WWII air war myths

[tyrodtom]

Isn't it a myth that the crickets that were given to the airborne troops and used on D-day mimiced the bolt of the german rifle and led to us deaths?

Those little cricket clickers were still popular when I was a kid, they don't sound remotely like anyone working the bolt of a Mauser, or any other rifle bolt being worked.

Even if the sound was similiar, how many troops would be that familiar with how a Mauser bolt sounds, and really anyone waiting in ambush is going to put a round in the chamber well before there's any hostiles around, and engage the safety, maybe.
Whoever made up that little myth has seen too many movies, where the enemy has to work his bolt when surprised. In real life, any troop would already have a round chambered.

 

[parsifal]

Well this seems to have drifted far from your original (seeming) point of explaining the plausibility of the Japanese giving fearsome to names to Allied a/c due to their culture. Some of your statements now seem to pretty directly contradict that as in 3, which IMO means you've moved further torward the truth, because it was in fact particularly unlikely that the Japanese would do something like call an Allied plane by a name implying it was to be feared, even compared to other air arms, who probably wouldn't do it either

.

Read my post concerning the term "whispering death". i never said there waas any evidence to support it. My exact words were that it was unlikely that the term came from a japanese source. Dont try and attribute things I never said or implied to justify your obvious and overt pro-japanese bias

Anyway on a few other points,

1. and 2. Every modern nation has a national myth of its past, not 'myth' is sense of the 'air myths' we're speaking of here, but some semi-true story that expresses what that nation thinks it is or wants to be. It never exactly coincides with the real past. Just the fact that typical Japanese officers, commoners, would ape the habits of Samurai gives you a hint about that. That belief 'they were like the Samurai' came from the national myth created in the Meiji period, which was no aberration whatsoever, but the basis of a new society created not all that long before those 1940's men were born. Their actual ancestors weren't Samurai, they were peasants who counted for nothing, by and large. Their idea of what the Samurai was and how he should act was a mixture of history and national myth of the Meiji period, as modified (or mutated perhaps) by particular social developments between then and WWII. It's somewhat like Americans speaking of 'our traditions of the Old West', which had no actual place in the direct family lineage of the vast majority of Americans. But that's part of our national myth: the *story* of the Old West does have an impact

.



Th myth about the japanese military being the descendants came from a number of sources, the influence of the meiji was about the least important influence. The rise of japanese militarism was not a random incidental event....it permeated every aspect of military traning, and the militarists exploited japans medieval military traditions down to and including training regimes for its personnel. if you are imbued with a miltary doctrine, which we call the code of the bushido, it is a certainty that the organization as a whol, including its aviators, and its military strategists are going to have their thinking, their problem solving approaches, coloured by that thinking.

its intersting that you raise the myth of the old west. I agree that its a part of the American national psyche, but it seems to escape you that this psyche is essentially rooted in the very thing i am talking about. the myths of the old west for their time are essentially technocratic in comparison to the older, more medieval thinking of the japanese self image

Japan was inward looking from around the 1620's to 1850's, which isn't just to nitpick but to recognize that attitudes ca. 1550 were quite different again; Japan a major trading country at that time. And an expanisionist culture and a hermit culture are not the same thing at all; that was a real change. As far as brutality the English in the 16th century still half hung, castrated and mutilated to death live victims, and put down rebellions with mass killings. Once you go back a few centuries that was pretty much universal behavior when rulers thought it necessary

.


You are right about the period 1550 to 1620, however you fail to acknowledge that during that period the japanese fought a series of wars that progressively decreased the outward looking, progressive attitudes, and reinforced the inward looking shogunates. The ultimate outcome of that period (1550-1620) was the adoption of the isolationist policies thast we are talking about. It is therefore entirely valid for me to include 150

I think this discussion also gets back to leftover Allied WWII propaganda (which doesn't mean 'false', but just simplified story to get across and have adopted by the audiecne the 'necessary' POV). 'The Japanese were just like that via their culture', when in fact the 16th century culture of Japan had no more really direct impact on 20th century behavior than in the West.

sorry but this has nothing to do with post war propaganda. The japanese as a society were far more conservative and militaristic than anything seen in the west, arguably even moreso than the germans. It was (and is) an inherently conservative society, and its behaviour in the 20th century is entirely consistent with that.

because of that ultra societal conservatism, ther was and is amuch greater affinity to their medieval past than anythig we have experienced. There is nothing proagandist about that. There is, however an agenda behind trying to dress up japanese socitey as 'progressive" and "just like us"....in fact they were neither.

There were real events in Japanese history which caused the social/political changes which manifested in Japanese policy and behavior in the 30's-40

Of course some also had roots much further back, but it's way oversimplified to characterize as just a resumption of 'normal' after an 'aberration', which also logically implies that current Japanese society is another 'aberration', IMO a very hard to support thesis in the face of any facts or direct experience in modern Japan

.

There are plenty of sociological theses to support that very notion...suggest you do some basic research and come back to earth before making statements like that

4. Actually Japanese airmen were mostly enlisted men, as opposed to mostly (and eventually almost exclusively) officers in Western air arms and had less prestige if anything

.

true that they were mostly enlisted. I would also reinforce that by saying that the military leaders that used them viewed them as 'cheap and expendable". Apart from that, almost everything else in your statement is sheer fabrication, designed i believe to achive a specific purpose and outcome. The prewar aircrews were imbued with a psyche of invincibility and indoctrinated to amuch greater extent of the military virues of their 'system" to a far greater extent than anything in the west.

also, it is true that ASW and commerce defense generally were a blind spot in Japanese naval thinking for a long time before WWII. But besides being a completely different issue than whether the outlook was 'romantic' or 'technical', the IJN's theory of beating the USN in a decisive naval action in a short war, while ultimately unsuccessful and perhaps unrealistic, was more realistic than the idea of winning a war of attrition v the US by successfully defending Japanese commerce for a long time.

It was also a strategic blind spot for both the RN and USN. However, whereas both the western navies recognized that defincy and reacted appropriately (some initiatives like convoying not costing a penny inrresources), the japanese displayed a marked resistance to such thinking. Almost certainly this sterms from the more authoritarian system within the IJN, japanese officers were simply not trained to think outside the square 9or circle0, wester officers were (well, generally)

 

[A4K]

Cannibalism amongst the IJA was no myth.

Read once of a british officer being consumed as a 'special feast' for a visiting japanese General. Can't remember where unfortunately.

 

[stona]

Read once of a british officer being consumed as a 'special feast' for a visiting japanese General. Can't remember where unfortunately.

You may be thinking of the US airman Marve Mershon who,having been beheaded,was partially consummed by Japanese Officers (Chichi Jima,Feb '45).

This is an example of ritualistic cannibalism, a form of so called "customary" cannibalism,something that has been practised in many cultures around the world. The victim is not eaten because there is no other sustenance available but rather for ritualistic or magical reasons. A common belief is that the eater,by ingesting the flesh,will somehow acquire some desirable attributes perceived in the victim.

Cannibalism in WW2 was more often driven by desperation. This is called survival cannibalism,almost anyone is capable of this. There are examples of men surviving in life boats by eating their deceased (allegedly) comrades,or even drawing lots to see who would be eaten,and who would be the killer. These weren't Japanese.
In Western cultures this type of cannibalism sometimes called "lifeboat cannibalism" is tolerated. The perpetrators did not often find themselves executed after rescue.

The most famous modern case must surely be the survivors of the 1972 Andean plane crash. These survivors were not subject to any form of retribution and received a Papal Indulgence to remit the punishment due for the "sin" in the after life (they were all Roman Catholics).

In the US the story of the 1846 "Donner Party" is,or should be,well known.

Cheers

Steve

 

[A4K]

I don't remember the time or place Steve, but I do remember a british pilot was the subject of the meal. Setting was in the jungle somewhere and food was scarce, but they wanted to prepare a special feast in the General's honour so the poor pilot (as the highest, or one of the highest ranking officers among the prisoners) got the chop. The article gave all the names and details but I've long forgotten them.

 

[Njaco]

Lets keep our heads here and cut the sarcasm. I don't want this thread to implode.

 

[stona]

I don't remember the time or place Steve, but I do remember a british pilot was the subject of the meal. Setting was in the jungle somewhere and food was scarce, but they wanted to prepare a special feast in the General's honour so the poor pilot (as the highest, or one of the highest ranking officers among the prisoners) got the chop. The article gave all the names and details but I've long forgotten them.

I'll see if I can find the details. It's oddly weird when a name is put to the victims. I don't doubt for a second that it happened.

Not sure what sarcasm is referred to.There is no sarcasm intended in anything I wrote.
Cheers

Steve

 

[Njaco]

Not you stona. The last 2 pages of posts have started to get away from the subject and fall into sarcastic attacks. Too many threads go this way and its tiresome.

 

[meatloaf109]

Cannibalism, ritual or otherwise still creeps me out.
Except for that Monty Python sketch, now that was funny!

 

[stona]

Not you stona. The last 2 pages of posts have started to get away from the subject and fall into sarcastic attacks. Too many threads go this way and its tiresome.

Okay and sorry,I misunderstood

Cheers

Steve

 

[Capt. Vick]

Thanks Tyro, that's what i figured.

 

[A4K]

Cheers Steve, be interested if you can find something out re the British officer. The name of the Japanese officer was definitely given, and am pretty certain the pilot's name was too.
Wish I could remember where I read it (-possibly in an early '80s Australian 'Parade' magazine - always full of WW II articles)

Evan

(Chris, sorry if one of my posts fell into that category)

 

[at ease]

1. The P-38 was called "The Fork Tailed Devil" by the Germans

Today, I found some evidence that it may have been.

See:

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/aviation/p-38-german-name-39919-4.html#post1102698

 

[parsifal]

1. coral sea was the battle that saved australia
2. Hellcats achieved a kill loss ration over a6Ms of 19:1
3. the war in china was ad "incident"
4. hitlers germany was a respectable regime, more or less the same as most other nations of the time
5. hitlers treatment of the jews was about the same as as the british treatment of nonwhite colonials.
6.The allies and soviets won by numbers alone
7. fighters are always the most important aircraft in the inventory

 

[DonL]

4. hitlers germany was a respectable regime, more or less the same as most other nations of the time
5. hitlers treatment of the jews was about the same as as the british treatment of nonwhite colonials.

This are no myths, this is clear revisionist history.
To my opinion, proved false statements of facts and enough to bring someone to court to get an adequate penalty.

Edit.

You can also directly formulate Point 4 just as well for the UDSSR of Stalin

 

[swampyankee]

4. Colin Kelly died in a suicide attack on a Japanese ship. Nope.

Somebody else take over.

To expand a bit on 4: that he was awarded the Medal of Honor. I happen to think he was a hero, but he was awarded the DSC, not the MoH.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

This are no myths, this is clear revisionist history.
To my opinion, proved false statements of facts and enough to bring someone to court to get an adequate penalty.

Edit.

You can also directly formulate Point 4 just as well for the UDSSR of Stalin

Also, no one seriously tries to make out the Nazis to be that way. So how can they be myths. Myths are widly believed? Who besides possibly the minority known as Neo Nazis believes this?

 

[DonL]

Nobody!

 

[GregP]

Hi Parsifal,

Never hear the F6F being touted as having a kill-to-loss ratio over A6M's of 19:1 before. It did over all aerial opposition taken as a whole, but not specifically over A6M's. Maybe that's a prevalent belief in Australia?

Another that gets me is people claiming the highest kill ratio for FM-2's. It's a Wildcat and belongs in with the Wildcats. I don't see anyone tying to make a separate category for the F4U-4 from the F4U-1 ... they were Corsairs. Or one for a separate F6F-3 from the F6F-5. There was more horsepower difference between an F4U-4 and an F4U-1 than there was between an F4F and an FM-2, and more for the F6F-5.

Heck, the Bf 109 started with less than 1,000 HP and wound up with about 1,500, but they don't try to differentiate the victories among the variants. The ONLY reason we see this we HAVE the data for the two variants in the case of the FM-2 and the rest of the Wildcats due to the Navy combat reports, but not for ANY other fighter variants in WWII. Sorry, a Wildcat is a Wildcat.

At least in my book, they're all Wildcats together.

To tell you the truth, the notion of counting all the victories divided by only the losses to enemy aircraft alone is suspect itself.

I understand not counting losses to Flak, as no pilot sees incoming shells fired from the ground ... but operational losses should be counted against all kills, too. If you lost 4 Hellcats due to mechanical failure, they're still stricken from the books and are lost ... if on action missions. Reliability is a part of every weapon system and causes real-life losses that are aviodable if the reliability was better.

Just my opinion. Like the mileage you get in your car, opinons vary.

 

[Balljoint]

4. hitlers germany was a respectable regime, more or less the same as most other nations of the time

Basically true relative to other nations of the time of the Thirty Years War.