally moved, starting at about 8.00am. The list of conspirators were 1,475 army, 8 civilians and 0 navy. The courts martial were held without publicity, lasted around an hour each and the ringleaders, military and civilian, were executed. The purge was also helped by the fact so many of those killed were navy men, and their killers were army. Post rebellion the new Prime Minister Koki Hirota then was able to stare down the Army's attempts at a blacklist of potential cabinet members. The Diet was more moderate and therefore more able to put a brake on the radicals. Japan's drift to major war was slowed but not stopped. The threats of violence helping supress dissent about radial solutions, the war but not a war with China from July 1937 another reason to clamp down on dissent and push the expansion case, support the troops, it is patriotic.

The "2-26" incident was much more a genuine uprising, the generals did not order it, even if they largely agreed with the demands. Note the demands of the rebels were to annihilate people in power who were hindering "the divine Showa Restoration", these included, military officers, elder statesmen, bureaucrats, political party leaders and "other criminals".

It seems clear Japan could make war on China with minimal risk of intervention from other powers, something evident at the time, The IJA invaded Manchuria in September 1931 and by the end of the year had occupied the area. The Shanghai incident ran from 18 January to 3 March 1932, where the IJN tried to use force to stop the Chinese boycott of Japanese goods. Effectively a division of IJA troops was sent in February. The Japanese officially created their Manchurian colony on 25 August 1932. On 31 August 1932 the Japanese invoked their version of the Monroe Doctrine. In March 1933 the IJA occupied key areas of Jehol province. On 27 March 1933 Japan announced it was withdrawing from the League of Nations. In 1934 IJA troops entered Chahar (inner Mongolia) and Hopei (the province Beijing was in). During 1934 the Japanese worked up their plan for a war with the USSR, using 27 out of 30 divisions. Which required the situation in China to be quiet. In Spring 1935 pro Japanese Chinese troops drove the Chinese forces out of Jehol. The Japanese also demanded Chinese troops withdraw from Hopei, which they did.

Tension in northern China was on the rise as the Nationalists closed in on the (semi) independent warlords there, forcing them to choose between fighting the nationalists or joining them. The Japanese expansionists were not happy about the idea they could face a united China, instead of a collection of warlords they could manipulate or easily defeat. The colonial faction was not happy about the long term threat a united China would pose to the Japanese colonies on the mainland. The excuse for intervention of lawlessness was going away.

Inside the military there was the Kodo ha (Imperial Way) faction aiming for a military dictatorship under the Emperor (The civilians with their links to big business had plenty of corruption scandals to parade) and the Tosei ha or control faction who wanted the army in the field to be controlled by GHQ and were less interested in a military dictatorship.

Kodo ha, 100% soldier, Emperor higher than the law, "direct rule of the Emperor", divine origin believers, anti communist, politicians no good, no compromise, unhappy with peace, battlefield men, Nazi type sympathisers.

Tosei ha, more law abiding, lay stress on merit, respect status quo, believe in cooperating with politicians and businessmen, consider international cooperation important.

The trouble for the officers in charge were the increased radicalisation of subordinates, "Rule from Below"

According to the Japanese statistical yearbook the official Japanese expenditure by the war and navy departments goes like this, in million yen, year, war, navy

1930 201 / 242
1931 227 / 227
1932 374 / 313
1933 463 / 410
1934 459 / 483
1935 497 / 536
1936 511 / 567
1937 591 / 645
1938 488 / 679
1939 825 / 804
1940 1,192 / 1,034
1941 1,156 / 1,497

Total Japanese government expenditure grew from 1,558 million yen in 1930 to 8,134 million yen in 1941. Note the struggle for parity between the army and navy. The problem is to capture all the expenditure on defence, not just the departmental budgets. According to Japan's War Economy by Erich Pauer in 1930 the Japanese government spent 28.6% of its budget on defence and 17.7% on debt. By 1935 it was 46.3% and 17.6% respectively, in 1940 50.3% and 15.5%. Government liabilities in the first 5 years of the 1930s came to 3.7 billion yen, the next 5 years 20.5 billion yen. (the 1941-45 period 168.5 billion yen)

In June 1937 there was a USSR border incident which was resolved largely without fighting, but when Japan signed the anti Comintern pact the USSR stepped up its support to China.

China incident first shots fired 7 July 1937, fighting from then on. The army had become radicalised enough to conduct massacres as well as running around wielding swords.

In July 1938 the Japanese demanded control of all disputed border areas with the USSR and Manchuria. This was supported by a corps level attack to take one area and the local commanders, as near usual, kept going beyond their ordered stop line and were then kicked back out in 3 days, with 500 Japanese dead and 1,000 wounded. Then came Nohomon in June and July 1939, including a major attack against the Emperor's express orders, the result was a Japanese division nearly annihilated. With things like Japanese air strikes on Siberian airfields, after the fighting and armistice the Kwantung Army command was purged. It seems there was a faction who planned China then the USSR, and they were very discomforted by the Hitler-Stalin agreement in August 1939. Even in December 1941 about 25% of the army strength was in Manchuria.

In 1940/41 China was asking for US help in having Japan to the peace table. Japanese terms, China would recognise the new Inner Mongolia Government (Can you say Japanese colony), Japan could enlarge garrisons in Northern China. No Anti Japanese officials would be appointed in North China. The Shanghai DMZ would be enlarged (equals more Japanese troops in Shanghai). All anti Japanese policies eliminated, with Japan determining anti Japanese. China would join the Anti Comintern pact. China would cut tariffs for Japanese goods. China would respect foreigners rights and interests in China. (Japan would take or do what it wanted). Later came merging the Nationalist and Japanese sponsored governments.

The risks are of course obvious from hindsight, in 1940 the great risk was the European Empires with colonies in Asia might be breaking up and failure to fill that power vacuum would mean Japan losing a great opportunity to instantly have big and wealthy additions to the Empire. Additions that would make it dominant in the rubber and tin trade and provide all the oil the country needed as well as plenty of food. Powerful and successful allies had been found in Europe, the Red Army Counter attack near Moscow started on 5 December 1941, well after Japan's war decision. Japan told itself it had easily won all its modern wars, even when badly out numbered. The military control of the government meant military solutions and requirements tended to come first. The amount of political violence in Japan meant many thought there was a real risk of civil war, making some decide better to fight an external enemy and possibly lose than defeat yourselves and end up destroyed anyway.

A war between Japan and the US became as close to inevitable as possible when Japan signed the Tripartite Pact in September 1940, with its conditions about what to do if another major power entered the then existing European war, the US had a copy almost immediately. During 1940 it became clear Japan was stockpiling strategic resources, helping that was a bad move, especially before operation Barbarossa as it risked materials making it to Europe, or being used in any attack on South East Asia in support of the Axis. The Japanese judged the US would enter the war as soon as Japan attacked South East Asia, or soon after, derailing the offensive.

By 1940/41 there had been plenty of moves and counter moves, depending on the chosen start date it is easy to decide one was the driver and the other doing the reacting.
I could not give both bacon & agree. Your statements of history have been my point of view. We came to Japan in the 1850s, found them fighting with swords, running around in bathrobes, and said this is no way to conduct business. They learned to use guns and colonize as the British, French, Portuguese, and others did. They tried that with China and we said wrong again. Not military power, but economic power, so they built electronics and cars. Now, we complain because their stuff is good and cheap.
 
Regarding the "brain wash" attitude against Japan, pre and post war, much was caused by news reports at the time. Many of the US service members came home with that attitude for their lifetime. An example, in the 1970s - early eighties, many WW2 vets were retiring from their careers. A wife of one such retiree commented, "He wants to come with me everywhere. The other day, leaving the bank, walking through the parking lot, we came to man with the car hood up, holding jumper cables. Bob looked in at the engine and said, "That's a Jap car. Get a Jap to jump it."
 
In 1973, following the Yom Kipper War, in which the Arabs lost badly after attacking Israel, they cut off oil to the US in retaliation, resulting in a major gasoline shortage. The US did not respond by attacking the Arabs.
The 1940 situation was not anywhere CLOSE to the 1973 situation. Very MANY things in 1973 had "work arounds" for which none existed in 1940.

Not saying you are wrong. I'm saying things weren't anywhere near the same in 1940 Japan as in 1973 U.S.A., politically, economically, socially, or international cooperation-wise. In 1940, the Japanese weren't friends with anyone, so there was nobody going to help in any way.
 
These decisions are always made by politicians for their own glory. Not by the ordinary man in the street who knows he and his family are the ones who will be the meat in the grinder while those who caused the war, and their kin, sit safe and sound well away from any fighting.


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LQUXuQ6Zd9w
 
The RAF "dehousing" approach to strategic air war was supposed to cause the outraged German people to rise up and overthrow the Nazis.

Now, if you will excuse me, I will go out and finish recoating the bedliner on my beautiful 1999 Toyota 4X4 pickup truck.

How in the name of everything sane they came up with that idea is beyond me.

They only had to look what happened in England during the German bombing of London in both ww1 and ww2. That did not cause the outraged British people to rise up and overthrow the government in either case. Instead it solidified the British people against the Germans both times.

To expect the exact opposite to happen in Germany was a classic case of "military intelligence".

The same military intelligence that the US used in Vietnam and the Russians are using in Ukraine.

Photos of the finished pickup belong in picture of the day.
 
14 February 1942 directive to Bomber Command ".. it has been decided that the primary object of your operations should now be focussed on the morale of the enemy civil population and in particular, the industrial areas. With this aim in view, a list of selected area targets (taking account of the anticipated range of the TR.1335 equipment [GEE]) is attached in Annex 'A'..." GEE range listed as 350 miles from Mildenhall.

Primary areas, Essen, Duisberg, Dusseldorf, Cologne, alternative areas Bremen, Wilhelmshaven, Emden. The estimated weight of attack (total bomb tonnage required) for decisive damage assuming 50% efficiency was calculated two ways a) 7 tons per square mile, b) 1 ton per 800 population,
Essen a) 1,000, b) 1,600
Duisberg a) 800, b) 1,100
Dusseldorf a) 850, b) 1,200
Cologne a) 1,400, b) 1,800

The ultimate effort against morale was the Battle of Berlin given the city was not considered to have a lot of industry but the idea survived to influence SHAEF thinking in September 1944 (armies closer to Germany than in 1918, allies deserting like in 1918) and the allied operation Hurricane raids on the Ruhr in October 1944, where Bomber Command dropped over 9,000 tons of bombs on Duisberg in a day. The way Germany had collapsed in 1918 continued its influence almost to the end.

The area bombing ideas came from observations of Luftwaffe raids on Britain. Coventry especially showed destroying factories was hard, most production loss was due to disruption to the work force, housing, electricity, water and gas supply, transport to do essential tasks like shopping, on top of the loss of shops. There were definite drops in morale in places plus economic effects from trekking into the countryside at night to sleep. Part of the support of Bomber Command in 1940/41 came from the need to generate "good news" and show it was not all one way, despite the statements from people who had been bombed out that they did not wish it on anyone.

The various USSBS morale reports for Germany make it clear morale as defined in "let us overthrow the Government" or "we want out of the war now" did not break. Absenteeism went up and productivity did not improve as much as in other areas. There were examples of workers becoming more dedicated but it appears the general result of the situation in Germany in 1943 and beyond was an increase in general apathy and absenteeism, Ford factories in the Ruhr 4% in 1940 and 25% in 1944, foreign workers could be held to 3% absenteeism but they were 50 to 80% as productive as Germans. No revolt, just a get through the day attitude. Of course it was not just bombing, it was the war situation and the casualties taken.

Until around the end of 1943 Harris had the most realistic view of what the strategic bombers could actually do, he then reached for the ultimate bombing prize, collapse due to air power, while it is hard to pin down the exact figure, in 11 months of fighting from June 1944 21st Army Group seems to have had as many killed in action as Bomber Command total war dead, a toll worth trying to avoid. As 1944 went on Harris failed to pick up the effects of improved bombing effects and accuracy, while allied heavy bomber forces bomb lift went from around 5,000 tons in mid 1943 to 20,000 tons in the second half of 1944, in a quantity has its own quality effect. Harris objections to the oil campaign rested on how temporary bomb damage could be, the size of the oil sector, the difficulty of hitting the targets and the ability to keep hitting them once the bad weather arrived. Reasons that had evidence based on previous "panacea target" attacks. Harris supported area bombing post war to the end.

In the final 4 months of 1944 the 8th dropped 35% of its bombs through 10/10 cloud and another 15% through 8 or 9/10 cloud, "blind bombing" Bomber Command Area Attacks are officially 46% of effort in those 4 months, and that includes things like the 6 November 1944 attack on the Nordstern oil plant at Gelsenkirchen, and the 9 November 1944 attack on the Wanne-Eickel refinery, bad weather meant they are officially recorded as area attacks. Under the USAAF system they would be oil attacks, dropping area attacks to around 43.8% of bombing effort.

For the shore bombardments of Japan in 1945, those advocating the bombardments noted that since there was no warning system, unlike for air raids, the effects on the work force were greater, with significant increases in absenteeism, plus while an air raid would last for minutes the bombardments could go on for hours. Apparently the Hitachi plant bombarded in the 17th of July had to shut for a month thanks to absenteeism, despite only 4 shells landing in the plant. The copper mine output dropped to around 1/3 due to fear a bombardment would destroy the pumps and thereby flood the mines. Of course in at least 2 plants the opposite occurred, with increases in morale and output.

The US interest in Japan was pushed by the Japanese failing to do their Christian duty to shipwrecked mariners by putting the sailors in prison, the gap between Japan and the world was painfully obvious and the world was coming, the immediate result was civil war, removing the shogunate, handing power back to the Emperor and a legislature. In 1940/41 Japan had other countries with common interests, Hitler and Mussolini would be quite pleased if South East Asian resources were denied to the allies for a start, the Germans had done a quite effective U-boat campaign off the US east coast in WWI, another one would absorb USN forces for a start.

There is the derogatory term of "just copying", Japan tried the colonial/military approach in the first half of the 20th century, then switched to the industrial/trade/civil approach post WWII, with improvements to things like quality control, apart from it having functioning male only electoral system pre WWII to build on the post war occupation did a lot to change attitudes about the rest of the world.
 
According to one source in the 70's, a book by a lawyer who was involved with the Japanese war crimes trials, the quality issue came from the Japanese taking all males out of school when they reached a certain age and then stuck them in war production factories. At their next birthday they were conscripted into one of the military services. This meant that they spent a relatively large percentage of their manufacturing time in training and became cannon fodder soon after becoming competent at their jobs. Other countries used women workers and/or classified the male workers as essential and blocked them from being conscripted.

The book had a title something like Imperial Conspiracy.
IIRC the problem was the Japanese Army, IJN understood the need of qualified workers but could not prevent Army to follow its very strict conscription policy
 
My apologies but I could not see any other way to make people realise what the Japanese faced in ww2 and why they reacted the way they did.

My father was in ww2 and served at Guadalcanal. Before being sent there they were, in his words, brainwashed to hate the Japanese.

During the big Japanese push he was in the hospital at Henderson field, along with many other servicemen suffering from malaria. The only reason he lived to 93 was that the Japanese troops who went through the hospital area first banged on the roof of each hospital tent, then when there was no "reaction" sliced a hole in the roof, then when there was no 'reaction' stuck their heads in. When no one tried to kill them they just walked away. You would think from that he would look positively on Japanese but no - right to his end he could not look at, or hear comments about his Japanese son in law without the brainwashing instantly returning. Not even the fact that he liked his SIL and that his SIL was a highly respected doctor and HOD of his organisation could stop this occurring.

The same hatreds are being engineered in many countries right now and that scares the sh-one-t out of me.

EDIT. My BIL was born in an internment camp for Japanese even though his father and uncles were in the 100th Infantry Battalion.


A friend of mine who was married to a very nice Korean lady always wanted to get me to hate the Japanese. He would ask, "How can you work on Japanese aircraft for the simulators? Don't you know what they did to your ancestors?" What I told him was that the people who were guilty of these deeds have been dead a very long time. We never could agree on the subject.
What I never told him was that I was working with the Japanese Maritime Self Defense Force for a few years. I had a chance to get to know some of their officers and a few of our own retired CPOs and become pretty good friends with them.

- Ivan.
 
The same military intelligence that the US used in Vietnam and the Russians are using in Ukraine.
US Strategy, such as it could be called in Vietnam, wasn't about dehousing or outright elimination of the North.
That's what the USAF&USN did in North Korea, and ran out of worth targets in a year.

North Vietnam, very, very strict RoE until 1972

South Vietnam?

'That Map Grid looks good, might have had a Truck in it at some point. Bomb it'
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back