your opinion on operation downfall ? info inside

[hkrommel]

Why do you think the Soviets didn't know about the mines? Soviet ships were still sailing across the Pacific and offloading in Vladivostok. The allies wee definitEly telling the Soviets about general location of the minefields around Japan

Not really. I've never seen any indication that they did, and even then it would take a long time to find and sweep all of them. There wasn't much communication, in fact there were several instances of improperly marked Soviet transport ships being torpedoed by American submarines. They also laid the mines around the island , not in shipping lanes, so you would only hit them if you got close to Hokkaido itself.

 

[Amur_Tiger]

They didn't even know the mines were there, and it would significantly delay any operation once discovered.

Again, look at the Battle of Shumshu. Because they performed so poorly the Soviets decided not to invade Hokkaido barring massive preparation even if their operation in the Kuril Islands was a success (and that was in doubt).

Also, where are you conjuring this magical port capacity with which the Soviets would supply their troops? Not to mention there weren't many favorable beaches and the best landing sites were all fortified, some as early as the Russo-Japanese war!



This is a joke, right? Normandy was incredibly easy at everywhere but Omaha beach. The German formations were barely second-line. Considering that Japanese troops fought to the death on random pieces of land with zero inhabitants in the middle of the Pacific, what more would they do on the Home Islands?

Even if the Soviets mount a successful landing (which they were barely capable of against token resistance), how will they move inland at all? How will they cope with Japanese reinforcements? How will they be supplied? It's not like they are going be be constructing artificial ports like in Overlord. Where will the supplies come from?

Battle of Shumshu, I suppose you're reffering to this passage?

The Battle of Shumshu was the only battle between the Soviets and Japanese in August–September 1945 in which Soviet casualties exceeded those of the Japanese. The Soviets suffered 1,567 casualties – 516 killed or missing and another 1,051 wounded – and the loss of five landing ships, while Japanese casualties totaled 1,018 – 256 killed and another 762 wounded.[10] Soviet officers later often said that the operation demonstrated the difficulty of amphibious invasions of enemy territory and Soviet shortfalls and inexperience in amphibious warfare, and cited the Soviet experience on Shumshu as a reason for not invading the island of Hokkaido in the Japanese Home Islands.[11][12]

With Shumshu and Paramushiro under Soviet control, the rest of the Kuril Island chain, much more lightly held by Japanese forces, fell to Soviet forces easily. The Soviets completed their occupation of the Kurils on 5 September 1945.[

Now I hadn't run into this particular battle before though the result, a soviet victory against forces of about equal numbers suggests that they could have well pulled it off given the superior numbers they'd dedicated to the invasion of Hokkaido. The fact that you cast in doubt the outcome that is so clearly laid out is rather curious.

Never head of the Atlantic wall then? The Normandy landings faced twice as many divisions as there were in the entire whole of Hokkaido, while the particular placement of the Normandy landings was always in doubt ( though the Altantic wall didn't exactly have gaps in spite of this ) there were always a concentration of forces ready for an Allied invasion in Northern France, unlike the Japanese and Hokkaido.

If, as you've stated yourself, lend-lease provided a huge amount of supplies to the whole soviet union through the ports in the pacific I imagine that they'd do fine just with those.

Finally, mine-clearing is a pretty normal part of any naval operation and given the number of mine-clearing ships the Soviets had available they would have done just fine at clearing them, after all the point of mine-clearing ships isn't to just clear mines you knew about ahead of time.

 

[alex 9344]

I really can't take those "what if" scenarios serious to justify mass-murder of civilians, that is like saying ìf only the US had surrendered I guess no US soldiers or Japanese civilians would had died at all.
The atomic bombing didn't had to happen, the US wanted it to happen.

I can't force you to see my argument but your argument of the US wanted to nuke Japan in the first place is just not true I have presented ample evidence as to why we had to do it and operation downfall was barley a what if it was planned and was being executed as decisions about the bomb where being debated if you can't see why it was necessary to both save the United state's soldiers and more than likely the entire Japanese population then I'm sorry you see it that way this is the last time I shall discuss the bomb vs downfall debate with you

however if people want to discuss the original topic of downfall it self and the questions I asked and the Pacific war in general that is fine and I encourage that but please do not bring up the bomb vs invasion debate again we all have our opinion and are entitled to it but that debate has been going on for 70 plus years and it will never end. Nevertheless vonboe I enjoyed the debate

 

[bcoop1701]

No discussion of the justification for using the atomic bombs can be adequately made on this forum because it involves broaching subjects that are in violation of forum rules. It's pointless to argue it one way or the other because we can't discuss the why's without the thread being closed. That's not a complaint, just a statement of fact.

 

[alex 9344]

No discussion of the justification for using the atomic bombs can be adequately made on this forum because it involves broaching subjects that are in violation of forum rules. It's pointless to argue it one way or the other because we can't discuss the why's without the thread being closed. That's not a complaint, just a statement of fact.

Thank you please carry on with the original topic discussion and the discussion on the Pacific war please do not bring up the atom bomb again

thank you all who have participated in this thread so far I love the discussion so far!

 

[hkrommel]

Now I hadn't run into this particular battle before though the result, a soviet victory against forces of about equal numbers suggests that they could have well pulled it off given the superior numbers they'd dedicated to the invasion of Hokkaido. The fact that you cast in doubt the outcome that is so clearly laid out is rather curious.

Did you not read further? The Japanese capitulated because of the general surrender. The Soviets barely got a beachhead before Japan surrendered.

Never head of the Atlantic wall then? The Normandy landings faced twice as many divisions as there were in the entire whole of Hokkaido, while the particular placement of the Normandy landings was always in doubt ( though the Altantic wall didn't exactly have gaps in spite of this ) there were always a concentration of forces ready for an Allied invasion in Northern France, unlike the Japanese and Hokkaido.

All favorable landing beaches in Hokkaido were fortified and manned. They were also manned by actual Japanese troops, not the second-line reservists (to put it charitably) the Germans put up in Normandy. And yes, the Atlantic wall was a thing, but you can build all the concrete bunkers you want but if you put them in the wrong places and man them with what can be charitably called second-rate conscripts they do you no good.

At Sword beach the Allies had 683 casualties.
At Gold beach the Allies had about 1,000 casualties.
At Juno beach the Allies had about 900 casualties.
At Utah beach the Allies had about 1,000 casualties.
At Omaha beach (where they faced an actual first-line combat formation) the Allies had about 3,000 casualties.

At Shumshu the Soviets lost about 1,600 against token resistance on an island not nearly as heavily defended as Hokkaido. Not only that but they lost 5 landing ships in the process.

If, as you've stated yourself, lend-lease provided a huge amount of supplies to the whole soviet union through the ports in the pacific I imagine that they'd do fine just with those.

What are you talking about? How do the Soviets get supplies to Hokkaido? They can't just beach merchant ships, they have to have a port to supply a sufficient force. Where is that port? How will they seize that port? How will they seize that port intact? Hokkaido is a really big island and they will need sustained offensive operations. Where do the supplies come from for those operations?

 

[Amur_Tiger]

Did you not read further? The Japanese capitulated because of the general surrender. The Soviets barely got a beachhead before Japan surrendered.

Did you? Here's a quote from the conclusion of operations.

In a series of attacks during the night of 18–19 August 1945, the Soviets wiped out most of the defenses of the Japanese shore batteries, and Gnechko made plans to bring all Japanese resistance on Shumshu to an end on 19 August. Soviet heavy artillery came ashore on the morning of 19 August, and small groups of Japanese began to surrender. At 0900, a Japanese envoy informed the Soviets that the 91st Infantry Division had received orders from higher command to cease hostilities at 1600.

In short this entirely contradicts your telling of events with the exception of the fact that after already being in the process of losing badly they ceased hostilities.

All favorable landing beaches in Hokkaido were fortified and manned. They were also manned by actual Japanese troops, not the second-line reservists (to put it charitably) the Germans put up in Normandy. And yes, the Atlantic wall was a thing, but you can build all the concrete bunkers you want but if you put them in the wrong places and man them with what can be charitably called second-rate conscripts they do you no good.

You have no idea who the 5th area army was do you, let me give you a quote describing the bunch.

The 5th Area Army consisted mostly of poorly trained reservists, conscripted students and home guard militia. In addition, the Japanese had organized the Patriotic Citizens Fighting Corps — which included all healthy men aged 15–60 and women 17–40 — to perform combat support, and ultimately combat jobs. Weapons, training, and uniforms were generally lacking: some men were armed with nothing better than muzzle-loading muskets, longbows, or bamboo spears; nevertheless, they were expected to make do with what they had.

But I'm sure they were better then the 352nd faced on Omaha beach, described as such

The 352nd was formed in November 1943 in France, commanded by GeneralleutnantDietrich Kraiss from 6 November 1943 until it was destroyed in July 1944. Organizationally, the 352nd was better off than most German divisions in 1944 although other divisions too were very powerful. At that time, as a result of severe personnel losses, German infantry divisions were generally reduced to six battalions. The 352nd, however, retained its full complement of nine battalions.

 

[Had a dad]

Discussion of civilians and casualties of is not allowed