Too close for comfort? A greater appreciation for an Allied WW2 Victory

[Ted Striker]

[PLATO]

How about the sweet revenge when the USA sent a team of brothers from Tuskegee up in Mustangs that blew the hell out of German fighter crews.

GO TUSKEGEE !!!

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by PLATO1003
On last thing, Dad was scheduled for the first wave of the invasion of Japan. Given his description of their coastal defenses, I am convinced that I would not be here without the Atomic Bomb. No matter what you think of nuclear weapons, that use of them saved far more than it killed.

This isn't the place for the discussion (it's been discussed on this board ad naseum), but I completely disagree. Considering American intelligence was convinced Japan would surrender no later than November 1945, sans a-bomb, a land invasion would likely not even have been necessary.

My grandfather was to be in the first wave, too. He's come to have rather different feelings about the bomb than he did back then...

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
How about the sweet revenge when the USA sent a team of brothers from Tuskegee up in Mustangs that blew the hell out of German fighter crews.

Yeah, maybe it made them feel better about the whole syphillis thing...

[PLATO]

Considering American intelligence was convinced Japan would surrender no later than November 1945, sans a-bomb, a land invasion would likely not even have been necessary.

This is simply not a true statement.

[Ted Striker]

Yah I don't buy that one either.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by PLATO1003
This is simply not a true statement.

I don't like being accused of lying, so this is all I shall post:

"Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."

-The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, July 1946

[Ted Striker]

hindsight doesn't count

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
hindsight doesn't count

The argument was that ultimately the bombs were not necessary. Hindsight doesn't enter into it.

[PLATO]

Boris, not accusing you of lying. Please accept apologies. I have done papers on this in the past (20 years ago). Obviously my Dad's involvement in the war made it my favorite topic in H.S. and college. You are going to make me do my homework, but I'll get back to you.

[Ted Striker]

It does when you quote something that has an opinion based on interviews conducted after the fact.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
It does when you quote something that has an opinion based on interviews conducted after the fact.

Me speak-a slowly...

An argument that is stating the bombings were ultimately not necessary to end the war does not hinge on only using information available prior to the bombings. Such information would only be needed for an argument that we absolutely knew the bombings were unneccessary and bombed anyway, which I did not stipulate (though I suspect we should have known this).

[Ted Striker]

That's a silly argument.

All I care about is what was KNOWN at the time the decision was made.

[H Tower]

This isn't the place for the discussion (it's been discussed on this board ad naseum), but I completely disagree. Considering American intelligence was convinced Japan would surrender no later than November 1945, sans a-bomb, a land invasion would likely not even have been necessary.

this has no bearing on the decision to drop the bomb because at the time the intelligence services believed that Japan would fight to the last school child to drive back american troops.

Now...If they had turned these weapons to the Russian front, I believe that they could have broken the Russians back and caused total surrender. Once this happened and their access to oil and materials grew accordingly, then the Allies would have had no choice but to come to terms. Very different world it would be.

Russia would still have won out IMO, the massive reserves they were able to bring forward to keep fighting the germans just couldn't be matched.

[Urban Ranger]

Re: Too close for comfort? A greater appreciation for an Allied WW2 Victory

Originally posted by Sava
1. Race to get the bomb. This point wasn't specifically talked about in these shows, but it's relevant to the discussion. The Nazis and Japanese were very close to developing an atomic bomb. In earlier shows like this, it was discussed that America only beat the Axis to having a working atom bomb by months. In fact, there as a German submarine sunk off the coast of Indonesia that was carrying U-235 Uranium. Scary!

During the war, the Allies had known that the Germans were developing the bomb. The efforts were repeatedly thwarted by commando actions and bombing raids. OTOH, I do not know that Japan was trying to make it. However, it will require more evidence than a show on History Channel.

Originally posted by Sava
2. Jet Engine technology in Japan. Japan did have working prototypes of a jet fighter and smaller, rocket fighter. I know the dropping of the atom bombs on Japan has been debated before on these forums, but the point was brought up that if Japan had enough time, an invasion of the Japanese islands in early '46 might have been repelled by jet torpedo planes and jet air superiority fighters.

That was not Japan's main problem. Their main problem was they ran out of pilots. Technology couldn't have helped there.

Originally posted by Sava
3. Helicopter technology in Japan and Germany. Japan had been experimenting with anti-submarine gyro-copters that had seen battle and had success! Also, Germany had programs for Vertical Takeoff fighters that were designed to fly around 600 mph and shoot down allied B-29s at high altitude.

That's fine. They still wouldn't have enough production and pilots to make a difference.

Originally posted by Sava
4. Jet Technology in Germany. Most of us have heard of the Me-262, but there were many other Jet fighters that had been built and many that were on the drawing boards. The Nazis did develop a swept-wing jet fighter that the Russians copied when they built the MiG-15. This fighter would have been better than the F-86 Sabre that the US didn't build until the 50's. We should also be thankful that Hitler wasn't an aircraft expert. Had he realized the Me-262's potential, he wouldn't have ordered it to become a fighter-bomber in conjuction with the fighter program. This would have had an effect on the Allied bombing campaign, and D-Day would not have been possible.

Again, not enough to make a difference.

The parallel can be drawn in tanks. The US did not have any designs close to their Germans and Soviet counterparts until the M-26 Pershing. The Sherman wasn't bad but was still inferior. The Germans had excellent tanks but they didn't have enough.

Originally posted by Sava
5. Guided air-to-air missiles. Yes, Germany did have this technology and had tested it in combat by August of '44. These new missiles would have been the weapons of the new Nazi jet fighters since they flew at speeds too fast for conventional cannons and machine guns of the day.

August 44? What difference would it make?

Originally posted by Sava
6. Stealth technology. The Nazis accidently stumbled onto stealth technology and designed a jet that was to become the inspiration for the American B2 stealth bomber. This jet bomber would have been able to strike America in early 1946. I suppose we should also thank Albert Speer who was opposed to providing resources to the German atomic bomb program. New York could have been nuked in April of '46.

Again, you need more evidence than a History Channel show to back this baby up.