your opinion on operation downfall? info inside (continued)

[alex 9344]

Ok guys my last thread on this topic was locked due to me accidentally putting in a question that violated the rules that question has been ommited. So please enjoy the thread and its topic

Operation downfall was the planned allied invasion of Japan if we never dropped the bombs now I want your guys opinions on these questions after reading

1 was the timeframe to complete downfall viable based on the allies attack strategy and the Japanese defenders?

2 do you think the Japanese estimate of American casualties was attainable based on the Japanese defence?

3 do you think Japan could have sustained there estimated 10 day kamikaze attacks?

4 how difficult do you think the invasion of Japan would have been based on what the Americans learned about Japanese warfare and the overwhelming air power America had?


6 based on the info provided what is YOUR estimates on American casualties ? And Japanese causality ?
7 how long do you think Japan could have defended the home island's?

All information on operation downfall that I could find is here
http://www.kilroywashere.org/006-Pages/Invasion.html

Thanks for your thoughts love learning about ww2 and can't wait for my first hoi game

 

[Anichent]

It would have been a lot harder than any invasion of Europe. The casualties would have been even higher than projected for sure, not only due to the difficulty and Japanese defences, but also because the Japanese would have been merciless and not surrendered easily. When it comes to fighting to the end I'd count on the Japanese people to be more intense about it than Germans in terms of the overall population.

Casualties? More than 1mil on each side for sure. Much higher. And it would have taken Americans much longer. They'd likely even face, for the first time in the war, serious instances of losing ground and battles. It would not be the fast march across France or the slow push in Italy, it would be slowly and the Japanese would give the Americans a run for their money on their own territory based on these plans.

 

[PanosB3]

The guerilla warfare would also be the cause for many casualties for the Allies as well, and the massive number of ''willing to defend homeland'' people.

As for how long japan would hold, that depends:

When will the government sign a peace treaty? probably not much after the invasion since they would lack a lot of resources and couldn't sustain anyone besides the government/high ranking officials.

When will the actual fighting stop?

Well with so many people willing or even wishing to die to defend their country and seeing surrendering as a very disgraceful thing, perhaps guerilla warfare for an average time period after the time period.

 

[Secret Master]

Reading the strategic bombing survey of the Pacific campaign, and looking at documents/memos from Japanese officials months before the atomic bombs were dropped is quite illuminating. (Don't know about the strategic bombing survey? Find the Pacific one here.) (There's also a whole bunch of quotations from primary sources on the wiki page for the surrender of Japan that outline just how bad the government ministers thought things were even by June.)

I am not convinced that Japan as a whole would have resisted to the levels seen either on Okinawa or from posts in this thread. The fervor people attribute to Japanese civilians was not necessarily going to be as high Allied intelligence predicted.

Why? Here are a few reasons.

1) The Japanese government itself predicted a famine coming in the near future. The blockade would no doubt continue during the invasion, but if the invasion lasts any longer than a month, you can expect famine to erode any fervor you might see. (You can look up on your own time what happens to the IJA and IJN when food stocks get low during Guadalcanal. It's not pretty. It's only going to be worse when it hits the home islands.)

2) The Japanese government itself was very worried about the potential for a Communist uprising months prior the bombs being dropped. Yes, despite their appearance of unity, there was a serious concern that even if the Allies never invaded, the government might be otherthrown by Communists due to the economic problems at home. This is an indicator that things were not as rosy as they appeared to Allied intelligence.

3) The strategic bombing was having an impact on morale. Not because the bombing itself was depressing, but because the people could see it was unopposed. Japanese civilians, when surveyed after the war, indicated a significant loss of confidence to the government as these B-29 bombings continued. They felt that the government was incompetent/lying to the them, and its propaganda was not having a real impact.

4) The kamikaze threat was very real. That being said, once that problem was dealt with, the Japanese had no real air force to oppose the invasion. I consider this to be one of the most significant hindrances to any serious attempts at counter-attacks during the campaign against Germany after Overload (Battle of the Bulge shows just what you could get away with if Allied air cover was out of the picture). While I do not discount the defensive advantage the IJA enjoys throughout the islands, I do think that every inch of ground lost is lost for good. I also think that Japanese forces will be unable to move around significantly without getting bombed, limiting their ability to respond to Allied offensives.

5) The existing divisions in Japan were not even properly armed and could not be properly armed.

Note that I'm not suggesting that there was no fight left in Japan or its people in August of 1945. What I'm suggesting is that the levels of fanatical devotion Allied intelligence expected to see were not a foregone conclusion. It is possible that coups and counter-coups could be in the offing due to divisions in the military leadership, as well as the intervention of the Emperor. And if they thought that anarchy was on the verge of happening, surrender and preservation of the state might be preferable to revolution or civil war.

The role of the Emperor in all of this might be crucial. He's the guy who wanted to start a process for peace after he found out civilians were using bomb fragments to make shovels, because there was that much of a shortage of iron.

 

[Caesar15]

It'd be pretty bad. Lots of military casualties on both sides, especially the Japanese. Also keep in mind that that famine would be widespread all throughout Japan, and the starvation factor would probably overrule the fanatical devotion factor and then we could potentially see civilians fleeing to the American front line and a complete collapse of the Japanese government because of the civil disorder that would erupt.

 

[jacobsighs]

I think you'd like the book "1945"

Although the Americans still use the atomic bombs, so it's not quite the same.

 

[Caesar15]

I think you'd like the book "1945"

Although the Americans still use the atomic bombs, so it's not quite the same.

They still use the bombs? How does that work?

 

[griffor]

i doubt it would have been the americans who invaded more than likely the soviets would have done the majority of the work without the bomb causing japan to surrender

 

[jacobsighs]

They still use the bombs? How does that work?

IRL there was a coup attempt by the Japanese army, which did not want to surrender. The head of the army refused to help the coup, but also said he would not prevent them from trying. The coup attempt failed.

In the book, the head of the army agrees to help the plotters, which leads to a successful coup. The Emperor is placed under house arrest and prevented from announcing surrender. Without a Japanese surrender, the U.S. bombs 2 other cities. The Japanese then relocate PoWs to urban centers to prevent more atomic bombing. An American invasion is launched on Kyushu from Okinawa, an OSS agent is landed in Japan, and much more. There are also some other unforeseen consequences of this, for example the Soviets allow Japanese forces in China to redeploy to Japan, which creates a rift between the PRC and the Soviets.

I enjoyed it, but everything is subjective so I wouldn't get mad if someone said they didn't like it.

 

[Mamluke]

SNIP

thank you kindly for the LINK !! already have it saved in my PC.
(no time to read the servey)
lets cut to the chase, why invade Japan, when you can starve it out?

I mean, the Americans could Bomb Japan in free reing since 1944??
they captured Okinaway, the navy could reach Korea and beyond, ( I bet) the IJN was... a skeleton at best? the SOV would Invade Machuria. thus making the Japaness Empire only a simple Island nation.

"but the Soviets could Invade Japan Itself!" I here you say.
could the Americans just blockade and patrol hakkaido. and kindly say "fuck off" if the SOV was going anywhere near the small Island? what are the Sov going to do? they did their Job against Germany, and they didn't really and a strong navy in the pacific.

Unless Im mistaken.

 

[Heruure]

I think people overreact alot with this operation, the Japanese government was thinking about surrender even before the nuclear bombs fell, with how it went in Europe and the soviets shifting their focus and all.

 

[Ernestas]

Operation would had been a good thing in order to exterminate Japan for its recolonization and expansion of USA landmass in Asia. I personally would had bombarded their coasts to oblivion, then with heavy concentration of armor, artillery and careful movement I would had established defense perimeters and let Japanese to beat themselves bloody. The point here is to cause starvation and as many Japanese deaths as possible while preventing your own. Overall, land invasion would had been straightforward matter with minimal casualties compared to that you are just about to do, all that matters is to take complete dominance of seas. With coasts besieged, it's easy to land your troops since you have heavy artillery support to shatter any pre-established defenses, counter any batteries and to obliterate any push. Air supremacy would enable troops to receive massive boost in anything that they will do and especially it will be useful then assaulting their beaches, having strike squads taking out anything that infantry encounters.

Of course, if those fools surrender then it's a loss for us. We could not force the end of Japan simply by prologing its suffering to the point then its infrastructure and intellectual reserves are so shattered that upcoming starvation would wipe that island out to non-importance.

 

[Denkt]

I think it would have been very one sided with the american forces suffers very few permanent casulties compared to the japanse.

 

[Secret Master]

Operation would had been a good thing in order to exterminate Japan for its recolonization and expansion of USA landmass in Asia.

I am not sure if you are referring to wiping out the IJA or the Japanese people in general. Genocide is a forbidden topic around here, so if you mean just the armed forces of Japan, clarify your statements in the future or I will be forced to take action.

 

[Ernestas]

Indeed, I'm referring to destroying Japanese military in cold and calculating manner. Rest is collateral damage inflicted by Japanese themselves to their own people due to their own pride and stubbornness by refusing to surrender. I'm just implying if Japanese are reckless enough, we would need to maximize damage done by us to them in order to keep them weak and preferably to the point there Japan becomes just a base of operation to USA fleet and air force. Fortunately, history turned for the better and with some proper investment, they had become our main allies in the Asia.

In addition I could say that there is no need for land invasion, just blockade them to submission. Due to forum laws, I will leave out ugly parts which will happen to civilian population due to their own stubbornness, but we all know that ''strategic bombing'', ''blockades'' and other similar methods truly are and that they do.