Diary shows Hideki Tojo resisted surrender till end

[Fade]

Diary shows Hideki Tojo resisted surrender till end
By Mari Yamaguchi, THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

TOKYO - Japanese Second World War leader Hideki Tojo wanted to keep fighting even after U.S. atomic bombs destroyed Hiroshima and Nagasaki, accusing surrender proponents of being "frightened," a newly released diary reveals.

Excerpts from the approximately 20 pages written by Tojo in the final days of the war and held by the National Archives of Japan were published for the first time in several newspapers Tuesday.

"The notes show Tojo kept his died-in-the-wool militarist mentality until the very end," said Kazufumi Takayama, the archives curator, who confirmed the accuracy of the published excerpts. "They are extremely valuable."

Story continued.... (http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/World/2008/08/12/6426076-ap.html)

[gaijinsamurai]

......probably because the asshole knew there was a noose waiting for him, and he didn't care how many Japanese he took with him!

[Semeru]

Japan has a habit of revising it's history books to shiny up it's reputation, (more so than most countries). Spreading the Bubonic Plague over Nanjing, China in WWII? No mention of it. Germ warfare Unit 731? Their youth will have to Google it to find it themselves. Atomic Bomb? They'll say it was murderous but it halted their war atrocities.

[Winger]

Japan has a habit of revising it's history books to shiny up it's reputation, (more so than most countries). Spreading the Bubonic Plague over Nanjing, China in WWII? No mention of it. Germ warfare Unit 731? Their youth will have to Google it to find it themselves. Atomic Bomb? They'll say it was murderous but it halted their war atrocities.

Considering the Tojo-bushido mentality impressed upon this culture for so long it's safe to say they have come a long way. Its too bad that it took a lot of loss, damage & occupation to affect this.

We can expect the same with other countries we've occupied

[Semeru]

Considering the Tojo-bushido mentality impressed upon this culture for so long it's safe to say they have come a long way. Its too bad that it took a lot of loss, damage & occupation to affect this.

We can expect the same with other countries we've occupied

Most of my beef with them has little to do with their U.S relationship. It's how they deal with their history with China that has got me bothered.

China censors it's media sure. No surprise there, they've been like that for awhile now. But when a country like Japan, that attempts to pass itself off as free and apologetic for it's atrocities against China in WWII, keeps their 2008 edition history books edited and wiped clean of their atrocities. Well that's just false advertising and empty apologies on Japan's part.

The U.S is willing to write down shameful things like the Bonus Brigade massacre in it's own history books. Japan needs to suck it up and be honest to their own folks.

[Mastermind]

The Japanese who were in charge and who were trained to do what they did were real animals...we can all agree on that. But, the Japanese who are now working and living are pretty darn good world citizens. They learned their lessons from that terrible time. The have displayed their shame over and over and over. That they don't wish to cram their nasty old ancestors down the throats of their school kids only seems like something I would do. They sure as hell don't need any up and comers displaying Tojo flags as a rally symbols for reviving the "Good Old Days" of power and glory.

I'm cool with Japan's methods...we kicked their asses...deservedly...they now build great cars...the world goes on.

[DizBukHaPeter]

It's not that the Japanese forget their past atrocities but they downplay it or even try to justify it.

Many in Japan have a victim-mentality when it comes to the A-bombs. During the anniversary of the A-bomb, if you have friends in Nagasaki or Hiroshima; they might ask you things like: "don't you think its terrible what the US did?' or "what do you think, dont you feel a little guilty?", etc.. Usually I shrug and say "no I think the A-bomb was justified" and they might gasp and say nothing more. Its hard to justify the A-bomb by talking about their atrocities in China because usually they have no idea what you're talking about.

I dont blame them, the schools dont teach them much and what they do teach them is tilted towards the Japanese.

[Minardiau]

Got to also remember that the Japanese seen themselves as liberators against the imperialistic Europeans and Americans. They battles for the greater good of Asia.

[Terran]

Also, you have to understand that contradictory with popular belief, those who were big timers in Japanese politics at the end of WW2(many were the ones responsible for the aggression) were left in power after the US occupation, and are in power and influence till this day(in forms of second-generation politicians who carry over their father's belief). The US allowed this due to the cold war, out of the need for a stable ally to deter Soviet influence.

There's quite a diversion of thoughts in Japan over WW2. Their leaders never thought they did anything wrong because the were pretty much the same folks that started the war in the first place. There's tons of books to confirm this mentality of "we were right. And NO, we didnt REALLY lose the war because China sucked or history could have been otherwise blablabla " in Japanese bookstores.
While in contrast, the civilians population shows a great deal of apathy toward the war, thinking the war and atrocities committed as "a result of a militant government who is solely responsible, so is none of my business and should just go on with my life".

[Semeru]

Got to also remember that the Japanese seen themselves as liberators against the imperialistic Europeans and Americans. They battles for the greater good of Asia.

That's ridiculous. As a matter of fact Japan has invaded and pissed off nearly every single Asian country. They knew they weren't liberators, they saw themselves as conquerers back then. Even nowadays I talk to some of my older Asian friends and they all hold some degree of resentment towards Japan. Definitely not the younger generation but the adults.

[LRPV]

The Japanese who were in charge and who were trained to do what they did were real animals...we can all agree on that. But, the Japanese who are now working and living are pretty darn good world citizens. They learned their lessons from that terrible time. The have displayed their shame over and over and over. That they don't wish to cram their nasty old ancestors down the throats of their school kids only seems like something I would do. They sure as hell don't need any up and comers displaying Tojo flags as a rally symbols for reviving the "Good Old Days" of power and glory.

I'm cool with Japan's methods...we kicked their asses...deservedly...they now build great cars...the world goes on.


Did I miss something? Try sprouting this BS in an RSL...

Bring spare teeth...

The Japs still refuse to openly acknowledge actual history...

Like many Australians, I had (now deceased) family that fought the Japs and could relate to their behaviour.

[gaijinsamurai]

Matermind is fully acknowledging the fact that their conduct was terrible in WWII.
But if you think his statement that present-day Japanese society, as a whole, is different from that of those who pertpetuated the atrocities and aggression of WWII is BS, I think that it is in fact you who are full of sh*t.
If you don't think they've made repeated apologies and aknowledge that what they did was wrong, you simply don't know your facts.
I will agree that they should do more for those women known as "comfort women" in WWII, and that former Japanese leaders have made stupid statements regarding the pre-1945 years, but those do not reflect the sentiments of the vast majority of Japanese people, who feel they were the aggressors and that what they did was shameful.

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

[Curtis E. Bear]

Did I miss something? Try sprouting this BS in an RSL...

Bring spare teeth...

The Japs still refuse to openly acknowledge actual history...

Like many Australians, I had (now deceased) family that fought the Japs and could relate to their behaviour.

The "Japs" hey? Still living in the 1940's I see.

[oldsoak]

OOI What is this with "Japs" ? Is it not a shortened form of Japanese as "Brits" is shortened for British ? Since when did it become a derogatory term ? Heck I still refer to the Germans as Jerries.


In the 1940's the allies troops had more colourful ways of describing them :-P

[gaijinsamurai]

In North America "Japs" is considered to be very derogitory (remember that Japanese and other Asian Americans had a history of considerable descrimination in the US, especially in the early 20th Century), but I realize that in the UK, Australia, and NZ, it is not necessarily meant to be disrespectful.
I know of other discussion forums which expressly prohibit the use of the term, and the first few times I heard it on MP.net I found it offensive, but considering the source, it isn't worth the trouble to get worked up over it.

However, when people use the term in combination with statements which try to give people the impression that today's Japanese are the moral equivilant to those in Hideki Tojo's day, based soley on their race and nationality, one cannot help but wonder if they are indeed racist.

[el borracho]

I think it's because we're overly sensitive about those terms. Back then, "nips" was tossed around freely, and even that comes from the Japanese word for their country Nippon. Many don't understand that it wasn't a catch-all term meant to degrade Asians. Regardless of it's etymology it's still considered derogatory. The "n-word" started out the same way, as a morph of the Spanish and Portuguese word for black. What began as a simple description quickly spiraled into a new meaning.

[Mastermind]

Did I miss something? Try sprouting this BS in an RSL...

Bring spare teeth...

The Japs still refuse to openly acknowledge actual history...

Like many Australians, I had (now deceased) family that fought the Japs and could relate to their behaviour.
You guys were a lot closer to the action and the threat. I fully understand your animostity. But, Man...there has to be a time to get on with things.

I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Sorry. I've worked with too many modern day Japanese and have known their families..e.ven some who were in the Japanese Army and Navy during the war. Believe it or not...they were just human beings. None of them had a bayonet in their hip pocket.

I am aware that if I had had to endure what some people had to endure at the hands of the Japanese in WWII, I would probably have different opinion.

I'll be sure to keep my filthy mouth shut next time I'm visiting down under.

[gaijinsamurai]

You've got nothing to be sorry for, Mastermind, and you were 100% correct in your post. The pre-1945 Japanese military and government were absolutely terrible, and that is beyond dispute. But when people try to blame present-day Japanese for the sins of their grandfathers and great-grandfathers (and by the way, neither of my wife's grandfathers served in the war-they were too old, and she grew up knowing fully well that it was her country that instigated the conflict and deserved to lose), I draw the line.

[gaijinsamurai]

Also-I know of many Australians who do not have the same views as LRPV. My wife has been to Australia on a couple of occassions, and was treated well there, and I knew many Aussies in Japan who didn't have any animosity towards the Japanese.

[Mastermind]

Thanks, Gaijin. I have my personal prejudices, just like everyone else. But, even so, I know it is not right to condemn an entire population for the sins of a few...or the sins of their predecessors.

[Avon]

Despite the horror of having to use such weapons as the A-bombs, it was the cheapest way (human lives wise) for the war to end.
The terms agreeable to the Japanese command structure were totally unacceptable to the Allies. What the Japanese did not realize was a few hours before the announcement of Japan's willingness to accept the Potsdam terms of surrender, President Truman had signed the document that authorized the dropping of the third atomic bomb!

Adrian

[Mastermind]

We had a third Bomb? I have learned something new.

[Indiana Jones]

Despite the horror of having to use such weapons as the A-bombs, it was the cheapest way (human lives wise) for the war to end.
The terms agreeable to the Japanese command structure were totally unacceptable to the Allies. [...]
Adrian
Dear Adrian,
This notion has become a minority position in contemporary historiography, with Mr. Frank being its most notable proponent. This of course does not necessarily imply that it is wrong, however most researchers have emphasized the greater complexity of the issue in the light of the Japanese and recently unearthed Russian sources. Perhaps consider this as an introductory read:
http://www.h-net.org/~diplo/roundtables/#hasegawa
Cheers,

[Mastermind]

Despite the horror of having to use such weapons as the A-bombs, it was the cheapest way (human lives wise) for the war to end.
The terms agreeable to the Japanese command structure were totally unacceptable to the Allies. What the Japanese did not realize was a few hours before the announcement of Japan's willingness to accept the Potsdam terms of surrender, President Truman had signed the document that authorized the dropping of the third atomic bomb!

Adrian
There were a great many factors that led to the ultimate surrender of Japan...the nuclear weapon drops on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just part of the whole collection.

It is my personal opinion, based on much reading, that the biggest reason Japanese leaders began seriously considering surrender, was the Russian declaration of war.

The nuclear bombing of the two cities were important. But, the problem was, the majority of Japanese leaders had no idea what they were. They knew they were big, but most thought they were some form of new gasoline bombs. Don't forget, more people had been killed, by a wide margin, in the fire bombings of Tokyo than in both nuclear attacks on Nagasaki and Hirosima combined. And, though punishing, the Japanese were still determined to continue the war. But, the huge shock to the leadership was the Russian declaration.

Also, a primary determination that was causing massive pain throughout Japan was the American naval blockade and the destruction of the Japanese fishing fleets (Officially called, "Operation Starvation" by the Allies). More people were dying of starvation, the economy was totally devastated and there was quite litterally, no possible solution. Japan was one of the most ruined nations on earth...yet, the mind set of not only the leadership, but a large part of the general public was one of resistance to the end.

Aslo, there had been a major change in the top leadership that had been brought about by the failure of the military in the eyes of the Emperor. Tojo had been forced out of power, replaced by the unpopular Koiso and he was replaced in April '45 by the aged, and peace leaning, Suzuki.

Great hope had been placed on the possibility of getting the Soviets to intercede with peace proposals to the Allies since the Japanese had a non-aggression agreement with them. Amazingly, Stalin had allowed a few cordial meetings, encouraging such hope, biding his time, while events played out. But, the most dramatic effect of the nuclear bombs was to push Stalin off his fence, convincing him the Japanese would have to surrender immediately...He very quickly declared war on Japan, moved his forces to attack shallow Japanese border postions and invaded the Japanese northern Islands with a token force. Stalin did this to gain a barganing position in the surrender agreements. Basically, it worked, but not as well as he would have liked...he had miscalculated and had waited too long.

Although the Russian moves stunned the Japanese leaderhip, probably the deciding factor was the assassination attempts against Suzuki a week after Nagasaki by insurgent Army officers. Prince Higashikuni stepped in as PM immediately as the military insurgency grew and threatened a massive blood bath of the higher class leadership, and even included a kidnapping attempt on the Emperor.

There really was no choice but to accept the Allied surrender demands...otherwise, Japan was probably going to face a horror of a whirlwind, of massive starvation, invasion on a massive scale and a bloody revolution from within...the chaos would have been unimaginable.

In effect, I view the surrender as an attempt by the Japanese elite to find rescuers from their own military. The only power organization that existed strong enough for them was that offered by McArthur and the Pacfic rim allies...excluding the Russians, of course..

The A-bombs helped. But, only in the way they affected Stalin's actions.

In my humble personal opinion, only.

[VansRV]

Dear Adrian,
This notion has become a minority position in contemporary historiography. Cheers,

"contemporary historiography" You mean Lefty Revisionist, not Mainstream. Sorry the facts speak for themselves.

[Indiana Jones]

"contemporary historiography" You mean Lefty Revisionist, not Mainstream. Sorry the facts speak for themselves.
Vans,
I think you are quite mistaken as far as the consensus in the academic community is concerned. Even a superficial glance at the available literature will reveal that most "mainstream" (whatever that may be) experts have abandoned the "traditional" pattern. Be that as it may, emotionally charged epithets and apodictical statements such as the one above are hardly going to be conducive to a productive discourse; neither will be any attempts to politice the matter. As far as the "facts" are concerned, the subject at hand is infinitely complex and multifaceted; simplistic approaches will not do it justice. In historiography, only amateurs deal in absolutes.
Cheers,

[VansRV]

Vans,
In historiography, only amateurs deal in absolutes.
Cheers,

I was a history major at the University of Pittsburgh under Professor Donald Goldstein, and it is Richard Frank who is attempting to politice the subject. Your condescending tone is typical of those whom share your opinion. Anyway this subject has been beat to death, have a good day.

[Indiana Jones]

I was a history major at the University of Pittsburgh under Professor Donald Goldstein, and it is Richard Frank who is attempting to politice the subject. Your condescending tone is typical of those whom share your opinion. Anyway this subject has been beat to death, have a good day.
Huh ?
What, pray tell, would be my opinion ? I certainly did not offer much of an opinion on the matter as of yet, and I am not very much in agreement with Mr. Frank, either. If I came off as condescending, I apologise, but it is hard to confer tone through this medium.
Regards,

[sreto]

Also-I know of many Australians who do not have the same views as LRPV. My wife has been to Australia on a couple of occassions, and was treated well there, and I knew many Aussies in Japan who didn't have any animosity towards the Japanese.

Word. We get plenty of Japanese tourists coming here and plenty of foreign exchange students. IMO the Japanese people have gone from being conquerors of Asia to selling used underwear in wending machines. Doesnt look like they will be perpetuating any massacres soon. Being worked up over somebody not willing to admit something just isnt worth it, people can believe what they want. Australia was on the victorious side, Japan on the losing you can kinda see why our history would be a little bit different.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

In effect, I view the surrender as an attempt by the Japanese elite to find rescuers from their own military. The only power organization that existed strong enough for them was that offered by McArthur and the Pacfic rim allies...excluding the Russians, of course..

The A-bombs helped. But, only in the way they affected Stalin's actions.

In my humble personal opinion, only.

I think the simple fear of being occupied by the Russians was also a big factor. Like the Germans, they preferred the western Allies.

[Avon]

Sorry it took me so long to respond.


We had a third Bomb? I have learned something new.
Yes, it was still in the USA. The USA had a lead in nuclear weapons and they were in production, just in case they were needed.


Don't forget, more people had been killed, by a wide margin, in the fire bombings of Tokyo than in both nuclear attacks on Nagasaki and Hirosima combined.
Yes, and don't forget Dresden and other cities in Europe. Dresden, Tokyo, etc. but it took hundreds or thousands of bombers and it took hours. Those two factors plus the fact that a large percentage of the population does not realize that the nuclear bombings did not take the greatest toll on lives.


the most dramatic effect of the nuclear bombs was to push Stalin off his fence, convincing him the Japanese would have to surrender immediately...He very quickly declared war on Japan, moved his forces to attack shallow Japanese border postions and invaded the Japanese northern Islands with a
token force.
I knew about the insurrection and some of the other factors. One thing I have never been able to find any information on is what the USSR planned in the way of an amphibious invasion of the home islands. Has anyone come across any of this sort of information?

Indiana Jones and Mastermind, thanx for your input.

Adrian

[gaijinsamurai]

I know that Stalin had planned on grabbing Hokkaido, and would have if the Japanese hadn't surrendered when they did.

[Mastermind]

Sorry it took me so long to respond.


One thing I have never been able to find any information on is what the USSR planned in the way of an amphibious invasion of the home islands. Has anyone come across any of this sort of information?

Indiana Jones and Mastermind, thanx for your input.

Adrian

Yer welcome...

And as far as any significant planning for a Soviet invasion, I don't believe there was one. The Soviets did not have any real navy or amphibious assault equipment to speak of in the Pacific. The threat of an invasion was enough considering the chaos within the Japanese government at the time. Events were swirling out of control so rapidly, I believe the Japanese leaders really did not know exactly how to find their own asses at any given time. Rumors and imaginary fears were getting the best of them.

[Avon]

as far as any significant planning for a Soviet invasion, I don't believe there was one. The Soviets did not have any real navy or amphibious assault equipment to speak of in the Pacific. The threat of an invasion was enough considering the chaos within the Japanese government at the time.
I was wondering for they did not have much of a navy nor an air force that could protect their navy once at sea. Plus once on land the mountainous terrain favored the defenders.
I believe you on the planning, just the opposite of the USA. President Roosevelt assigned a commission in Jan. 1942 to develop a plan to invade the Japanese home islands! So, the staging and logistics of each island conquered was part of the plan and coordinated for the final invasion.


I believe the Japanese leaders really did not know exactly how to find their own asses at any given time
One real reason the Japanese did so poorly in the war was because intelligence was very poor. They had no idea what was going on on the other side of the horizon.
I once read that the reason Japanese intelligence was so poor was because the Japanese command structure was set up shortly after 1900 based upon the Royal Navy. The 'proper' British admirals felt intelligence was like reading another gentleman's mail, and a gentleman does not read another gentleman's mail! So, intelligence was frowned upon.

[Dean1962]

There were a great many factors that led to the ultimate surrender of Japan...the nuclear weapon drops on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just part of the whole collection.

It is my personal opinion, based on much reading, that the biggest reason Japanese leaders began seriously considering surrender, was the Russian declaration of war.

The nuclear bombing of the two cities were important. But, the problem was, the majority of Japanese leaders had no idea what they were. They knew they were big, but most thought they were some form of new gasoline bombs. Don't forget, more people had been killed, by a wide margin, in the fire bombings of Tokyo than in both nuclear attacks on Nagasaki and Hirosima combined. And, though punishing, the Japanese were still determined to continue the war. But, the huge shock to the leadership was the Russian declaration.

Also, a primary determination that was causing massive pain throughout Japan was the American naval blockade and the destruction of the Japanese fishing fleets (Officially called, "Operation Starvation" by the Allies). More people were dying of starvation, the economy was totally devastated and there was quite litterally, no possible solution. Japan was one of the most ruined nations on earth...yet, the mind set of not only the leadership, but a large part of the general public was one of resistance to the end.

Aslo, there had been a major change in the top leadership that had been brought about by the failure of the military in the eyes of the Emperor. Tojo had been forced out of power, replaced by the unpopular Koiso and he was replaced in April '45 by the aged, and peace leaning, Suzuki.

Great hope had been placed on the possibility of getting the Soviets to intercede with peace proposals to the Allies since the Japanese had a non-aggression agreement with them. Amazingly, Stalin had allowed a few cordial meetings, encouraging such hope, biding his time, while events played out. But, the most dramatic effect of the nuclear bombs was to push Stalin off his fence, convincing him the Japanese would have to surrender immediately...He very quickly declared war on Japan, moved his forces to attack shallow Japanese border postions and invaded the Japanese northern Islands with a token force. Stalin did this to gain a barganing position in the surrender agreements. Basically, it worked, but not as well as he would have liked...he had miscalculated and had waited too long.

Although the Russian moves stunned the Japanese leaderhip, probably the deciding factor was the assassination attempts against Suzuki a week after Nagasaki by insurgent Army officers. Prince Higashikuni stepped in as PM immediately as the military insurgency grew and threatened a massive blood bath of the higher class leadership, and even included a kidnapping attempt on the Emperor.

There really was no choice but to accept the Allied surrender demands...otherwise, Japan was probably going to face a horror of a whirlwind, of massive starvation, invasion on a massive scale and a bloody revolution from within...the chaos would have been unimaginable.

In effect, I view the surrender as an attempt by the Japanese elite to find rescuers from their own military. The only power organization that existed strong enough for them was that offered by McArthur and the Pacfic rim allies...excluding the Russians, of course..

The A-bombs helped. But, only in the way they affected Stalin's actions.

In my humble personal opinion, only.

The timing of the Soviet invasion of Manchuria was in fact decided during the Tehran and Yalta conferences. It is very hard to find any references that are more than oblique, but nonetheless, there were two major decisions that came out of Tehran. The first was the timing of the opening of the second front (D-Day) and the second was the Soviet Union agreeing to declaring war against Japan. At Yalta, they agreed to the timing of the declaration. (3 months after the defeat of Germany)The Soviets refused to do it until after the defeat of Germany (they never really thought of the Japanese as a real enemy, having handily defeated them every single time they had faced each other on the Sino-Soviet border) However, it was the price they paid for getting a second front out of the Western Allies. The main reason for the cordial relations before the declaration of was was quite simple; the Russians were not ready to attack or defend the Sino-Soviet border before that time. However, once the war in Europe was over, it was a whole new ball game.
Most people do not know, or they conveniently forget that D-Day was not the greatest invasion of all time, it was actually Operation August Storm. The Soviets managed to move 1.5 million men into position, moving them from Europe to the Far East, then they ran roughshod over the Kwantung Army, defeating them in a matter of Days. For further information, Read David Glantz or try this link. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1995/HAL.htm

Hope this helps,

Dean

[Dean1962]

Megaraptor;3489232']I think the simple fear of being occupied by the Russians was also a big factor. Like the Germans, they preferred the western Allies.

Don't be so sure about that. The Japanese were involved in a death struggle against the Americans, to the point that they systematically refused to ever surrender each and every time they fought each other.
On the other hand, many Japanese openly admired the Russians. It came from the Battle of the Tsushima Straits, when the Russians continued to fight, firing all of their remaining guns even when their ships were dead in the water and going down. The Japanese admired this kind of fighting spirit, and Admiral Rozhestvensky was particularly admired and most welcome in Japan after the battle. On the Sino-Soviet border, the Japanese did not commit hara-kiri when defeated by the Russians, and surrenders were commonplace when the Japanese were defeated. in fact, almost the entire Kwantung Army surrendered en masse to the Soviets, something they would never have done when facing the Americans.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

almost the entire Kwantung Army surrendered en masse to the Soviets, something they would never have done when facing the Americans.

You have to remember that by August 1945 the Kwantung Army consisted of the dregs of the Japanese Army, as all the best units had been recalled for the defense of the home islands.



And as far as any significant planning for a Soviet invasion, I don't believe there was one. The Soviets did not have any real navy or amphibious assault equipment to speak of in the Pacific.

I thought Operation Downfall called for a Soviet invasion of Hokkaido?

[Mastermind]

^That si a good read, if a bit dry....it has several good points. I particularly noticed the quote "The Japanese tried to fight a 20th century war with a 16th centuray Samurai mentality." They did that from the very beginning.

Although the paper readily establishes the August 13 date as one of action for the Soviet invasion of Manchuria, it is suggests that pusing the button four days after Nagasaki was suspiciously belated. Especially since Stalin had agreed to go to war against Japan at Yalta.

I fully appreciate the difficulty of moving a huge invasion force, such as involved with August Storm, and the planning and time involved. but, the Soviets knew by early April, Germany was finished. That gave them almost six months to begin positioning material and reassigning units...that is, the gaining of a start gave them an extra few months to prepare. I believe it might be a huge coincident, challengin belief, for the Soviets to have set thier dat for the jump off so close to the American nuclear attack. It is possible, the Japanese were more accurate in their assessment of an early September attack potential than a mid August as was the case. In otherwords, I think it is possible Stalin jumped the moat a bit earlier than he originally planned....based on the motivation of the surprising American bomb drops.

AS for the Soviets ploughing up the Japanese so quickly, I think a lot of that all one the same reasoning for the Germans doing so to the Russians in Barbarosa...The Japanese simply were not prepared for an attack, much less such a masisve attack. Their commanders and their soldiers had been standing the wall for years without much to do and they had become hardened into the mud, so-to-speak.

At anyrate, the read was very informative...thanks for posting it.

[Dean1962]

Megaraptor;3491429']You have to remember that by August 1945 the Kwantung Army consisted of the dregs of the Japanese Army, as all the best units had been recalled for the defense of the home islands.

Very true. But at the time, the Soviets did not know that. All of the Allies were of the opinion that the Kwantung army was the one remaining intact Japanese Army, and that they were also the largest formation that the Japanese had left. Much smaller units had given the Americans major headaches in the Pacific, so the Allies were very wary of the Kwantung Army. The Russians also took them very seriously, but in the end, it was not Soviet firepower, but their mobility that sealed the victory. The Japanese were simply unable to move quickly enought to effectively counter the Soviet advances, as most of their infantry units were true leg infantry. In many instances the Soviets were into the Japanese rear areas before a shot had been fired, and the Japanese were unable to turn to face them or to manovre in any way. So they started to surrender, and they kept on doing so until the remainder were ordered to lay down their weapons by Tokyo.

[Mastermind]

Megaraptor;3491429']

I thought Operation Downfall called for a Soviet invasion of Hokkaido?

In reviewing my resources, one from the West Point Military History Museum, I found no significant mention of reliance on any Soviet involvement in Downfall, not in either of the two phases of Downfall..."Olympic" or "Coronet.

Although plans were drawn up as early as the Quebec conference, the Western Allies seem ot have deliberately avoided any conspicuous planning for operation Downfall with the Soviets.

I think, based on my reading between the lines, there probably was some high level assumptions giving casue to believe the Soviets may apply pressure on the Manchurian army to anchor them in place to prevent a Japanese home land reinforcement effort. I doubt the McArthur was all that worried about any threat from Manchurian forces re-entering Japan once Olympic was initiated...and he may have even welcomed it as an opportunity to destroy those forces enroute with the massive air and submarine blockading strength he had at his command.


I did just a quick research on the soviet potential involvement in Downfall...so others may find facts contrary to what I found...I would welcome any info to shed light on that possibility of soviet involvement.

[Dean1962]

^That si a good read, if a bit dry....it has several good points. I particularly noticed the quote "The Japanese tried to fight a 20th century war with a 16th centuray Samurai mentality." They did that from the very beginning.

Although the paper readily establishes the August 13 date as one of action for the Soviet invasion of Manchuria, it is suggests that pusing the button four days after Nagasaki was suspiciously belated. Especially since Stalin had agreed to go to war against Japan at Yalta.

I fully appreciate the difficulty of moving a huge invasion force, such as involved with August Storm, and the planning and time involved. but, the Soviets knew by early April, Germany was finished. That gave them almost six months to begin positioning material and reassigning units...that is, the gaining of a start gave them an extra few months to prepare. I believe it might be a huge coincident, challengin belief, for the Soviets to have set thier dat for the jump off so close to the American nuclear attack. It is possible, the Japanese were more accurate in their assessment of an early September attack potential than a mid August as was the case. In otherwords, I think it is possible Stalin jumped the moat a bit earlier than he originally planned....based on the motivation of the surprising American bomb drops.

The Russians had one goal during the WW II, and that was to defeat the hated Hitlerites. The Japanese barely rated a second thought, and I believe that it never even entered the Stalin's head that he should start preparing for the attack against Japan before Germany was defeated. To him, Japan was not a threat. I don't think he cared enough to prepare for anything. Anyways, given his timeframes, he did not have to.


AS for the Soviets ploughing up the Japanese so quickly, I think a lot of that all one the same reasoning for the Germans doing so to the Russians in Barbarosa...The Japanese simply were not prepared for an attack, much less such a masisve attack. Their commanders and their soldiers had been standing the wall for years without much to do and they had become hardened into the mud, so-to-speak.

Maybe so, but every time the Kwantung Army had gone up against the Russians, they lost. I believe that the Japanese were unprepared only insofar that they were unable to properly prepare for the attack that they faced. As for being hardened into mud, many of them were combat veterans. They were very aware that the Soviets could attack them, and they knew what the Soviets could do. The problem was that they could not do anything about it, due to the lack of materiel and up to date armour.


At anyrate, the read was very informative...thanks for posting it.

Glad you enjoyed it.

[Dean1962]

In reviewing my resources, one from the West Point Military History Museum, I found no significant mention of reliance on any Soviet involvement in Downfall, not in either of the two phases of Downfall..."Olympic" or "Coronet.

Although plans were drawn up as early as the Quebec conference, the Western Allies seem ot have deliberately avoided any conspicuous planning for operation Downfall with the Soviets.

I think, based on my reading between the lines, there probably was some high level assumptions giving casue to believe the Soviets may apply pressure on the Manchurian army to anchor them in place to prevent a Japanese home land reinforcement effort. I doubt the McArthur was all that worried about any threat from Manchurian forces re-entering Japan once Olympic was initiated...and he may have even welcomed it as an opportunity to destroy those forces enroute with the massive air and submarine blockading strength he had at his command.


I did just a quick research on the soviet potential involvement in Downfall...so others may find facts contrary to what I found...I would welcome any info to shed light on that possibility of soviet involvement.

There was none. But the idea that American ships would land on Hokkaido carrying Russian armies, while the Americans, British, Canadians, and everyone else attacked Kyushu must have scared the beejeebers out of the war cabinet in Tokyo. I have always believed that it was the possibility of this type of attack that finally forced the Japanese to surrender. Once Manchuria had been lost, along with their largest remaining army and their only remaining resource base, a two pronged amphibious assault became a possibility that the war cabinet knew they could not possibly defeat. It was only at that point that they knew they were checkmated, and it was only at that time that a surrender was actually accepted. The atomic bombs were, IMO, an afterthought. As others had stated, other bombings had been far worse.

My $0.02 .

Dean.

[[WDW]Megaraptor]

I did just a quick research on the soviet potential involvement in Downfall...so others may find facts contrary to what I found...I would welcome any info to shed light on that possibility of soviet involvement.

I haven't found much except this discussion here: http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=43240

What I have found seems to indicate that:

1. The USSR did plan to invade Hokkaido, which was lightly defended. However this plan was being made independently and was not part of Downfall. Source conflict on whether the western Allies were aware of the Soviet plans.
2. They halted the plan to avoid the risk of fighting with the Americans and let the US occupy Hokkaido.
3. The Soviet Pacific Fleet made landings at the Kurils and in Korea, so they could undertake amphibious operations.

[Mastermind]

That is a good conversations, filled with reliable documentations. And from the reading, it would appear the Soviets were not in the least prepared for a massive invastion as compared to the Western Allies. Their forces consisted of a few destroyers, come gun boats armed with T-34 turrets and some motor boats. Although they had some lend lease equipment for river crossings, such as the DUKWs, they really did not have any significant levels of amphibious invasion support types in either design or quanity. The discussion did mention they seem to have had the ability to land a rifle corps ...but did not say if that landing would be opposed or by stealth infiltration. Also, air cover seemed to be considerably scant in the planning.

I have to stand by my belief, based on what I have read, of course, that the landings in the northern islands were basically unresisted token forces...now, I must point out I am not belittling the Soviet invasion forces...I am comparing the invasion forces by each other...although, the Soviet forces in their own light may have been recognized as substantial and, as events proved, up to the task...they were in no guise comparable to the Western Allied preparations.

Also, I did not see any references to cooridination with the Western Allies in anything except hasty dodging at the last second to avoid accidental clashes with the Western Allied effort. If the Soviet Hokkaido invasion forces were accidentially identified by the w. allies as Japanese efforts to reinforce the island, the incident may have become one of the biggest fratricide engagements ever.