![]() |
| If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|||||||
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#15
|
|||
|
|||
|
From: Cub Driver look@
be the material from Japanese sources. That would be completely new. I guess. I don't know. Oh, it is. My Flying Tigers book was published in 1991, and it was the first to identify the Japanese units and airmen who fought in Burma and China. The Bloody Shambles books came out in 1992, so of course we didn't have the advantage of one another's work. Hata & Izawa's book on the JAAF in English translation only came out this year! www.danford.net/jaaface.htm The Japanese navy fared better. John Lundstrom's First Team 1984 was the first to do this kind of research for the navy carrier pilots. The Hata & Izawa volume on the JNAF came out in English translation in 1989. The pace has picked up more recently, with a bunch of Osprey books using Japanese sources, and the Buffaloes Over Singapore book just published by Grub Street. There were a few articles published in places like the AAHS Journal and the British air magazines, but nobody paid any attention to them. Once information has become accepted, we think it's been around forever. It's hard to believe that up to October 1991 everyone accepted without question that the AVG Flying Tigers had fought the A6M Zero in Burma and China, and most people believed that Japan had only one (presumably independent) air force. I picked up a recent book on the war in the Solomons and New Guinea, which was okay as far as it went. But i stopped reading it because the author did not have even one Japanese source. In the intro he made some excuse about how hard it was to get Japanese sources. So what the japs did, how allied actions affected them, etc., were speculation or based on war-era allied intelligence estimates. So, for example, the fact that the Japanese military had better maps of the Solomons than the allies is, according to this author "a mystery." Such a piece of crap I won't even mention the author or title. He should be ashamed. But it's not a lot better with the Med. Everybody knows, for example, about Omaha Beach, or even Guadalcanal, for that matter. But who knows about the US Army Ranger units--1st and 3rd Ranger Battalions--that were massacred at Cisterna. Of 767 men, only 6 escaped. Mention this and get only blank stares or straight-out disbelief. It is simply amazing to me that six decades after the war, aside from what happened in northwest Europe, much of the war remains obscure, what little written about it all too often riddled with myth, error and nonsense. I'm glad you've done something to correct that picture. Chris Mark |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|