We Answer MORE of Your Questions-Episode 335 

That's a point I have repeatedly had to make to my undergraduate students. The lack of perspective or context (and even outright lies) about the timeline of the Japanese surrender means that many of the other actions of the war get glossed over and forgotten.

The bomb was going to be used: that is the nature of things. You don’t spend all that money and create a weapon like that and not use it. It’s horrific power and consequences after needed to be seen to establish the as of yet unreached threshold to use it again. In no time in history could it have been used to SAVE so many lives. Plus, the fire bombing of Tokyo killed far more in just as horrific of ways that first night. I always tell people if they want to argue for useless death and possible war crimes you’ve got the wrong bombing raid.

@@johnemmert9012 I find math a good way of clarifying issues. I think one misunderstanding young people have about the War is that most people were killed by the bombing. Actually, bombing is down the list of killing methods and among the most inefficient and expensive. Only about 0.5 million Germans were killed by bombing at great cost in men and material in a war that killed some 60 million people. The Germans found many much more efficient ways of killing people. The Japanese were a little different because their cities were largely made of wood and paper houses. Even so, only about 1.0 million Japanese were killed in the bombing in a war that the Japanese 1) launched, 2) began the bombing of civilians, and 3) killed over 20 million Asians.

I see all the time on social media and RU-vid people saying that the bombings were completely unnecessary and that it was ONLY the Soviet invasion of Manchuria that led to Japan's surrender. They don't understand that they're parroting an actual Soviet propaganda point. There is some evidence that the invasion of Manchuria DID have an effect on Japan's surrender. However the majority of the evidence points to the bombs being the decisive act. A lot of people seem to be pushing back against that nowadays but to me the evidence clearly shows that the bombings led to surrender although I believe the Soviet invasion of Manchuria also helped.

@@TehSlaw Your assessment is 100 percent correct. There are a lot of woke voices denying this. It reflects the fact that our universities are dominated by Marxist professors determined to attack America at every chance and to promote anti-Semitism,

A great boss is a blessing. Captain Todi is representative of a professional Master and Commander. It's why the USN is still keeping the peace, and a big reason the Cold War was ended.

​@@richardbennett1856Amen to all that. Go Navy!

AMEN!

Yeah that was probably one of the stupidest most-uneducated out of touch questions I’ve ever heard.

You right about the crew needing a break, but they also need the crew to teach the new group of officers and sailors about fighting the war in the Pacific. It was also helpful in getting the Essex and Independence carriers ready for combat. The yard can document the weaknesses that were being fixed in Enterprise and make sure the new carriers don't have those weak spots.

And "Thunder Below" is one of the best Submarine stories of WWII. Who needs fiction with real heros like Morton, O'Kane and Fluckey!

Halsey also got along with MacArthur and they played well together. Fletcher was tagged as not agressive enough. That was not something Halsey was ever accused of. Perhaps the Admiral that that should have given way on the fifth star for Spruance was Leahy. The thing, as I understand it, about five star "retirement" was that they didn't. They were on active status, and full pay, for life. As a compromise, Spruance, although remaining a four star, was also on active status and full pay for life. These opinions are based on my memories from reading Morison.

So based on my reading King’s dislike of Fletcher started pre war as he moved in and out of the Bureau of Navigation. King regarded Fletcher as politically connected and needless to say Fletcher wasn’t a SOB which was the kind of person King liked. Once in command a combination of factors doomed Fletcher. First King has started out not liking him. Second he wasn’t aggressive enough (and for King it would have required stupid levels of aggression to make him happy which would have failed making him unhappy). Fourth you had guys like Jocko Clark who hated having a Black Shoe in command of carriers and never wasted a chance to pour poison in Kings ear regarding Fletcher. Fifth there were some legitimate questions around how Fletcher handled his force at Coral Sea driven by the fact that those ashore assumed Fletcher knew everything they did when he didn’t. That Nimitz after interviewing Fletcher had full confidence in him and told King as much didn’t fully resolve the issue in King’s mind since he didn’t fully trust Nimitz yet either. Sixth after Savo Island Turner who was an adept political Admiral managed to blame Fletcher for the biggest defeat in Navy history which was under his command. Fletcher being more interested in winning a war than self promotion didn’t see this as the threat it was. Of course the anti-Fletcher drumbeat coming from aviators who were certain that they would have won brilliant smashing victory after brilliant smashing victory of only they and their 20-20 hindsight had been in command never let up and Fletcher coming home for a rest was all the opportunity King needed to bury him. It’s such shame because Fletcher was a truly outstanding commander in Nimitz’s own mold. Consider that in the first three carrier vs carrier battles in history he took a USN force that wasn’t remotely as operationally proficient as its IJN foe (an opponent which was unarguably the best in world at that time in the realm of carrier operations) and managed to go 3-0 sinking 4 fleet and two light carriers for the loss of 2 US fleet carriers on of which if not for a serious damage control failure should have survived. Guys like Mitscher and Jocko Clark look great because they had the luxury of commanding the big blue fleet. Yes they performed brilliantly in that role. But the degree of difficulty isn’t even remotely close to what Fletcher faced commanding an untried force with an evolving and still paper thin doctrinal playbook that still had a lot to learn.

@@jetdriver Very well said.

​@jetdriver I've always been an admirer and defender of Frank Jack Fletcher and that's the best defense of the man that I've ever seen. My impression is that King viewed the aborted mission of wake as a confirmation for his pre-war reasons not to like Fletcher, and unfortunately, King was the kind of man where once you were on his bad side, there was no getting off of it. From then on, every battle Fletcher fought that didn't go perfectly, King had another excuse to dislike and discredit him.

Seals and classified info could be a barrier to writing anything about them.?

The Aleutians was wasteful, but they didn't decimate the best Marine division for an objective.

*And some combat. Not every island was abandoned.

Yeah, not sure I understand what point Seth was making. The battle was won on the 4th with Fletcher in charge. Spruance did well by not losing it on the 5th & 6th.

@@jpjohn13 But Seth said the battle was won with Spruence in charge. Which is incorrect. What you say about Sorience is correct.

The potential to draw mainland Japanese forces away from engagement with the Chinese

I’m way ahead of you, and several shots in already. What do we want … BILGE PUMPS … what do we need … BILGE PUMPS … BILGE PUMPS … BIGLE PUMPS!!! Cheers!

I'm sure things were perfectly fine under Japanese occupation.🙄

The Japanese really wanted the raw materials from the Dutch East Indies (Indonesia). Here's a starting point, with a lot of citations for further reading: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_occupation_of_the_Dutch_East_Indies

I believe that was the first. The Germans later added an additional rotor, and it was the British who captured a copy of the newer version with the additional rotor.

I would have bet $100 that’s that what Seth was going to say.

There should be a BoB type movie. Cactus was our " best " moment too

Miniseries would be great. Maybe a "The Pacific" tie-in that covers the naval battles. Maybe with some cutting back and forth to some scenes from that mini-series. To understand the Guadalcanal, I think you've got to get the sense that it was "Multi-Domain" with land, sea and air actions.

I was thinking about it too. I definitely do not want this show to end and I would be fascinated to hear Bill and Seth's thoughts on other war theatres, even though the channel says Pacific.

They will hopefully be helping ALT. HOLLYWOOD make accurate and very important historical movies

War crimes prosecutions are even more political than most criminal prosecutions. As was stated, LeMay knew he would have been prosecuted if we had lost. I would cite Yamashita's trial and execution as an example. They got even more political in Europe.

Excellent comment. I've thought for a while that Denis Villeneuve would make Giant's Night look amazing

and unhappy Coda at Tassforonga......

I will have my usual aneurism pointing out that Gilbert Hoover did nothing wrong and that he was the most capable surface warfare officer the navy had in that campaign (possibly barring Willis Lee).

Bingo!

At least one of his favourites. As according to his memoirs. He mentioned that he was fond of Saratoga as well.

Chops?

@@chrismcleod9748 Aptitude, skills, ability.

Just turn Hornfischer's "last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors" into a screenplay!

@@UPNilesCyn Absolutely, it's not only well-researched, but gripping readng as well.

My kind of comment😊

WELL SAID, If anything you didn't Press it home ENOUGH ! I have TOURED most of the Concentration Camps of the Third Reich, it is a TERRIBLE thing to 1st unarm people, then simply MURDER them. I do agree, it was IMPOSSIBLE to find & prosecute everyone that had killed them. but I do FEEL a Greater Effort should have been Made.

So we were right.

@@UnauthorizedHistoryPacificWar Yes, but you said that a coup would have occurred to keep Japan in the war. It was actually in progress. Apologies if I'm splitting hairs. I think you handled the leading question from the questioner very well. Thank you for keeping up the great work!

It’ll be here soon enough. Recorded 403 today.

Read slaughter house 5. Being bombed is never good if you there on the ground. So it goes..

Not going to comment on whether Tokyo or Dresden was worse, but I will say that once a firestorm gets going, it doesn't matter what the buildings are made of--people may not have burned to death in a stone building, but they suffocated because the firestorm consumed all the oxygen. Either way, they died.

Agree