wow! thats is 242 post without making a competent argument. You are on pace for the record! (currently a tie between cydhartha and si modo.)

__________________

It depends on the situation. Aircraft carriers were vital … in their fight against the US Navy. According to the terribly vague scenario you laid out, the US Navy declares themselves winner and leaves. The only fleets Japan would have had to contend with were the Soviets (who didn’t acquire a carrier for another 40 years) and the Australians (who also had no carriers). Regardless, Japan still had 5 carriers in 1945, and had another 5 in production.

Your evidence is a wiki-click away:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...frontAtlas.jpg

Yup; you’re a winner in your own mind.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

Nope, never said the navy leaves. And the navy never did leave. in order for you to criticize my argument, you have to add to it. nice.


yes, that evidence shows that what is left of the Japanese empire is about to be snatched by the Soviets. That probably had a lot more to do with the bomb being dropped than "concern for causualites"

not that i would believe everything from wikiquote anyway...
i would like to hear you elaborate on the specific nature of each of those 'possessions.' much of the red is probably just pockets of japanese troops who have no way of delivering the resources of the respective area to the homeland.

well, if that is your only counter-argument...

__________________

I can’t elaborate on specifics, since all you’ve provided are glittering generalities as a “strategy”. Your assumptions; that the Japanese were beaten back to their home isles, that they had virtually no navy or other significant combat force, and that they had no access to the materials they needed to continue their fight, are all wrong. If you ever think up an actual strategy and post it, I’ll be more than happy to comment in more detail.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

ok...
But let me guess, you have no evidence to support this, because you cannot elaborate on specifics... we just have to cross our fingers on wiki quote? LOL.

This game is easy. NOPE, you are wrong! haha.

If you can criticize my argument without adding to it, and with actual facts, get back with me.

But i understand, a busy man does not have time for 'specifics.'

__________________

Ummmm, that evidence in is the link that you may not have read (and it's not wiki). Grim Economic Realities

yes, america built 14 aircraft carriers in 1945 to Japan's zero...

That is the main offensive weapon of this naval war...

Ok more support for my argument from your source:

"Japan, an island empire totally dependent on maintaining open sea lanes to ensure her raw material imports, managed to build just sixty-three DDs (some twenty or so of which would have been classified by the Allies as DEs) and an unspecified (and by my unofficial count, relatively small) number of 'escort' vessels. In the same time span, the US put some eight hundred forty-seven antisubmarine capable craft in the water! And that total doesn't even cover the little stuff like the armed yachts and subchasers we used off our Eastern seaboard against the German U-Boats. All in all, by the end of the war, American naval power was unprecedented. In fact, by 1945 the U.S. Navy was larger than every other navy in the world, combined!"


That does not sound to me like Japan was capable of offensive warfare in 1945. But hey, believe what you want to believe.


Oh, there is more!!!

The Pacific War was also very much a war of merchant shipping, in that practically everything needed to defend and/or assault the various island outposts of the Japanese Empire had to be transported across vast stretches of ocean. Japan also had to maintain her vital supply lanes to places like Borneo and Java in order to keep her industrial base supplied. A look at the relative shipbuilding output of the two antagonists is enlightening.

Merchant Ship Production (in tons)
Year United States Japan
1939 376,419 320,466
1940 528,697 293,612
1941 1,031,974 210,373
1942 5,479,766 260,059
1943 11,448,360 769,085
1944 9,288,156 1,699,203
1945 5,839,858 599,563
Total 33,993,230 4,152,361


Ok, so if Japan is dependant on access to the open ocean for offensive warfare, and the american navy is bigger than all other navies in the world in 1945 COMBINED,

how bouts we evaluate the probability of the Japanese conducting offensive warfare from their shattered Island and disconnected possessions???

But hey, now you can argue with your own source....


You do realize that you are attempting to argue that Japan was a formidable enemy in 1945, capable of offensive warfare, and you are referring to a source whose main thesis is that Japan was a tiny dwarf from day one in 1937??

UMMMMMMMMMMM........

Talk about one thick headed individual.

__________________

Hell, I'd even be happy with wiki links that support your position; at least I might get some idea as to just what your position is. So far, you’ve offered NOTHING, other than completely baseless assumptions. The problem isn’t time, I’ve already wasted a lot of time digging up wiki links and links about the status of the Japanese Navy; the problem is your “strategy” is far too vague to comment on in any more detail.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

Hell, I'd even be happy with wiki links that support your position; at least I might get some idea as to just what your position really is. So far, you’ve offered NOTHING, other than completely baseless assumptions. The problem isn’t time, I’ve already wasted a lot of time digging up wiki links and links about the status of the Japanese Navy; the problem is your “strategy” is far too vague to comment on in any more detail.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

My position is extremely simple, but you cannot understand it because no one ever taught you that you are allowed to think outside the box on certain issues, and not just through the same old simplisitic perspectives that dominate historical discussion.


The article provided by Si Modo argues that Japan was NEVER a formidable enemy, and offers plenty of evidence as to how lop sided the war was FROM THE BEGINNING. Considering that Japan is far weaker in 1945 than 1941, the burden of proof now rests with YOU to demonstrate that Japan was capable of offensive warfare in 1945, when its home island is cut off from its industrial resources in the pacific rim and has a navy that is bigger than all the world's navies combined sitting politely outside its shores.

let me guess, these are 'boundless assumptions'?
when then lets hear your conclusive evidence, professor. LOL

__________________

Well, it pains me to say it, I agree with you and Si Modo on this point.

Japan had almost no offensive capabilities in 1945.

They were reduced to Kamikaze pilots and the remnants of a once formidable navy. In fact, after Midway in 1942, Japan had lost most of it's offensive capability..........

After the battle of Midway, Japan still had 11 aircraft carriers of all types, but only 5 were available for operations, and only one was a large carrier. It also lost so many of its most experienced aviators and it could not quickly replace them. The US Navy had 3 large aircraft carriers in the Pacific, 13 more were being built, and there was no way Japan could match the American rate of production of aircraft carriers, aircraft, and well trained aviators. Japan was already fighting a war it could not win, and after the battle of Midway it was already beginning to lose it, just 6 months after it started it in Pearl Harbor. Despite all its remaining strength, after the battle of Midway Japan lost its superiority and initiative in the Pacific and was forced to defense. Since that day, the Pacific Ocean was dominated by American aircraft carriers.

The Battle Of Midway

Personally, I do not agree with dropping the atom bomb on a city.

While I understand why it was done, if I had been the president at that time, I would have tried to feint an attack on a sparsely populated area of Japan and then when they had all their defenses set to repel the attack, nuke that area.

Dropping the 2nd atom bomb was truly a disgrace, in my opinion, after we learned how horrific that weapon was. Of course fire bombing Tokyo was also a disgrace, but as they say, war is hell.

When Truman was told that an invasion of Japan could result in one million allied casualties, I can understand why he used the atom bomb, but I still do not agree with the decision.

Of course, I have the huge benefit of hind sight on my side.

I’ll take it up with you, since htperr6565 doesn’t actually have a position, other than US strategy was wrong.

Japanese offensive capabilities need to be assessed by the forces they’re fighting. Even at the start of the war, they didn’t have the ability to win against the US, and most of them, the upper echelons of the admiralty included, were well aware of it. Their hope was to sign a treaty with the US to keep us out of their sphere of influence.

At the start of 1945, the Japanese had lost a significant amount of their capabilities, but a significant amount remained. The US still had the only force that could have opposed the Imperial Japanese Navy. They were a formidable force compared to any navy in the world. If we hadn’t pressed the attack, if we hadn’t continued the bombing campaign, if we’d pulled our forces back to a defensive position where we couldn’t easily have been attacked by warships or kamikazes, which is what I understand htperr6565’s ambiguous position to be, then IMO the Japanese certainly retained the capability to rebuild and rearm.

__________________
“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.” - Lord Palmerston

Some aspirin should help with that. It's not sooooo bad to agree sometimes.

a point i was trying to make to you know who. if we stop and pull back now what??? whats next??? shake hands and call the war off???? oh wait. Harry Truman and I are inside the box here.
the order after 12-7-41 was unconditional surrender. was FDR inside the box????