"weary" wrote:

"Matt Wiser" wrote
in message
news:3ff88f39$1@bg2....

"weary" wrote:

"B2431" wrote in message
...
From: "weary"


Besides, I have never asked nor do I
want my government to kill civilians so
that
I can sleep safe
at night. As a matter of fact, if I knew
that is what my government
was doing, I would not sleep safe at night.


Tell ya what, get the bad guys to move
their
military targets away from
civilian populations and the civilians
will
stop dying. That is true for
all
countries and organizations including the
U.S. and Al Quaida.

Your insistance that civilians were deliberatly
targeted in Hiroshima and
Nagasaki would only hold water if the military
targets were no where near
civilian population centers.

In Hiroshima the aiming point was in a largely
residential area and
the targetting selection required that the
military
target be in a large
urban
area.


I ask again, how would YOU have taken out
the military targets in Nagasaki
and
Hiroshima without harming civilians.

Conventional bombing and I haven't claimed
that
no civilians would be harmed
so don't you try that strawman as well.


As a Jew I take offense at your comparing
Dachau to Hiroshima.

When did I do that?

Many thousands
of humans died there, not just Jews, but
I
have been there and have seen
the
grave markers.

Many thousands of Japanese civilians died
in
Hiroshima.


Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired



Look, accurate conventional bombing was
not possible in 1945, and the
only
way of knocking out Japan's major industries,
cottage industry,

The idea of a substantial "cottage industry"
is a myth
USSBS
"By 1944 the Japanese had almost eliminated
home industry in their war
economy. "


and adjacent
military targets was by low-level fire raids
at night. B-29s attempted
daylight
precision bombing of such targets from Nov
'44 to March of '45. It didn't
work.

From the USSBS
"The tonnage dropped prior to 9 March 1945 aggregated
only 7,180 tons
although increasing month by month. The planes
bombed from approximately
30,000 feet and the percentage of bombs dropped
which hit the target areas
averaged less than 10 percent. Nevertheless,
the effects of even the
relatively small tonnage hitting the selected
targets were substantial.
During this period, attacks were directed almost
exclusively against
aircraft, primarily aircraft engine, targets.
The principal aircraft engine
plants were hit sufficiently heavily and persistently
to convince the
Japanese that these plants would inevitably
be totally destroyed. "

How does this constitute a case of "It didn't
work".

The bombing campaign continued for quite some
time after March 45 and
in fact that period is when the vast majority
of munitions were dropped.

And although you seem to want to ignore the
USSBS report I quoted elsewhere
I will include it again because it refers to
a period when over 150 000 tons
of bombs were dropped on Japan, as opposed to
the already noted 7180 tons
in the period you wish to concentrate on. Its
content is inconsistent with
your claim that precision bombing "didn't work".

"Bombing altitudes after 9 March 1945 were lower,
in both day and night
attacks. Japanese opposition was not effective
even at the lower altitudes,
and the percentage of losses to enemy action
declined as the number of
attacking planes increased. Bomb loads increased
and operating losses
declined in part due to less strain on engines
at lower altitudes. Bombing
accuracy increased substantially, and averaged
35 to 40 percent within 1,000
feet of the aiming point in daylight attacks
from 20,000 feet or lower."


LeMay was right: it HAD TO BE DONE. He knew
the civilian casualties
would be high, but it was necessary to accomplish
the mission assigned
him:
the destruction of Japan's industry to support
the war, and destruction of
such military targets colocated with the industries.
More people died in
a single fire raid on Tokyo than were killed
in the two nuclear strikes
put
together.
You still haven't answered the question: what
would you have done? I'll
refresh
your options
1) Bombing in combination with Blockade
2) Invasion of Kyushu in Nov 45 followed by
Invasion of Kanto Plain Mar 46
3) Open military use of the Atomic Bomb
Diplomacy IS NOT AN OPTION.

This is not a game with you making the rules
to attempt to
restrict the outcome to your point of view.
Reality was, as noted in USSBS
"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."




You're forgetting that Hap Arnold fired LeMay's predecessor in the 21st
Bomber Command in Feb of '45 for poor performance of his command. His strikes
were all DAYLIGHT PRECISION BOMBING from 28,000 to 32,000 feet (which was
the doctrine for the B-29s). LeMay tried a few daylight strikes to find out
what was going wrong and came to the conclusion that low level at night was
the way to go. Little danger from fighters, almost no light to medium flak,
and the target density suited the fire bombing that he contemplated. The
March 9-10 45 fire raid on Tokyo succeeded beyond expectations.
As far as the bomb: it was available, and given what happened on Okinawa,
Luzon, Iwo Jima, etc. Truman, based on the INFORMATION HE HAD AVAILIABLE,
took the step of combat use of the bomb. 15 Kt on Hiroshima and 20 Kt on
Nagasaki forced, with the Soviet attack on Manchuria and the Kuriles, the
Emperor to order the military to "bear the unbearable" and accept the Potsdam
Declaration. That is a lot better than a 12-18 month bombing and blockade
campaign, or two costly invasions of key areas of the Japanese Home Islands.
You forget that there was still considerable fighting underway on some of
the Philippines in August of '45, and the British were still clearing Burma
and getting ready for a Malaya campaign. Based on the information available
to him in the Summer of '45, TRUMAN HAD NO CHOICE. He dropped the bomb and
the boys came home. It's easy to criticise with 50+ years of hindsight. And
as the grandson of a veteran who was supposed to be in Kyushu in November
of '45, I will never question Truman's decision.

Posted via www.My-Newsgroups.com - web to news gateway for usenet access!