If you were a Japanese soldier where would you fight?

Discussions on WW2 in the Pacific and the Sino-Japanese War.
zstar
Member
Posts: 157
Joined: 15 Oct 2004 06:32
Location: as

If you were a Japanese soldier where would you fight?

Post by zstar » 26 Dec 2004 07:13

Would you choose

a) China - including manchuria and occupied territories

b) Burma - and the jungles of south east asia

c) Pacific islands - such as midway, okinawa etc

User avatar
Unsere_Freiheit
Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28 Jan 2004 11:18
Location: HK

Post by Unsere_Freiheit » 26 Dec 2004 14:10

I want to state that it's different to station in Manchuria and the mainland China,
Japanese troops in Manchuria had a good time doing nearly no fighting there ,until the arrival of the Russians in August 1945,while those in China suffered casualties in those vast campaigns against Nationalists and facing constant disruption from the Communist guerrilla attacks,which were rather successful.

but I think it's still better to face the disease in Burma, and if you're put to Okinawa or those South-East Asian islands, your chance of getting killed is quite high.

User avatar
red devil
Financial supporter
Posts: 629
Joined: 25 Nov 2004 02:11
Location: Sutton Coldfield England

Re: If you were a Japanese soldier where would you fight?

Post by red devil » 26 Dec 2004 20:56

zstar wrote:Would you choose

a) China - including manchuria and occupied territories

b) Burma - and the jungles of south east asia

c) Pacific islands - such as midway, okinawa etc
Is there such a thing as a "good" place to fight?

User avatar
Unsere_Freiheit
Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28 Jan 2004 11:18
Location: HK

Post by Unsere_Freiheit » 27 Dec 2004 01:58

I think he means the place you stationed where your chance of survival is higher

User avatar
red devil
Financial supporter
Posts: 629
Joined: 25 Nov 2004 02:11
Location: Sutton Coldfield England

Post by red devil » 27 Dec 2004 02:40

Oh I know what he meant, I suppose I was looking at it philosophically

Vorith
Member
Posts: 8
Joined: 22 Dec 2004 05:59
Location: USA

Post by Vorith » 27 Dec 2004 06:46

Burma. Less commericial traffic than China and more places to hide than an island.. Because crawling into the deepest, darkest hole available was about the only chance of survival a Japanese soldier stood.

User avatar
Unsere_Freiheit
Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28 Jan 2004 11:18
Location: HK

Post by Unsere_Freiheit » 27 Dec 2004 10:59

one has to check how many kinds of malaria does he get if he is in the jungles of Burma :wink:

Larry D.
Financial supporter
Posts: 3933
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 23:03
Location: Winter Springs, FL (USA)

Post by Larry D. » 27 Dec 2004 13:58

Truk, because (a) it was bypassed, and (b) unlike most of the other bypassed Pacific islands and atolls, the Truk garrison had sufficient food and was relatively free of disease. Formosa falls in the same category, too.

--Larry

Goldfish
Member
Posts: 410
Joined: 31 May 2004 13:51
Location: Atlanta, USA

Post by Goldfish » 27 Dec 2004 15:02

Was surviving the main thing that Japanese soldiers would be looking for? What about glory and advancement, or dying while doing the most service for the Emperor or where they could do the most to defend their country? Those were what a surprising number of Japanese soldiers were fighting for. For that, the best opportunities were in the Pacific or in Burma. China and Manchuria had opportunities for trade (and corruption) and easy service medals, but, especially after 1940 or so, little opportunity for glory or martyrdom. By 1941, national attention was on the glorious southern campaign and then the grueling heroic struggle against the oncoming Americans. Even today, the battles in China after 1941 are largely forgotten in Japan compared to the epic battles in the Pacific and Southeast Asia. In short, I think the Japanese would have wanted to serve where all patriotic soldiers want to serve-where the action was thickest.

User avatar
Unsere_Freiheit
Member
Posts: 266
Joined: 28 Jan 2004 11:18
Location: HK

Post by Unsere_Freiheit » 27 Dec 2004 15:05

but in fact the campaigns in China tied down 60% of the total Japanese army forces.they need that much amount of men to hold all the major cities in China (they already don't have enough men for countryside),conducting offensives and stationing in Manchuria.

Larry D.
Financial supporter
Posts: 3933
Joined: 04 Aug 2004 23:03
Location: Winter Springs, FL (USA)

Post by Larry D. » 27 Dec 2004 15:56

Goldfish's appraisal of the individual Japanese soldier through 1943 is pretty much on the money, but the conscripts that began to appear in droves during 1944 were not all that eager to die for the Emperor. They did do that, to be sure, but increasingly out of fear and peer pressure rather than blind devotion to some vaguely perceived purpose, quest for glory or the Empire. By fall 1944, many of the rank and file were demoralized, but still fought to the death or committed suicide rather than surrender to a foreign barbarian who, they were told, would torture them to death.

--Larry

User avatar
Landsturm
Member
Posts: 447
Joined: 07 Nov 2004 17:55
Location: Finland

Post by Landsturm » 19 Jan 2005 02:06

Because crawling into the deepest, darkest hole available was about the only chance of survival a Japanese soldier stood.
Some did this for fairly long period too. Lieutenant (Japanese Army) Onoda refused to stop fighting even when World War 2 ended. News of the Armistice were, according to him, just a propaganda-effort. Onoda finally surrendered in March 1974, when his war-time commanding officer flew into the isolated Pacific Island, where loyal warrior kept his positions, and told him to lower his arms. Onoda`s record was smashed by Japanese private Teruo Nakamura, who stayed in his defenceline (in the Island of Morotai) until December 1974.

User avatar
Anwar bin Zapari
Member
Posts: 176
Joined: 01 Jun 2002 19:39
Location: Malaysia

Post by Anwar bin Zapari » 19 Jan 2005 14:31

Malaya. I would be involved in action early on (1941/1942) and then be a garrison soldier. Hopefully not posted anywhere else. There are some guerilla activities to worry about though.

Signed,
Anwar

User avatar
Baltasar
Financial supporter
Posts: 4613
Joined: 21 Feb 2003 15:56
Location: Germany

Post by Baltasar » 19 Jan 2005 17:02

Landsturm, could you please give us some sources about those accounts? I'd really like to know more about those idividuals, who continued to serve their cause for several decades after hostilites ended officially.

User avatar
Acolyte
Member
Posts: 1376
Joined: 07 Jul 2004 13:55
Location: Festung Europa

Re: If you were a Japanese soldier where would you fight?

Post by Acolyte » 19 Jan 2005 19:09

zstar wrote:Would you choose

a) China - including manchuria and occupied territories

b) Burma - and the jungles of south east asia

c) Pacific islands - such as midway, okinawa etc
I'd probably prefer to stationed in Manchukuo guarding some important military installation.

Return to “WW2 in the Pacific & Asia”