| Flags to mark VE day 08:45 - May 5 with 2973 views | Bluefish |
would it not be a better way to mark VE Day by waving EU flags? This would show what those brave people achieved in the war. |  |
| |  |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:12 - May 5 with 1335 views | ElephantintheRoom |
Or Japanese flags perhaps.
We were complicit after all in testing two different forms of atomic bombsto see which worked best on pre-prepared sites in Japan before allowing them to surrender during an after VE day. |  |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:30 - May 5 with 1314 views | Guthrum |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:12 - May 5 by ElephantintheRoom |
Or Japanese flags perhaps.
We were complicit after all in testing two different forms of atomic bombsto see which worked best on pre-prepared sites in Japan before allowing them to surrender during an after VE day. |
1) There had already been a test (Trinity) before the bombs were dropped.
2) The Japanese were showing no signs of surrender up until the bombs were dropped and the Soviet invasion of Manchuria (launched the same day as Nagasaki). Preparations for a last-ditch defence of the Home Islands went on until the last minute. There was even a near-successful armed coup in Tokyo in an attempt to prevent the Emperor's surrender broadcast from going out, by elements of the fight-to-the-death faction in the Japanese military. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ky%C5%ABj%C5%8D_incident [Post edited 5 May 2020 9:32]
|  |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:46 - May 5 with 1285 views | flimflam |
Most of Europe waved flags at the Germans so should come natural to them. [Post edited 5 May 2020 9:46]
|  |
| All men and women are created, by the, you know the, you know the thing. |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:50 - May 5 with 1268 views | NotSure |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:30 - May 5 by Guthrum |
1) There had already been a test (Trinity) before the bombs were dropped.
2) The Japanese were showing no signs of surrender up until the bombs were dropped and the Soviet invasion of Manchuria (launched the same day as Nagasaki). Preparations for a last-ditch defence of the Home Islands went on until the last minute. There was even a near-successful armed coup in Tokyo in an attempt to prevent the Emperor's surrender broadcast from going out, by elements of the fight-to-the-death faction in the Japanese military. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ky%C5%ABj%C5%8D_incident [Post edited 5 May 2020 9:32]
|
I think the purpose of this thread is to wind up brexiteers, not to start a history discussion. Still, very interesting to think about how much longer Word War 2 would have lasted without the nuclear bombs. |  | | |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:51 - May 5 with 1265 views | Mullet |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:46 - May 5 by flimflam |
Most of Europe waved flags at the Germans so should come natural to them. [Post edited 5 May 2020 9:46]
|
Try suggesting that to the Dutch, the large swathes of French, Poles etc. right across to the Balkans. Plenty died and risked everything because they didn't wave flags at them. Our own football team raised their arm to Hitler too don't forget in 1938. |  |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:57 - May 5 with 1255 views | Guthrum |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:46 - May 5 by flimflam |
Most of Europe waved flags at the Germans so should come natural to them. [Post edited 5 May 2020 9:46]
|
France: 210,000 military dead in WW2
Yugoslavia: 300,000 - 450,000 military dead in WW2
Belgium: 12,000 military dead in WW2
Netherlands: 7,000 military dead in WW2
Greece: 35,000 military dead in WW2
Norway: 2,000 military dead in WW2
Poland: 240,000 military dead in WW2 | |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:06 - May 5 with 1241 views | Guthrum |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:50 - May 5 by NotSure |
I think the purpose of this thread is to wind up brexiteers, not to start a history discussion. Still, very interesting to think about how much longer Word War 2 would have lasted without the nuclear bombs. |
Operation Coronet, the second stage of the plan to invade the Japanese Home Islands, was slated for spring 1946. The worst fighting would have been in the ealier phase, set for late 1945, with the assault on Kyushu. The Japanese were in the process of packing the island withland, sea and air forces, many of them designated as suicide attackers (often having little combat training). The Allies were expecting to take as many as a million casualties. The Japanese leadership were prepared to sacrifice several times that.
There was considerable debade as to whether, rather than being dropped on cities, the atomic bombs should be used to bombard the landing beaches. Which would have meant the attacking Allied troops being exposed to considerable radiation. It was finally decided to use them in an attempt to force the Japanese to surrender before these extremely costly operations had to be mounted. | |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:09 - May 5 with 1235 views | NotSure |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:57 - May 5 by Guthrum |
France: 210,000 military dead in WW2
Yugoslavia: 300,000 - 450,000 military dead in WW2
Belgium: 12,000 military dead in WW2
Netherlands: 7,000 military dead in WW2
Greece: 35,000 military dead in WW2
Norway: 2,000 military dead in WW2
Poland: 240,000 military dead in WW2 |
French military dead can seem quite high, until you realise those figures include prisoners of war who died.
And 1.8 million French soldiers surrendered during the Battle of France in 1940. | | | |
Login to get fewer ads
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:23 - May 5 with 1212 views | ElephantintheRoom |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:30 - May 5 by Guthrum |
1) There had already been a test (Trinity) before the bombs were dropped.
2) The Japanese were showing no signs of surrender up until the bombs were dropped and the Soviet invasion of Manchuria (launched the same day as Nagasaki). Preparations for a last-ditch defence of the Home Islands went on until the last minute. There was even a near-successful armed coup in Tokyo in an attempt to prevent the Emperor's surrender broadcast from going out, by elements of the fight-to-the-death faction in the Japanese military. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ky%C5%ABj%C5%8D_incident [Post edited 5 May 2020 9:32]
|
erm no.... because the japanese were anxious to surrender the nuclear bomb programme which had been years in the testing and prepartion was accelerated.... yes one type of bomb was tested - but a second type was thought to be more powerful - and how better to test it than to use it?.
The scientists at los alamos even had a sweepstake to see which was more powerful.... bets on the outcome of what was eventually the nagasaki drop ranged from 0% to 1000% more powerful than the hiroshima bomb
I know it is nice to think that those pesky japs wouldn't surrender.... but its simply not true... they were rather keen not to become a communist country.
Small cities which had hills around them to contain the blast like hiroshima and nagasaki (and the primary target for both missions, honshu) were protected from conventional bombing for the entire war... which led to a proliferation of hospitals in these cities.
The bombs, as it turned out were of similar power - but as the Nagasaki one was around 1% efficient, you can see why some enthusiasts were looking for 1000% more ooomph perhaps. It didnt kill as many people as at hiroshima because of cloud cover, meaning they didnt get that one dead centre.
Some lucky people with horrific injuries were evacuated to nagasaki from hiroshima.... and some actually survived the experience of a second nuclear explosion.... decades of medical follow up showed those that didnt die within a year from their injuries and radiation actually lived longer than average.
Incidentally, if you are interested in the true scale of USA war crimes inflicted on Japan read up on the fire bomb raids... and in particular the Tokyo raids in March 1945. The population density of central Tokyo back then was 100,000 per sq mile. The first raid evaporated 15 square miles in one night... and they even went back for a second dose the next day when the smell of burning flesh was so intense at 5000 ft altitude that US bomber crews had to use oxygen to stop them vomiting - and the heat rising from the fire storm below knocked several B-29s out of the sky.
Official death toll is 90,000 - 120,000 - as much as the two atomic bombs together... but if you do the Tokyo maths you can see that the figure is as reliable as those bandied about at a tory press briefing mid-corona crisis. The japanese didnt want their population to realise just what was happening to them.... and within three months the americans weree prosecuting Germans for war crimes. so they didnt want the true scale of the carnage to be realised either. | |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:25 - May 5 with 1203 views | Radlett_blue |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:57 - May 5 by Guthrum |
France: 210,000 military dead in WW2
Yugoslavia: 300,000 - 450,000 military dead in WW2
Belgium: 12,000 military dead in WW2
Netherlands: 7,000 military dead in WW2
Greece: 35,000 military dead in WW2
Norway: 2,000 military dead in WW2
Poland: 240,000 military dead in WW2 |
And, interestingly enough, I believe most of those countries don't keep making a big song & dance about anniversaries of VE Day & umpteen other events from 2 World Wars every year. |  |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:36 - May 5 with 1174 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:46 - May 5 by flimflam |
Most of Europe waved flags at the Germans so should come natural to them. [Post edited 5 May 2020 9:46]
|
Good grief |  |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:03 - May 5 with 1138 views | noggin |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:36 - May 5 by Swansea_Blue |
Good grief |
We woz the only country wot stood up to them gerries innit. |  |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:04 - May 5 with 1136 views | Guthrum |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:23 - May 5 by ElephantintheRoom |
erm no.... because the japanese were anxious to surrender the nuclear bomb programme which had been years in the testing and prepartion was accelerated.... yes one type of bomb was tested - but a second type was thought to be more powerful - and how better to test it than to use it?.
The scientists at los alamos even had a sweepstake to see which was more powerful.... bets on the outcome of what was eventually the nagasaki drop ranged from 0% to 1000% more powerful than the hiroshima bomb
I know it is nice to think that those pesky japs wouldn't surrender.... but its simply not true... they were rather keen not to become a communist country.
Small cities which had hills around them to contain the blast like hiroshima and nagasaki (and the primary target for both missions, honshu) were protected from conventional bombing for the entire war... which led to a proliferation of hospitals in these cities.
The bombs, as it turned out were of similar power - but as the Nagasaki one was around 1% efficient, you can see why some enthusiasts were looking for 1000% more ooomph perhaps. It didnt kill as many people as at hiroshima because of cloud cover, meaning they didnt get that one dead centre.
Some lucky people with horrific injuries were evacuated to nagasaki from hiroshima.... and some actually survived the experience of a second nuclear explosion.... decades of medical follow up showed those that didnt die within a year from their injuries and radiation actually lived longer than average.
Incidentally, if you are interested in the true scale of USA war crimes inflicted on Japan read up on the fire bomb raids... and in particular the Tokyo raids in March 1945. The population density of central Tokyo back then was 100,000 per sq mile. The first raid evaporated 15 square miles in one night... and they even went back for a second dose the next day when the smell of burning flesh was so intense at 5000 ft altitude that US bomber crews had to use oxygen to stop them vomiting - and the heat rising from the fire storm below knocked several B-29s out of the sky.
Official death toll is 90,000 - 120,000 - as much as the two atomic bombs together... but if you do the Tokyo maths you can see that the figure is as reliable as those bandied about at a tory press briefing mid-corona crisis. The japanese didnt want their population to realise just what was happening to them.... and within three months the americans weree prosecuting Germans for war crimes. so they didnt want the true scale of the carnage to be realised either. |
Wrong. It was well known that the Little Boy design (which was very rudimentary) was a lot less efficient than the Fat Man implosion design tested at Trinity. The latter was technically far more complex, hence the test to make sure it worked.
The key with an atom bomb (hydrogen bombs work differently) is to have fission take place in as much of the material as possible before it blows itself apart. The uranium gun design (Little Boy) has nothing more than the steel gun barrel down which one part of the core was fired at the other. Whereas the implosion design (fat man) had inward momentum, ensuring that far more of the material would undergo fission. Still only a very small percentage, but the latter was a significant improvement.
The Hiroshima weapon was less powerful (16 kilotons TNT equivalent) than the Nagasaki one (21 kilotons).
When you say 'the whole war', effective US bombing of the Home Islands was only possible for the final 12 months of the war. Also, those cities had not been bombed even before target selection for the atomic bomb raids had started.
You say "war crimes" with regard to the bombing of Tokyo, but the absolute prohibition against aerial bombing had been ignored by everybody since 1914 (and, in any case, the wording specifically referred to balloons). They weren't an "undefended locations", having anti-aircraft guns and military garrisons (not to mention military installations and arsenals). Most of the prosecutions for war crimes by the Allies were for waging aggressive war, for the mistreatment and killing of PoWs and for genocide. | |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:05 - May 5 with 1137 views | Swansea_Blue |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:03 - May 5 by noggin |
We woz the only country wot stood up to them gerries innit. |
Seems to be the implication. Although I struggle to tell the difference between people who are trolling, being sarcastic and those who are just willfully ignorant. | |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:07 - May 5 with 1136 views | flimflam |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:25 - May 5 by Radlett_blue |
And, interestingly enough, I believe most of those countries don't keep making a big song & dance about anniversaries of VE Day & umpteen other events from 2 World Wars every year. |
It irks me we do not do the same for VJ day. Not on the same scale anyway.
Living in Suffolk we have good reason as the Suffolk regiment was heavily involved in the far East. Two battalions (4th and 5th) surrendered without hardly firing a shot as disembarked into Singapore just before it surrendered, saw 17 days of defensive actions after 3 yrs of training ending up in POW camps for the rest of the war where hundreds perished.
The 2nd battalion served in India.
edited for historical inaccuracies. [Post edited 5 May 2020 11:31]
| |
| All men and women are created, by the, you know the, you know the thing. |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:11 - May 5 with 1121 views | Guthrum |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:09 - May 5 by NotSure |
French military dead can seem quite high, until you realise those figures include prisoners of war who died.
And 1.8 million French soldiers surrendered during the Battle of France in 1940. |
Which includes the capitulation of the whole remaining French armed forces after the armistice.
The idea that the French army didn't fight bravely in 1940 is a complete myth. Their leadership was often poor and disorganised, plus lack of radios hampered communications. Most importantly, they were strategically caught out by the German attack from the Ardennes (which hit some of the weaker French formations), breakthrough and rapid exploitation. Once that happens, it's a very difficult situation to come back from, always chasing to catch up. But all accounts agree the French fought bravely. Had they not, Dunkirk would never have been possible. | |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:20 - May 5 with 1112 views | Guthrum |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:23 - May 5 by ElephantintheRoom |
erm no.... because the japanese were anxious to surrender the nuclear bomb programme which had been years in the testing and prepartion was accelerated.... yes one type of bomb was tested - but a second type was thought to be more powerful - and how better to test it than to use it?.
The scientists at los alamos even had a sweepstake to see which was more powerful.... bets on the outcome of what was eventually the nagasaki drop ranged from 0% to 1000% more powerful than the hiroshima bomb
I know it is nice to think that those pesky japs wouldn't surrender.... but its simply not true... they were rather keen not to become a communist country.
Small cities which had hills around them to contain the blast like hiroshima and nagasaki (and the primary target for both missions, honshu) were protected from conventional bombing for the entire war... which led to a proliferation of hospitals in these cities.
The bombs, as it turned out were of similar power - but as the Nagasaki one was around 1% efficient, you can see why some enthusiasts were looking for 1000% more ooomph perhaps. It didnt kill as many people as at hiroshima because of cloud cover, meaning they didnt get that one dead centre.
Some lucky people with horrific injuries were evacuated to nagasaki from hiroshima.... and some actually survived the experience of a second nuclear explosion.... decades of medical follow up showed those that didnt die within a year from their injuries and radiation actually lived longer than average.
Incidentally, if you are interested in the true scale of USA war crimes inflicted on Japan read up on the fire bomb raids... and in particular the Tokyo raids in March 1945. The population density of central Tokyo back then was 100,000 per sq mile. The first raid evaporated 15 square miles in one night... and they even went back for a second dose the next day when the smell of burning flesh was so intense at 5000 ft altitude that US bomber crews had to use oxygen to stop them vomiting - and the heat rising from the fire storm below knocked several B-29s out of the sky.
Official death toll is 90,000 - 120,000 - as much as the two atomic bombs together... but if you do the Tokyo maths you can see that the figure is as reliable as those bandied about at a tory press briefing mid-corona crisis. The japanese didnt want their population to realise just what was happening to them.... and within three months the americans weree prosecuting Germans for war crimes. so they didnt want the true scale of the carnage to be realised either. |
And on the "communist country" thing, the Japanese and the Soviets had had a neutrality pact for most of the War. The Soviet attack on Manchuria (launched the same morning as the Nagasaki raid, while the 'planes were in the air) began without a prior declaration of war and without having informed the other Allies of the timing. The Japanese did not know when, or even if, it was coming. Moreover, that was still a very long way from Japan itself*.
Thus a possible Soviet takeover was by no means imminent enough to cause the Japanese to surrender. Certainly not before the middle of August.
"The Glorious Death of One Hundred Million" is not a slogan put out by a government desperate to surrender.
* The Soviets also lacked experience or adequate equipment for large-scale amphibious landings. [Post edited 5 May 2020 11:26]
| |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:23 - May 5 with 1099 views | Guthrum |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:07 - May 5 by flimflam |
It irks me we do not do the same for VJ day. Not on the same scale anyway.
Living in Suffolk we have good reason as the Suffolk regiment was heavily involved in the far East. Two battalions (4th and 5th) surrendered without hardly firing a shot as disembarked into Singapore just before it surrendered, saw 17 days of defensive actions after 3 yrs of training ending up in POW camps for the rest of the war where hundreds perished.
The 2nd battalion served in India.
edited for historical inaccuracies. [Post edited 5 May 2020 11:31]
|
Yes, I agree that VJ Day is as worthy of commemoration as VE Day. | |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:24 - May 5 with 1100 views | flimflam |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:05 - May 5 by Swansea_Blue |
Seems to be the implication. Although I struggle to tell the difference between people who are trolling, being sarcastic and those who are just willfully ignorant. |
It was tongue in cheek.
The only thing that saved us from the same fate was Dunkirk, The English Channel, The RAF and the bonkers decision to bomb London instead of the airfields.
Edit - And our Navy although that would of been be overcome by owning the skies. [Post edited 5 May 2020 11:35]
| |
| All men and women are created, by the, you know the, you know the thing. |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:47 - May 5 with 1067 views | WeWereZombies |
| Flags to mark VE day on 09:30 - May 5 by Guthrum |
1) There had already been a test (Trinity) before the bombs were dropped.
2) The Japanese were showing no signs of surrender up until the bombs were dropped and the Soviet invasion of Manchuria (launched the same day as Nagasaki). Preparations for a last-ditch defence of the Home Islands went on until the last minute. There was even a near-successful armed coup in Tokyo in an attempt to prevent the Emperor's surrender broadcast from going out, by elements of the fight-to-the-death faction in the Japanese military. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ky%C5%ABj%C5%8D_incident [Post edited 5 May 2020 9:32]
|
Your second point is completely wrong. The Japanese were considering surrender, with an almost certain verdict that they had to, to avoid a Russian invasion. However, the Allied demands for unconditional surrender were very unpalatable to the Japanese mentality. A battle was going on between the Hawks and the Doves in Washington on whether to relax those terms, but there are suspicions (not least because of Truman's enthusiasm for his 'new toy' as documented in the minutes to the Atlantic Conventions) that some in the United States had to drop the bombs regardless just to find out what they would do in a real war situation.
https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/debate-over-japanese-surrender
It is still a source of much contention between historians, and I will admit that I am much swayed by having gone to Hiroshima and Nagasaki back In January, but please do not go making sweeping statements about the most sombre of historical events; the understanding of which may still be vital to all our futures. |  |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:57 - May 5 with 1046 views | MattinLondon |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:11 - May 5 by Guthrum |
Which includes the capitulation of the whole remaining French armed forces after the armistice.
The idea that the French army didn't fight bravely in 1940 is a complete myth. Their leadership was often poor and disorganised, plus lack of radios hampered communications. Most importantly, they were strategically caught out by the German attack from the Ardennes (which hit some of the weaker French formations), breakthrough and rapid exploitation. Once that happens, it's a very difficult situation to come back from, always chasing to catch up. But all accounts agree the French fought bravely. Had they not, Dunkirk would never have been possible. |
Just a quick question for you - hope you don’t mind.
In your opinion, if Britain was not an island and connected to continental Europe, would Britain have fallen? Did the fact that we’re an island save the country from being conquered?
I did read somewhere that the Nazis hesitated after Dunkirk- not sure if this is true or not. Ta. |  | | |
| Flags to mark VE day on 12:08 - May 5 with 1028 views | WeWereZombies |
| Flags to mark VE day on 10:23 - May 5 by ElephantintheRoom |
erm no.... because the japanese were anxious to surrender the nuclear bomb programme which had been years in the testing and prepartion was accelerated.... yes one type of bomb was tested - but a second type was thought to be more powerful - and how better to test it than to use it?.
The scientists at los alamos even had a sweepstake to see which was more powerful.... bets on the outcome of what was eventually the nagasaki drop ranged from 0% to 1000% more powerful than the hiroshima bomb
I know it is nice to think that those pesky japs wouldn't surrender.... but its simply not true... they were rather keen not to become a communist country.
Small cities which had hills around them to contain the blast like hiroshima and nagasaki (and the primary target for both missions, honshu) were protected from conventional bombing for the entire war... which led to a proliferation of hospitals in these cities.
The bombs, as it turned out were of similar power - but as the Nagasaki one was around 1% efficient, you can see why some enthusiasts were looking for 1000% more ooomph perhaps. It didnt kill as many people as at hiroshima because of cloud cover, meaning they didnt get that one dead centre.
Some lucky people with horrific injuries were evacuated to nagasaki from hiroshima.... and some actually survived the experience of a second nuclear explosion.... decades of medical follow up showed those that didnt die within a year from their injuries and radiation actually lived longer than average.
Incidentally, if you are interested in the true scale of USA war crimes inflicted on Japan read up on the fire bomb raids... and in particular the Tokyo raids in March 1945. The population density of central Tokyo back then was 100,000 per sq mile. The first raid evaporated 15 square miles in one night... and they even went back for a second dose the next day when the smell of burning flesh was so intense at 5000 ft altitude that US bomber crews had to use oxygen to stop them vomiting - and the heat rising from the fire storm below knocked several B-29s out of the sky.
Official death toll is 90,000 - 120,000 - as much as the two atomic bombs together... but if you do the Tokyo maths you can see that the figure is as reliable as those bandied about at a tory press briefing mid-corona crisis. The japanese didnt want their population to realise just what was happening to them.... and within three months the americans weree prosecuting Germans for war crimes. so they didnt want the true scale of the carnage to be realised either. |
Couple of corrections needed here. On the morning that the second atomic bomb, Fat Man, was dropped the primary target was Kokura; which is further north on Kyushu. However, the target was obscured by clouds totally so the secondary target of Nagasaki became the mission. When total cloud cover seemed evident here also the drop airplane, Bockscar, was about to turn away from this city too but a sliver of a gap in the clouds was spotted. The bomb was dropped to the north of the city rather than the centre so it was close to the hills and did not have the 'open end' of the dock side. With the cloud cover almost complete above the effect was devastating but we will probably never know how many died because of the destruction of records and undocumented foreign workers. | |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 12:13 - May 5 with 1023 views | WeWereZombies |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:20 - May 5 by Guthrum |
And on the "communist country" thing, the Japanese and the Soviets had had a neutrality pact for most of the War. The Soviet attack on Manchuria (launched the same morning as the Nagasaki raid, while the 'planes were in the air) began without a prior declaration of war and without having informed the other Allies of the timing. The Japanese did not know when, or even if, it was coming. Moreover, that was still a very long way from Japan itself*.
Thus a possible Soviet takeover was by no means imminent enough to cause the Japanese to surrender. Certainly not before the middle of August.
"The Glorious Death of One Hundred Million" is not a slogan put out by a government desperate to surrender.
* The Soviets also lacked experience or adequate equipment for large-scale amphibious landings. [Post edited 5 May 2020 11:26]
|
To say that the Japanese did not know if the Russians were coming is, frankly, ridiculous. | |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 12:17 - May 5 with 1015 views | flimflam |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:57 - May 5 by MattinLondon |
Just a quick question for you - hope you don’t mind.
In your opinion, if Britain was not an island and connected to continental Europe, would Britain have fallen? Did the fact that we’re an island save the country from being conquered?
I did read somewhere that the Nazis hesitated after Dunkirk- not sure if this is true or not. Ta. |
We would of been speaking German today 100%
See my post above.
The German hesitated at Dunkirk to allow their troops to catch up with their Panzers which had got way ahead. If Hitler had allowed them to advance we would have been wiped out on the beaches of Dunkirk.
The Battle Of Britain if lost would have seen the hundreds of thousands of German troops ready to embark completely overwhelm what was left of the Army who had lost most of its equipment at Dunkirk.
Hilters decision to change tactics and bomb London instead of the RAF airfields allowed us to resupply the planes and pilots and with us having radar pinpoint the exact locations of the German planes. We were very close to losing the war at that point.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Sea_Lion
Edit - To add if we had fallen in 1940 then the Russians would have also most probably also been beaten but the fact after D-Day they were having to fight on 2 fronts, East and West not including Italy and Africa meant that they were eventually overwhelmed.
Also we seem to forget the hundreds of thousands of Commonwealth troops who conquered Italy in a horrific campaign that was finally won with massive allied losses in May 1944 and completely overshadowed by D-Day the following month. [Post edited 5 May 2020 12:45]
| |
| All men and women are created, by the, you know the, you know the thing. |
| |
| Flags to mark VE day on 12:24 - May 5 with 1007 views | Guthrum |
| Flags to mark VE day on 11:47 - May 5 by WeWereZombies |
Your second point is completely wrong. The Japanese were considering surrender, with an almost certain verdict that they had to, to avoid a Russian invasion. However, the Allied demands for unconditional surrender were very unpalatable to the Japanese mentality. A battle was going on between the Hawks and the Doves in Washington on whether to relax those terms, but there are suspicions (not least because of Truman's enthusiasm for his 'new toy' as documented in the minutes to the Atlantic Conventions) that some in the United States had to drop the bombs regardless just to find out what they would do in a real war situation.
https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/debate-over-japanese-surrender
It is still a source of much contention between historians, and I will admit that I am much swayed by having gone to Hiroshima and Nagasaki back In January, but please do not go making sweeping statements about the most sombre of historical events; the understanding of which may still be vital to all our futures. |
The experience of the aftermath of the First World War, wich had ended with an armistice and a traditional negotiated peace, informed a lot of decisionmaking in the West. Particularly that the idea of "not really being militarily defeated" had allowed the Nazis to build a platform of having been unfairly penalised. Hence unconditional surrender. They couldn't reasonably offer to Japan anything better than they had to Germany, both were aggressors who had launched destructive wars (arguably Japan first, against China). After everything which had happened during the War, I'm not sure that would ever have been negotiable on the Allied side, if they had the means to gain outright victory.
The - mainly military - faction subscribing to the 20th century concept of Bushido and fighting to the death in honorable self sacrifice for the Emperor (itself founded on a historical myth as tenuous as European chivalry) was still in the driving seat at the beginning of August. That was the option on the table, not capitulation. When the decision to bomb was taken, the Soviets had not yet given any hint of when they might move, or how far. It wasn't until the shocks of the atomic bombings and the Soviet invasion of Manchuria* that the pragmatists (of whom there were, indeed, several**) managed to sieze control of the decisionmaking in Tokyo - but only just.
* The extent and rapid success of which, from 9th August on, was at least as big a factor as the US atomic bombing, if not more so. But prior to its launch, the Japanese hoped their armies could make a hard fight of it.
** Including the Prime Minister and Foreign Minister. But their influence was arguably less than the that of the military, until events strenghtened their hand. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
