Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mark DAgosta on December 29, 2009 at 7:51pm

I agree with you that the "terrible resolve" was coming, whether or not there was a declaration of war ahead of time, and therefore think that it shouldn't even factor into any game's Victory conditions.

Although I've owned the game for years, I'm just now getting into playing it. I'll be starting a full campaign game sometime over the next few months. Looking forward to it. Also looking forward to some strategy discussions in this forum.

-Mark

Permalink Reply by David Lubin on December 29, 2009 at 11:02pm

Mark,

If I may disagree with you on this, without the "Terrible Resolve" I think the Japanese could have fought the U.S. to a stalemate and maybe even bring the U.S. to the bargaining table if they took enough of our youth. I feel we would not have held out for Unconditional Surrender. We might even not have used the Atom Bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

I think the war could have been very different.

Dave

Permalink Reply by Russel on August 2, 2010 at 8:15pm

Oh, I think that's a pipe dream that Japan could have unleashed any sort of offensive on the US, swept them away, then be able to count on the US simply saying "OK, that's enough of that." Unconditional Surrender is the American way, and since it was essentially an American war against Japan, I doubt that anything less would have been accepted.

The atomic bombs were simply available and convenient (due to the rush to develop the Bomb before the nazis did). The USN had a very workable strategy to force Japan's surrender without an invasion, and largely pursued it. Personally, I doubt that the atomic bombs shorted the war by more than a few months. And it's always a conflicted judgment whether the unleashing of those weapons against humans was worth setting such a precedent. (My father-in-law, slated to participate in Operation Olympic, naturally believes use of the Bomb was very much worth the precedent. Duck and cover baby boomers often have a different perspective.)

My opinion above is heavily influenced by HP Willmott.

Russel

Permalink Reply by David Lubin on August 2, 2010 at 11:06pm

Russel,

I may take some flack for this but I was playing devils advocate above. My true feelings is that Truman had a responsibility to the American People - And that is to save American lives - And that if the Bombs saved just one American Live he had a Duty to Drop Both Bombs no matter the cost to the Japanese!

And yes even if the the bombs would have shorten the war by mere months How many lives would have been lost. We will never know, but I do know that Fire Bombing Would have been used and a much larger portion of the populace would have been killed, and even more homeless.

Dave