To so say sounds like it overlooks the history that happend.
Maybe because it would produce a sort of questioning not desiable? What if Japan had won? What if the US did not but an oil embargo on Japan or what if the US decided to allow FDR to meet Konoye so as to negotiate about the oil embargo? What if Chiang Kai-shek had not been back stapped in the Xi'an incident meaning no "second united front" thus likely no Second Sino-Japanese War? These are the possible questions if encouraged to introspect.
Is the "introspection" you seek only satisfied if its an "apologize like the Germans" conclusion?
Dude, I thought this would be common knowledge. I mean just look at ROC National Revolutionary Army's gears during WW2, look at their helmets. Those were German helmets. The most prolific hand gun during the war in China was the Mauser C96. The main rifle used by Chinese forces was the Chiang Kai-shek rifle (中正式）, which is literally a licensed copy of the Mauser Standardmodell.
I mean if this was the actual mindset of Japanese high command i doubt it would've come as far as it did in the first place, fairly sure they thought about the consequences of certain actions, in some instances they had underestimated it but still they did think of it.Japanese are fools because all they do is “Monkey see, Monkey want, Monkey grab", they don't think about consequences, they don't think about potential threats, they don't think about societal trend, they don't think about culture, they don't think about how their rivals will act, they only think about what can see and what they desire. They see Manchuria and say: "me want this!", and they dig in. And that is the start of their doom.
Well, if you have any idea of what China really looks like in the first two decades after 1911 revolution, everything will make sense. Most American learn about China history in a way that serves the political rhetoric of the US and the West. They are taught that immediately after 1911, it was all about "KMT vs Communists". In fact, it was never the case. The early era of is so-called "Republic of China" would be a totally chaotic hellhole of a fail state by today's standard. In fact, the KMT didn't even formally come to existence until 1919 (it was formerly known as 同盟会）. In fact, the Japanese didn't come as nearly as far as they should have.I mean if this was the actual mindset of Japanese high command i doubt it would've come as far as it did in the first place, fairly sure they thought about the consequences of certain actions, in some instances they had underestimated it but still they did think of it.
I read the forum on the battle off Samar. The question often comes up as to why Kurita turned back when he did. Those who have much more information than I do may be to provide another possible motive which I have not seen in any books or web pages I have read to this point. Most battleships at that time were provided with 100 shells per barrel for the primary batteries. The destroyers in taffy 3 had 350 shells per 5 inch barrel. At least one of them expended all it’s five inch shells. Japan had nearly 50 ships assigned to the southern and center force. Someone with significant knowledge of magazine capabilities could probably give a breakdown by ship the number of shells of 5 inch or greater and the number of torpedos carried by these task groups as they headed towards the Philippines. If one were to subtract out the ships lost or turned back plus the estimated shells and torpedos expended on taffy 3, what remained in the center force might have been only a paper tiger compared to the original task forces. The second consideration is that the center force was under nearly constant air attack for nearly three hours without any air cover. This would have been the longest time during the war that a task group would have been under air attack without defending aircraft. Could Kurita have considered turning back because he realized that the magazines might be nearly empty of shells by the time he arrived at the US transport and supply ships which were still nearly two hours away?We have numerous discussions that crop up all the time on the forum about World War II, what happened during that war, and strategies that were involved.
Unfortunatly, those discussions generally take the threads that they occur in far off topic.
So, this thread is for discussing thoe matters.
But please, no conspiracy theories, no "abject what ifs", and no historical/culutral finger pointing, revenge, political, etc. talk. Keep it on the historical record about the actual combat and campagns, and on the strategies that were actually used and how they influenced the outcomes. The other type discussions will be deleted with warnings, and then, if not halted, will result in suspensions.
Other than that...that is what this thread is for. I will be moving some posts over here from the Aircraft Carrier II thread.