America’s Intention, Was Solely To Defeat Japan

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 29 сер 2024
  • (Part:2) Embark on a thrilling journey through one of World War II's most pivotal battles in our gripping exploration of the Guadalcanal campaign. Join us as we uncover the untold stories of leadership, logistics, and the high-stakes decisions that shaped history on the shores of Guadalcanal.
    Prepare to be captivated as we delve into the heart of the action, where the iron will of Allied forces clashes with the harsh realities of wartime logistics. Led by the unyielding Kelly Turner, witness the relentless struggle against manpower shortages and inadequate infrastructure, testing the mettle of those fighting for victory.
    But the drama doesn't end there. Enter Admiral Frank Jack Fletcher, whose controversial decision to withdraw aircraft carriers from Task Force sixty-two sends shockwaves through the ranks. Explore the heated debates, the questions of reasoning, and the delicate balance between trust and strategic necessity as Admiral Ghormley's approval hangs in the balance.
    Subscribe now for an immersive journey through history's most decisive moments, where bravery, sacrifice, and the fog of war converge in the crucible of conflict. Don't miss out on this gripping tale of leadership, controversy, and the fight for victory on the shores of Guadalcanal. #japan #america #ww2 #audiobook
    Part 1: • The Pacific War Would ...
    Playlist: • The U.S. Navy at Guada...
    Plz don't forget to subscribe @Wartalesuncharted

КОМЕНТАРІ • 28

  • @Wartalesuncharted
    @Wartalesuncharted  4 місяці тому +5

    (Part : 2) Ladies and Gentlemen Welcome back! Today, we embark on the second day of our exploration into the intense saga of Guadalcanal. Brace yourselves as we uncover the dramatic events that shaped history on this pivotal battleground. From strategic maneuvers to courageous acts, join us as we dive deeper into the heart of one of World War II's most gripping campaigns.
    Part 1: ua-cam.com/video/nB7ey0jXxAk/v-deo.html
    Playlist: ua-cam.com/play/PLDxc_c19B0x4TlXAEfd95gqbBrkiacJpO.html
    Stay tuned for the next episode coming your way in just a few hours! Get ready to dive deeper into the gripping tale of Guadalcanal and uncover more thrilling moments from this historic campaign. Don't miss out - subscribe now and be the first to watch!

  • @davidsmith7372
    @davidsmith7372 4 місяці тому +8

    Doing my part for the algorithm

  • @RalphTempleton-vr6xs
    @RalphTempleton-vr6xs 3 місяці тому +2

    If Nimitz had known how disarrayed the Japanese combined fleet truly was after Midway he could have completely discounted the threat to Hawaii . It was inconceivable to them that they couldve been beaten so badly, even to the point of covering up the loss of all four carriers for weeks and quarantining survivors to keep it quiet. The loss of the kido butai was something they never got over

  • @Zerox_Prime
    @Zerox_Prime 4 місяці тому +7

    Japan lost every "Decisive Battle" they fought.

    • @dannycalley7777
      @dannycalley7777 4 місяці тому +1

      XP .............they were waiting for that One ????

    • @maemorri
      @maemorri 4 місяці тому +1

      I don't understand why Japan didn't commit fully to Guadalcanal. They had air cover from Rabaul as well as multiple carriers. They had great superiority in battleships and cruisers. Yet throughout the battle they behaved as if they were the underdogs.
      1) They landed ground forces piecemeal and engaged in complex overland marches and complex multipart attacks instead of concentrated and concerted attacks.
      2) Their battleships and cruisers raided the islands, but generally withdrew by daylight as if America had air superiority, which was at least contested.
      3) They supplied their troops by night dashes of destroyers and submarines, rather than sending invasion convoys escorted by concentrated naval assets, and daring the Americans to stop them, wasting both combat potential and failing to supply their troops.
      In the end, their troops starved and bled out in badly-supplied piecemeal attacks, and their navy acted with timidity and evasion, even though they had superior forces. By the time they committed to "decisive" battles at Santa Cruz and Leyte, it was too late. At Santa Cruz, they didn't lose, but still surrendered the initiative. Why? Where is the Japanese fighting spirit?

  • @patrickhenry2845
    @patrickhenry2845 3 місяці тому +2

    Actually, the European War against the Third Reich was a priority over the Pacific Theater War. FDR specifically told General Douglas MacArthur and Admiral Nimitz that personally, when he met with the two of them. When the war in Europe was finally over in May of 1945. The Japanese were all but broken by then. The only thing that Japan had left by the Spring of 1945 was their pride. Two bombs dropped in August 1945 was the assurance that the war in the Pacific Theater was over. And fewer American troops casualties.

  • @michaelgeraghty3989
    @michaelgeraghty3989 4 місяці тому +12

    Japan should’ve known better than to attack Pearl Harbor. Less than 25 years earlier they saw what happened when Germany committed acts of war against the US It took the US more than a year from declaration of war to large scale deployment of men and materials, but then it took only about 6 months to win a war that had been a stalemate for several years.

    • @ingurlund9657
      @ingurlund9657 4 місяці тому +4

      The US made the difference no doubt as it mean't two million fresh troops for the allies and nothing for the Germans after years of carnage. However the 6 million German casualties including nearly two million dead by the time the US was fully deployed in 1918 also won it for the allies. It took both factors. Without the US the war would have ended in stalemate. Without the millions of casualties the Germans had already sustained in the years of war the US couldn't have won it in 6 months. It took the efforts of everyone from 1914 on including Russia and the huge US arrival in 1918 all together to win it, not just the US arrival.

    • @michaelgeraghty3989
      @michaelgeraghty3989 4 місяці тому +2

      @@ingurlund9657 true, but that’s not the point. The point is Japan witnessed 1. How America switched from isolationism to mobilization in response to acts of war. 2. It takes America about 1 to 2 years to fully tespond with men and materials, and when it does that power is decisive. The Japanese officers who spent time in the US also knew US industrial capacity had greatly increased following WWI.

    • @maemorri
      @maemorri 4 місяці тому +1

      What acts of war are you referring to? Unrestricted submarine warfare? Zimmerman telegraph? Not really acts of war.

    • @michaelgeraghty3989
      @michaelgeraghty3989 4 місяці тому

      @@maemorri Yes those are the two, the latter of which included an offer to give Mexico CA, AZ NM and TX as inducement to join Germany by declaring war on the U.S. that offer was a big reason why isolationist President Wilson decided to print the Zimmerman Telegtam in every major US newspaper. People went nuts and isolationism evaporated almost overnight. That’s the “teaching moment” the Japanese didn’t grasp when they decided to directly attack the US. They didn’t realize they would give Roosevelt the same tool to end isolationism that the Germans gave Wilson.

    • @robertbricker
      @robertbricker 4 місяці тому +1

      I've listened to quite a few of these memoirs, and I remain somewhat unclear about Yamamato, who by popular historical culture was opposed to war with the USA - BUT - if necessary, in favor of an attempted knock-out blow. These remembrances paint him as more in-favor of a military response, and how he or anyone in Japan could imagine that the USA would be willing to negotiate a peace is nearly incomprehensible. I presume there must be some related expectation of Germany winning its own war too, but is still something I wrestle to understand.

  • @samdigiorgipo
    @samdigiorgipo 4 місяці тому +10

    Oh yes , , , Americas intention was to defeat Japan , , , most definitely , , ,

  • @davidlj53
    @davidlj53 4 місяці тому +4

    Well, yes!

  • @damonbryan7232
    @damonbryan7232 4 місяці тому +2

    There lies the problem. Japanese always wanted a "decisive naval battle". When they got it. They lost dramatically.

  • @hydroplaneing
    @hydroplaneing 4 місяці тому +1

    I had to listen again because I couldn’t believe what I heard: The Japanese army neglected to tell the Navy that USA had broken their operational code prior to midway! Army could have just put time bombs in the boiler rooms of navy ships and got the same results!

  • @philodonoghue3062
    @philodonoghue3062 4 місяці тому +2

    Us dear old Kiwis are a pretty informal trusting lot - it wouldn’t have occurred to our Labour government cabinet minsters that the Japanese weren’t.

  • @bobbarclay316
    @bobbarclay316 4 місяці тому +1

    Its ironic that the worst result from withdrawal of Fletcher's carriers would fall on American Cruisers.

  • @miketrusky476
    @miketrusky476 4 місяці тому +4

    And the alternative was?

    • @Adiscretefirm
      @Adiscretefirm 4 місяці тому

      Peace negotiations without surrender. They thought they could make a deal, badly underestimated the outrage over Pearl Harbor, and our willingness to accept casualties to exact revenge.

  • @stischer47
    @stischer47 4 місяці тому +1

    Very informative.

  • @user-vu4ok2rj3w
    @user-vu4ok2rj3w 3 місяці тому +1

    Like the story, the still images don’t get it !!