Elements of the US Pacific Naval fleet embark for Japan to help. - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;28579384]But they still had a [I]lot[/I] of men willing to die for the emperor. They also had designed new tanks to stand up to the American M4 Sherman (previously they did not have any tanks that could match it). Not to mention their frighteningly effective [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_Attack#Japanese_kamikaze]suicide attacks[/url], which would have definitely played a large part in the invasion.[/QUOTE] They wouldn't be able to produce many of those tanks due to the poor state of the country, please do tell me which tanks you are talking about.. there are many prototype tanks which had poor shell resistence and a decent gun or vice versa.

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579377]What if atomic bombs had not been invented. I never said I was oppose to them.[/QUOTE] Then we would have went with the back up plan. Napalm, napalm and more napalm.

[QUOTE=bravehat;28579413]Then we would have went with the back up plan. Napalm, napalm and more napalm.[/QUOTE] You would use napalm in a land invasion anyways! I also doubt that ANY japanese tank capable of being produced or in "stock" could have competed with the Iosif Stalin 1/2/3, T34/85, Pershing tanks.

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579401]They wouldn't be able to produce many of those tanks due to the poor state of the country, please do tell me which tanks you are talking about.. there are many prototype tanks which had poor shell resistence and a decent gun or vice versa.[/QUOTE] Specifically the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_3_Chi-Nu]Type 3 Chi-Nu[/url] and [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_4_Chi-To]Type 4 Chi-To[/url].

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579401]They wouldn't be able to produce many of those tanks due to the poor state of the country, please do tell me which tanks you are talking about.. there are many prototype tanks which had poor shell resistence and a decent gun or vice versa.[/QUOTE] [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_5_Chi-Ri[/URL] That's the one I think he's talking about, besides tanks aren't invulnerable, and the sherman sure as hell wasn't, I'm pretty sure the japanese would have had anti tank weapons that exploited the monroe effect.

[QUOTE=bravehat;28579413]Then we would have went with the back up plan. Napalm, napalm and more napalm.[/QUOTE] We would have used [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_bombs]Bat Bombs[/url].

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579421]You would use napalm in a land invasion anyways! I also doubt that ANY japanese tank capable of being produced or in "stock" could have competed with the Iosif Stalin 1/2/3, T34/85, Pershing tanks.[/QUOTE] Here's the thing though. CASUALTY MINIMISATION Japanese cities were almost all wood because of the climate, napalm would have done the job fine, but the nukes were easier because you just need one plane instead of swarms. Swarms of bombers tewnd to attract a lot more attention and flak than a single bomber, which generally goes unnoticed. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;28579434]We would have used [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bat_bombs]Bat Bombs[/url].[/QUOTE] Yeah they toyed with that idea but sadly the bats escaped and set a lot of countryside barns and shit on fire. v:v:v Fucking bats man.

Those tanks are not really decent. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=bravehat;28579441]Here's the thing though. CASUALTY MINIMISATION Japanese cities were almost all wood because of the climate, napalm would have done the job fine, but the nukes were easier because you just need one plane instead of swarms. Swarms of bombers tewnd to attract a lot more attention and flak than a single bomber, which generally goes unnoticed. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] Yeah they toyed with that idea but sadly the bats escaped and set a lot of countryside barns and shit on fire. v:v:v Fucking bats man.[/QUOTE] What if A-Bombs were not invented. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=bravehat;28579430][URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_5_Chi-Ri[/URL] That's the one I think he's talking about, besides tanks aren't invulnerable, and the sherman sure as hell wasn't, I'm pretty sure the japanese would have had anti tank weapons that exploited the monroe effect.[/QUOTE] As with every other war.

[QUOTE=bravehat;28579441]Swarms of bombers tewnd to attract a lot more attention and flak than a single bomber, which generally goes unnoticed.[/QUOTE] The Bombers carrying the Nuclear Payloads were noticed, but due to flying completely alone with no escort, they were assumed to be Reconnaissance Planes, which the Japanese didn't feel was worth wasting the fuel to take it down. Boy were they wrong. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579447]Those tanks are not really decent.[/QUOTE] They had enough power to challenge a Sherman Tank, and that's enough to be a threat.

If A bombs weren't invented then napalm and thermite and artillery would be used, and then the japanese would have solved that issue with flak a fukuryu commandos. [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukuryu[/URL] A pointlessly bloody and brutal conflict which with the help of atomic weaponry was over very very quickly. I don't get what the point you're trying to make is, without the a bomb it would taken a lot longer, more men would have died, and generally invading japan would be like sticking your dick in a hornets nest where all the hornets and doped up to their eyeballs on PCP.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;28579471]The Bombers carrying the Nuclear Payloads were noticed, but due to flying completely alone with no escort, they were assumed to be Reconnaissance Planes, which the Japanese didn't feel was worth wasting the fuel to take it down. Boy were they wrong. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] They had enough power to challenge a Sherman Tank, and that's enough to be a threat.[/QUOTE] Thats a Sherman though, with no modifications. Anything can charge a Sherman medium tank. That being said, you could probably penetrate a Chi-Nu on the first shot with the shermans light cannon. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=bravehat;28579489]If A bombs weren't invented then napalm and thermite and artillery would be used, and then the japanese would have solved that issue with flak a fukuryu commandos. [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukuryu[/URL] A pointlessly bloody and brutal conflict which with the help of atomic weaponry was over very very quickly. I don't get what the point you're trying to make is, without the a bomb it would taken a lot longer, more men would have died, and generally invading japan would be like sticking your dick in a hornets nest where all the hornets and doped up to their eyeballs on PCP.[/QUOTE] I don't know, I suggested the idea first then you guys wanted to start a debate :p

[QUOTE=bravehat;28579489]If A bombs weren't invented then napalm and thermite and artillery would be used, and then the japanese would have solved that issue with flak a fukuryu commandos. [URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukuryu[/URL] A pointlessly bloody and brutal conflict which with the help of atomic weaponry was over very very quickly. I don't get what the point you're trying to make is, without the a bomb it would taken a lot longer, more men would have died, and generally invading japan would be like sticking your dick in a hornets nest where all the hornets and doped up to their eyeballs on PCP.[/QUOTE] Not to mention that, as with many other countries, the USSR is going to try to keep their side of Japan under it's influence, likely isolating it from the American side. It would have been just like Germany.

this is kind of a stupid argument that someone is trying to justify the japanese for all the shit they did 80 years ago

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579493]Thats a Sherman though, with no modifications. Anything can charge a Sherman medium tank. That being said, you could probably penetrate a Chi-Nu on the first shot with the shermans light cannon.[/QUOTE] The M4 Sherman Tank was the United State's primary tank during the war and was used extensively across Europe and in the Pacific.

[QUOTE=Moose;28579516]this is kind of a stupid argument that someone is trying to justify the japanese for all the shit they did 80 years ago[/QUOTE] Who is justifying Japans invasion spree.

[QUOTE=Moose;28579516]this is kind of a stupid argument that someone is trying to justify the japanese for all the shit they did 80 years ago[/QUOTE] Actually we're trying to justify the use of Nuclear Weapons.

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579493]Thats a Sherman though, with no modifications. Anything can charge a Sherman medium tank. That being said, you could probably penetrate a Chi-Nu on the first shot with the shermans light cannon. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] I don't know, I suggested the idea first then you guys wanted to start a debate :p[/QUOTE] The thing is though, the Chi-Nu's cannon was just shy of the tiger tanks cannon and the tank was lighter, and considering the terrain the japanese would have put it to good use, and a lot of shermans would have been put down. Thus segueing nicely back to my original argument: More men would have died during a land invasion than with the A bombs. Either way this arguments won.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;28579523]The M4 Sherman Tank was the United State's primary tank during the war and was used extensively across Europe and in the Pacific.[/QUOTE] I know this, but you're forgetting my idea was a joint invasion. Where T34/85's and Iosef Stalin tanks would have been deployed. Aswell as post war designed tanks such as the Pershing.

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579538]I know this, but you're forgetting my idea was a joint invasion. Where T34/85's and Iosef Stalin tanks would have been deployed. Aswell as post war designed tanks such as the Pershing.[/QUOTE] Which as I said, would have destroyed Japan in the long run.

[QUOTE=bravehat;28579533]The thing is though, the Chi-Nu's cannon was just shy of the tiger tanks cannon and the tank was lighter, and considering the terrain the japanese would have put it to good use, and a lot of shermans would have been put down. Thus segueing nicely back to my original argument: More men would have died during a land invasion than with the A bombs. Either way this arguments won.[/QUOTE] How did you win? You never proved anything as it is impossible to prove unless you have a time machine and some sort of teleportation device. You arent a tactician either so I doubt anything you said would be useful when planning a invasion of Japan in the forties or fifties. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;28579551]Which as I said, would have destroyed Japan in the long run.[/QUOTE] Yes but you seemed focused on the Shermans and the shermans only when they probably would not have been the only tank invading japan.

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579538]I know this, but you're forgetting my idea was a joint invasion. Where T34/85's and Iosef Stalin tanks would have been deployed. Aswell as post war designed tanks such as the Pershing.[/QUOTE] Again you're forgetting that the sighting systems on world war 2 tanks were shit for the most part, and then again you're forgetting that the Chi-Nu albeit using paper mache armour had one of the biggest tank mounted guns of the war, fuck it was based of a cunting french artillery piece for fuck sake and the thing lobbed shells that woulda done major damage to a damn tiger.

[QUOTE=bravehat;28579576]Again you're forgetting that the sighting systems on world war 2 tanks were shit for the most part, and then again you're forgetting that the Chi-Nu albeit using paper mache armour had one of the biggest tank mounted guns of the war, fuck it was based of a cunting french artillery piece for fuck sake and the thing lobbed shells that woulda done major damage to a damn tiger.[/QUOTE] They would not be able to deploy many of them anyways, tanks would be one of the lesser factors when planning a invasion of japan. It would likely be more air support and infantry.

we bombed the fuck out of hiroshima and nagasaki deal with it

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579554]How did you win? You never proved anything as it is impossible to prove unless you have a time machine and some sort of teleportation device. You arent a tactician either so I doubt anything you said would be useful when planning a invasion of Japan in the forties or fifties. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] Yes but you seemed focused on the Shermans and the shermans only when they probably would not have been the only tank invading japan.[/QUOTE] It doesn't take a tactician to realise that when you want to keep men alive and run a total war efficiently you use the biggest damn bombs at your disposal, and the americans luckily got a shipment of two cans of ass rape with "first class delivery: Japan" printed on the side. And the shermans would have done the fighting, the rest of the tanks would have been for areas of high resistance, say what you want about Pershings and the KV's but the T-34's and shermans would have done pretty much all the work, simply due to the sheer numbers of them.

[QUOTE=Moose;28579591]we bombed the fuck out of hiroshima and nagasaki deal with it[/QUOTE] You're a bloody idiot, I am speaking of alternative history. [editline]13th March 2011[/editline] [quote=bravehat;28579593]it doesn't take a tactician to realise that when you want to keep men alive and run a total war efficiently you use the biggest damn bombs at your disposal, and the americans luckily got a shipment of two cans of ass rape with "first class delivery: Japan" printed on the side. And the shermans would have done the fighting, the rest of the tanks would have been for areas of high resistance, say what you want about pershings and the kv's but the t-34's and shermans would have done pretty much all the work, simply due to the sheer numbers of them.[/quote] [B]Available[/B] to your disposal I am speaking if there were no a-bombs why wont you people read.

And what if the japanese had Godzilla on their side. Hypotheticals are pointless, because we had the A bombs, if we didn't they would have been replaced by rockets and napalm from carriers and battleships, which the fukuryu would have destroyed, thus, fucking raping the americans capability to fight in the pacific and the Japanese would have had a respite, enough to perhaps build up some forces and start pushing the russians back.

[QUOTE=bravehat;28579636]And what if the japanese had Godzilla on their side. Hypotheticals are pointless, because we had the A bombs, if we didn't they would have been replaced by rockets and napalm from carriers and battleships, which the fukuryu would have destroyed, thus, fucking raping the americans capability to fight in the pacific and the Japanese would have had a respite, enough to perhaps build up some forces and start pushing the russians back.[/QUOTE] If they aren't important why did you start a argument over it.

I thought we were arguing over the justification of nuking japan by proving that the alternative was much worse.

[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;28579655]I thought we were arguing over the justification of nuking japan by proving that the alternative was much worse.[/QUOTE] I guess I'm in the wrong argument then, good luck with your future endeavors in argumentative shit in this thread.

[QUOTE=doonbugie2;28579645]If they aren't important why did you start a argument over it.[/QUOTE] i recall you being the guy that came in here hating on america trying to diss us because you think our navy is a bunch of bloodthirsty fucks