Good Morning...Hell comes at midnight

[Okla-homey]

March 9, 1945 Firebombing of Tokyo

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/8055/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz27.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Tokyo...the aftermath

61 years ago today, U.S. warplanes launch a new bombing offensive against Japan, dropping 2,000 tons of incendiary bombs on metropolitan Tokyo over the course of the next 48 hours. Almost 16 square miles in and around the Japanese capital were incinerated, and between 80,000 and 130,000 Japanese civilians were killed in the worst firestorm in recorded history.

Early on March 9, Air Force crews met on the Marianas Islands of Tinian and Saipan for a military briefing. They were planning a low-level bombing attack on Tokyo that would begin that evening, but with a twist: Their planes would be stripped of all guns except for the tail turret.

http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/8107/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz28.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Japanese image depicting the firebombing

The decrease in weight would increase the speed of each Superfortress bomber-and would also increase its bomb load capacity by 65 percent, making each plane able to carry more than seven tons. Speed would be crucial, and the crews were warned that if they were shot down, all haste was to be made for the water, which would increase their chances of being picked up by American rescue crews.

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/6195/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz24.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

Should they land within Japanese territory, they could only expect the very worst treatment by civilians, as the mission that night was going to entail the deaths of tens of thousands of those very same civilians. "You're going to deliver the biggest firecracker the Japanese have ever seen," said U.S. Gen. Curtis LeMay.

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/9546/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz12.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
Curtis LeMay, future Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force and founder of the Strategic Air Command

The fire bombing of the downtown Tokyo suburb of Sh1tamachi had been approved only a few hours earlier. Sh1tamachi was composed of roughly 750,000 people living in cramped quarters in wooden-frame buildings. Setting ablaze this "paper city" was a kind of experiment in the effects of firebombing; it would also destroy the light industries, called "shadow factories," that produced prefabricated war materials destined for Japanese aircraft factories.

http://img138.imageshack.us/img138/1267/zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz13.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
The Japanese tried to defend their capital, but were largely ineffective. After four years of war and having already sustained tremendous losses, they simply didn't have the means -- yet they remained defiant.

The denizens of Sh1tamachi never had a chance of defending themselves. Their fire departments were hopelessly undermanned, poorly trained, and poorly equipped. At 5:34 p.m., Superfortress B-29 bombers took off from Saipan and Tinian, reaching their target at midnight on March 10. Three hundred and thirty-four bombers, flying at a mere 500 feet, dropped their loads, creating a giant bonfire fanned by 30-knot winds that helped raze Sh1tamachi and spread the flames throughout Tokyo. By the time it was over, 1 out of 4 buildings in Japan's largest city no longer existed. Of those that remained, half were heavily damaged.

Masses of panicked and terrified Japanese civilians scrambled to escape the inferno -- most unsuccessfully. The human carnage was so great that the blood-red mists and stench of burning flesh that wafted up sickened the bomber pilots, forcing them to don oxygen masks to keep from vomiting.

The raid lasted slightly longer than three hours. "In the black Sumida River, countless bodies were floating, clothed bodies, naked bodies, all black as charcoal. It was unreal," recorded one doctor at the scene. 243 American airmen were lost in the raid.

http://img216.imageshack.us/img216/3094/insane7zo6zy.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

[Taxman71]

Wow. Hadn't heard about this before. Thanks Homey.

[SoonerBorn68]

I've got a DVD set called World War II In Color (great footage BTW). In it one of the films is called The Last Bomb. It goes into great detail of the last bombing run on July 16th, 1945 (I think) on Japan & documents LeMay's transfer to the PTO. It detailed the change of tactics from high altitude bombing to the much more effective lower altitude the 21st bomber wing went to after LeMay's arrival. Definately worth checking out. The set also includes The Fighting Lady, Memphis Belle, Midway, A Report From The Auletians, and The 6th Marines At Okinawa...all official US War Dept. films.

http://www.timelessmusic.com/DVDs/wwiiincolor.htm

Of course I bought mine out of the $5.50 bin at Walmart.

Great read as always Homey!

[slickdawg]

The tenacity of the Japaneese during WWII was incredible. Were it not for the Nukes, we would have been a few more years in beating them. They
would not have given up were it not for Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

[12]

...Sh1tamachi

Did you automatically know to do that, or did the software make you aware?

Amazing lesson, Col. Homey. LeMay's quote is funny, in a dark sort of way.

[Okla-homey]

Did you automatically know to do that, or did the software make you aware?

Amazing lesson, Col. Homey. LeMay's quote is funny, in a dark sort of way.

I tried it straight first and got "****amachi," so I edited.

[12]

***************amachi

just checking

[TUSooner]

So.... war really IS hell? Good post once again.

[Octavian]

were the Tokyo firestorms worse than Dresden? From the article it appears so...

[Okla-homey]

were the Tokyo firestorms worse than Dresden? From the article it appears so...

Good question. Airpower historians believe Dresden suffered about half the number of casualties in their fire raid than Tokyo suffered. This was due in large measure to Dresden's lower population density and far fewer wooden buildings.

[Harry Beanbag]

were the Tokyo firestorms worse than Dresden? From the article it appears so...


The Dresden raid was carried out by around 1300 bombers as opposed to the 334 at Tokyo. Nobody knows the exact casualty figures from either. The numbers for Dresden are anywhere between 35,000 and 100,000+, and Homey reported between 80,000 and 130,000 in Tokyo. I'm not sure of the population comparison between the two cities at the time, but a major factor in Tokyo was that most of the buildings were wooden.

[Octavian]

thanks for the answers

history will probably look at both unkindly and necessary...yep, war is hell

[Okla-homey]

also interesting, the Tokyo raid probably killed more people than the Hiroshima or the Nagasaki nukes. Perhaps even approximately as many as both nukes combined.

Tokyo fire raid: at least 80K deaths

Hiroshima: at least 66K deaths

Nagasaki: at least 39K deaths

[Octavian]

also interesting, the Tokyo raid probably killed more people than the Hiroshima or the Nagasaki nukes.

Tokyo fire raid: at least 80K deaths

Hiroshima: at least 66K deaths

Nagasaki: at least 39K deaths

I've heard that several times....

[Harry Beanbag]

thanks for the answers

history will probably look at both unkindly and necessary...yep, war is hell


The Allies wanted to ensure that the people in the Axis nations felt the ferocity of war on their home turf. Hopefully, it would give them a helping hand in preventing their countries from starting any more of them. Germany was largely untouched during WW1, thus the theory was the people didn't have the proper vision of what war really entailed. Seems to have worked pretty well.

[slickdawg]

also interesting, the Tokyo raid probably killed more people than the Hiroshima or the Nagasaki nukes. Perhaps even approximately as many as both nukes combined.

Tokyo fire raid: at least 80K deaths

Hiroshima: at least 66K deaths

Nagasaki: at least 39K deaths

Yes, but the "one bomb" versus days and nights of bombing made a huge difference.

[Okla-homey]

The Allies wanted to ensure that the people in the Axis nations felt the ferocity of war on their home turf. Hopefully, it would give them a helping hand in preventing their countries from starting any more of them. Germany was largely untouched during WW1, thus the theory was the people didn't have the proper vision of what war really entailed. Seems to have worked pretty well.

Pretty compelling results. Italy, Germany, Japan have not started any shiite since then. OTOH, the Soviets were pounded yet continued to be troublemakers themselves and through their client states for the rest of the century.

I don't know what lesson we should draw from all this other than the fact that war is hell and should be a last resort option. I differ with absolute "peace at any pricers" though in the sense that it must remain an option.

[Harry Beanbag]

Pretty compelling results. Italy, Germany, Japan have not started any shiite since then. OTOH, the Soviets were pounded yet continued to be troublemakers themselves and through their client states for the rest of the century.

I don't know what lesson we should draw from all this other than the fact that war is hell and should be a last resort option. I differ with absolute "peace at any pricers" though in the sense that it must remain an option.


But the Soviets won. They consider WWII to be their finest hour, which it was, but the beatdown they suffered early gets kind of lost since they were able to take out their vengeance on Germany just a couple of years later.

[imjebus]

I have never heard of this before. Wonder what the public opinion in the US was about the civilian casualties..

[Taxman71]

Given they were still stinging from Pearl Harbor, I'd say we were all for it if it saved US lives (which it did).

[Octavian]

The Allies wanted to ensure that the people in the Axis nations felt the ferocity of war on their home turf. Hopefully, it would give them a helping hand in preventing their countries from starting any more of them. Germany was largely untouched during WW1, thus the theory was the people didn't have the proper vision of what war really entailed. Seems to have worked pretty well.

agreed.

[Octavian]

I have never heard of this before.

its not something that usually makes the standard textbooks.


Wonder what the public opinion in the US was about the civilian casualties..

probably no national polls were taken, but I'd bet "Hell Ya" answer would've hit somewhere in the high 90s ;)

[SoonerProphet]

thing is, i don't think the fire bombing left thousands of radiated people in its wake. nevertheless, war is hell.

[Okla-homey]

I have never heard of this before. Wonder what the public opinion in the US was about the civilian casualties..

You're ahead of most of our fellow Americans. I shudder to think that most people under 25 don't even know who we fought in WWII or could find Japan on a globe.

Not you guys though. You some educated Okies by gawd!

[SoonerBorn68]

I have never heard of this before. Wonder what the public opinion in the US was about the civilian casualties..

From what I've gathered from listening to WWII era radio programs the American public was more concerned about winning the war and getting the boys home. The news would announce the Japanese casualty reports and the studio audience would erupt in applause.

The war against Germany was far different than the war with Japan. The Germans were brutal against the civilian populations and Russians but generally held respect for the American and British forces most of the time (see Malmedy late in the war). The Japanese never recognized the Geneva Convention treaty and because of their Bu****o code treated the enemy with a total disregard for human rights. Look at some of the propaganda posters or listen to some of the radio shows from that era. The Japanese people are presented as "sub human" to the American public. In all the radio shows I've listened to the Germans are referred to as "Germans" or "Nazis". The Japanese, on the other hand, are called "Japs", "Nips", "Slant Eyes", "Yellow hordes", etc.

To sum it up, IMO I don't think the American public at large cared how many Japanese civilians died...They started the war and now they are suffering for it.

[Okla-homey]

That's my understanding as well.

[SoonerBorn68]

Homey, I've been listening to the entire series of The Great Gildersleeve. It's a really nice removal from reality out here on the rig. I've got 512 episodes & and have made it up to around Christmas of 1944. This series is a facinatiing look into the day to day life during the war. Gildy has to deal with gas rationing, ration points, war news, etc. It gives a healthy appreciation of what those folks weathered.

[Okla-homey]

You know, FWIW, if those Islamo-fascist bastages ever hit us again on the order of 9-11, its going to be a gloves-off knock-down drag-out winner-take-all slugfest like it was in the Pacific during WWII. Frankly, I think UBL knows it too. He's not stupid.

[Harry Beanbag]

You know, FWIW, if those Islamo-fascist bastages ever hit us again on the order of 9-11, its going to be a gloves-off knock-down drag-out winner-take-all slugfest like it was in the Pacific during WWII. Frankly, I think UBL knows it too. He's not stupid.


I think so too, but against who? Are we gonna take out every country in the Middle East?

[soonerscuba]

I find the public reaction to the Japanese fascinating. I think it is regarded that the camps for them in the US were a black spot on American history, but at the same time I give one group of people a free pass on racism, and that is American WWII vets opinion of the Japs. If went through 1% of the **** they did back then, I would hate every last one of them to my dying day as well.

[Harry Beanbag]

I find the public reaction to the Japanese fascinating. I think it is regarded that the camps for them in the US were a black spot on American history, but at the same time I give one group of people a free pass on racism, and that is American WWII vets opinion of the Japs. If went through 1% of the **** they did back then, I would hate every last one of them to my dying day as well.


Yep.

[Okla-homey]

I think so too, but against who? Are we gonna take out every country in the Middle East?

Back in 1980, I told my buddies someday the West would end up marching from the tip of the Arabian Peninsula to Turkey.

We could take 'em, especially with nuclear preparatory fires.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating it...but if it comes down to our children or theirs, I know how I'd vote.

[Harry Beanbag]

Back in 1980, I told my buddies someday the West would end up marching from the tip of the Arabian Peninsula to Turkey.

We could take 'em, especially with nuclear preparatory fires.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not advocating it...but if it comes down to our children or theirs, I know how I'd vote.


It's going to take something catastrophic for that to happen. I'm not even sure them nuking Manhattan would get Europe involved enough to make that a reality.

I'm really concerned about the state and size of our military because I think there's some bad **** coming up down the road. As of now, we can't respond with the force that would be necessary to deal with it.

[soonerscuba]

As of now, we can't respond with the force that would be necessary to deal with it.

I disagree, I think that if something so terrible were to happen that we would have to conquer and destroy the mid-east, a) it would be a global effort, and b) most guys between 17 and 30 would probably enlist and ship off. As hated as we are, if the world had to choose between us and the mid-east, they would still pick us.

[Harry Beanbag]

I disagree, I think that if something so terrible were to happen that we would have to conquer and destroy the mid-east, a) it would be a global effort, and b) most guys between 17 and 30 would probably enlist and ship off. As hated as we are, if the world had to choose between us and the mid-east, they would still pick us.


It would be just like WWII, it took nearly two years before we had truly effective fighting units en masse. Training takes time, not to mention all the materiel that we don't have that would be needed.

[Okla-homey]

It's going to take something catastrophic for that to happen. I'm not even sure them nuking Manhattan would get Europe involved enough to make that a reality.

I'm really concerned about the state and size of our military because I think there's some bad **** coming up down the road. As of now, we can't respond with the force that would be necessary to deal with it.

I personally think we have a lot of capability in reserve. Most of the AF isn't in the fight over there anymore. We also have the better part of five divisions who aren't engaged at any one time. The Navy is still at sea as well.

Bottomline, never under estimate the capacity of the US to expand its military capability to handle threats and fight wars. That was Hitler and Tojo's big mistake. If we had to, we could fire up the draft and put a half million guys in uniform within 90 days.

Given our technological superiority and the fact we now are blessed with an entire generation of junior, middle and senior leaders with real combat experience, we're ready to take on anybody if it comes to that.

[royalfan5]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, and it has been awhile since I have done much reading with the Pacific Theater, but I seem to remember reading once that one of the reasons we did not use the Atomic Bomb on Tokoyo was because of the effectiveness of this raid,since destroyed much of Tokoyo's value as a target.

[SoonerBorn68]

Homey, you're right. In 1939 the U.S. had an active army of a little over 365K. We had no tanks to speak of and the AAF wasn't modern. Only the Navy was considered a threat. By 1945 there were over 6 million in uniform, over 48K Shermans had been built, over 110K superior aircraft had rolled out of assembly, and liberty ships were being launched daily. That was with a population of about 175 million. I would shudder to think what we could do with all the modern machinery and population we have today.

[Okla-homey]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, and it has been awhile since I have done much reading with the Pacific Theater, but I seem to remember reading once that one of the reasons we did not use the Atomic Bomb on Tokoyo was because of the effectiveness of this raid,since destroyed much of Tokoyo's value as a target.

Precisely. Your memory is admirable. We chose Hiroshima because it was relatively untouched and it was therefore a better place to show the Japanese the full power of "the bomb."

[SoonerBorn68]

Correct me if I'm wrong on this, and it has been awhile since I have done much reading with the Pacific Theater, but I seem to remember reading once that one of the reasons we did not use the Atomic Bomb on Tokoyo was because of the effectiveness of this raid,since destroyed much of Tokoyo's value as a target.

You're right. Over a 1/4 of Tokoya had been leveled during the raids. The brass intentionally picked Hiroshima & Nagasaki because they hadn't been attacked. They wanted to see exactly what damage would be done with A-bomb.

[Harry Beanbag]

I personally think we have a lot of capability in reserve. Most of the AF isn't in the fight over there anymore. We also have the better part of five divisions who aren't engaged at any one time. The Navy is still at sea as well.

Bottomline, never under estimate the capacity of the US to expand its military capability to handle threats and fight wars. That was Hitler and Tojo's big mistake. If we had to, we could fire up the draft and put a half million guys in uniform within 90 days.

Given our technological superiority and the fact we now are blessed with an entire generation of junior, middle and senior leaders with real combat experience, we're ready to take on anybody if it comes to that.


I'm not underestimating anything, I'm just saying it'll take time to ramp up. Men need to be trained and tanks and stuff need to be built. We are very "streamlined" I guess you could say right now, and everything is stretched pretty thin as it is.

You make a good point about the combat experience that exists right now though. That's something that we only had with very senior people at the start of WWII.

[SoonerBorn68]

beat me to it Homey. ;)

[Okla-homey]

Homey, you're right. In 1939 the U.S. had an active army of a little over 365K. We had no tanks to speak of and the AAF wasn't modern. Only the Navy was considered a threat. By 1945 there were over 6 million in uniform, over 48K Shermans had been built, over 110K superior aircraft had rolled out of assembly, and liberty ships were being launched daily. That was with a population of about 175 million. I would shudder to think what we could do with all the modern machinery and population we have today.

....and that was without any middle or junior military leadership who had any combat experience. Think about it, those kids who led squads, platoons, companies and battalions in 1941 had never heard a shot fired in anger until they were in it.

[SoonerBorn68]

I'm not underestimating anything, I'm just saying it'll take time to ramp up. Men need to be trained and tanks and stuff need to be built.

I agree, but we already have a presence there and carriers that can respond in hours, not weeks or months. Our Navy & Air Force pilots could keep the enemy busy until we got up to speed.

[SoonerBorn68]

....and that was without any middle or junior military leadership who had any combat experience. Think about it, those kids who led squads, platoons, companies and battalions in 1941 had never heard a shot fired in anger until they were in it.

aka Guadacanal.

[Okla-homey]

I would only add that IMHO (as a guy who has studied this stuff for fun and profit since college) having experienced combat NCO's and officers is what makes a force invincible when coupled with good weapons technology.

[Vaevictis]

It's going to take something catastrophic for that to happen. I'm not even sure them nuking Manhattan would get Europe involved enough to make that a reality.

That's sufficient in and of itself. If Islamic terrorists nuke one of our cities, I say we turn the sands to glass from the Mediterranean to the Indian and use Mecca (and Medina) as OPEN AIR nuclear and biological waste disposal such that anyone making the Hajj is certain to die from it.

And if that's what you're going to do, you don't need Europe's help, because you'll have annihilated everyone in that range. No real need for a large army at that point.

And I'm generally considered to be a "bleeding heart liberal" around these parts. Imagine what the people who consider themselves "moderates" and "conservatives" would think.