On this day during W.W. 2

I’ve been researching France in World War 2 recently, and I stumbled upon this article on JSTOR:

https://www.jstor.org/stable/286380?casa_token=HrDISj647xoAAAAA%3A4r0lrbG6dLMbOFV1mHpvWIxLmi5kgJmFmZ_TYY5Ct12HpfBVa87FyqGvcP00vs2G1JuM3ol2qcQ

Unfortunately, my regular free JSTOR account cannot access this.

Please let me know if you have access to this article in any way. Thank you!

The Bataan Death March (Filipino: Martsa ng Kamatayan sa Bataan; Japanese: バターン死の行進, Hepburn: Batān Shi no Kōshin) was the forcible transfer by the Imperial Japanese Army of 60,000–80,000 Filipino and American prisoners of war from Saisaih Point, Bagac, Bataan and Mariveles to Camp O’Donnell, Capas, Tarlac, via San Fernando, Pampanga, where the prisoners were loaded onto trains. The transfer began on April 9, 1942, after the three-month Battle of Bataan in the Philippines during World War II. The total distance marched from Mariveles to San Fernando and from the Capas Train Station to Camp O’Donnell is variously reported by differing sources as between 60 mi (97 km) and 69.6 mi (112.0 km). Differing sources also report widely differing prisoner of war casualties prior to reaching Camp O’Donnell: from 5,000 to 18,000 Filipino deaths and 500 to 650 American deaths during the march. The march was characterized by severe physical abuse and wanton killings, and was later judged by an Allied military commission to be a Japanese war crime.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bataan_Death_March

Considered a war crime, the Bataan Death March was a dark day in the US Army’s history as well as a black page of World War II.
Do you guys believe that this WAS truly a war crime or not?
Do you guys think that it compares to Germany’s war crimes in the European Theater?
I know that this is a touchy subject, but im looking for opinions and objectivity.

The Battle of Wake Island began simultaneously with the attack on Pearl Harbor and ended on 23 December 1941, with the surrender of the American forces to the Empire of Japan. It was fought on and around the atoll formed by Wake Island and its islets of Peale and Wilkes Islands by the air, land, and naval forces of the Empire of Japan against those of the U.S., with Marines playing a prominent role on both sides.

The island was held by the Japanese for the duration of the Pacific War; the remaining Japanese garrison on the island surrendered to a detachment of United States Marines on 4 September 1945.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Wake_Island

The Marines at Wake Island held out against the Japanese early in December 1941 before being overwhelmed.  Do you guys agree that it was truly an episode of heroism?

@CWO:

Italy didn’t hold on to British Somalia for very long.  Britain recaptured it in early 1941, and likewise liberated Ethiopia and conquered Italian Somaliland.  Germany didn’t save Italy’s rear end in that part of Africa, nor did it even intervene as far as I know;

I believe the Suez Canal was closed  :wink:

Didn’t the 101st and 82nd do so well on D-Day considering the bad drops they experienced?
Sterling job getting their jobs done on that first day.
A lot of men grew up that night and day and the experience they gained was so necessary in the months to come.

The Germans, what can you say? Allied air power and naval bombardments  negated any coordinated counterattack above the regimental level. They held on, but opportunities to exploit the initial weaknesses were lost as time passed.

A great day and hats off to any who were present.
I am sure nightime on the 6th brought relief to many a tired soldier.

"He wasn’t a complicated philosopher or thinker, but he quite simply said: ‘We’re just not going to make it, and just imagine, people are saying all kind of things, but look, an infantry division has just been deployed and they hardly have artillery support, and for every two kilometers, we have a single battery.’ "

Had Rommel of had the Panzer divisions at the beaches on D-Day would it of actually made any meaningful difference to the outcome of the battle?

This statement said it all so the ansewr is…. no.
Rommel was not a foul…

I think this was a very key consideration for the UK, Germany, Russia and Japan:

@KurtGodel7:

However, one reason for Hitler’s impatience in invading the Soviet Union was the British food blockade of Germany; and the resulting starvation in German-held lands. Delaying the invasion of the Soviet Union by two years would have meant two extra years of famine conditions; especially in occupied territories and population groups assigned low or mid-level priorities for scarce, precious food calories.

Only the US and some parts of the British empire had abundant food.  The UK, Germany, (and later Japan) were squeezed by naval (or submarine) blockades.  Russia was squeezed by the vast territories taken by the Germans.  Of course I’ll grant that in the early part of the war, Germany did quite well by taking the food and supplies found in France, Belgium, Ukraine, etc.

Grizzly, you make a good point.  The Germans were never going to be able to invade the UK; but they did try to starve them.  An excess of wheat in Australia and Canada does no good for the UK if it cannot be delivered.  I guess we disagree on whether or not British hunger, lack of heating oil, etc. would have been sufficient to make them either sue for peace with Germany…If the British were hungry enough (and I think without the US merchant marine), I could see them saying screw the French, lets have a ceasefire and let the USSR and Germany fight it out.

Regarding the USSR, I once read an estimate that 7/8 of the entire Germany war effort was fought on the eastern front.  This estimate includes the forces in Norway, the battles in Africa and the Balkans, Crete, the U-boat effort, the battles in Italy, the defense of France after D-day, the V-1 and V2 and other technological weapons, etc.  The defense of France required minimal forces in the early part of the war, especially early in the war when it was obvious the UK was in no position to invade.  I don’t think this small difference would have been enough to turn the tide in the East despite the small margin of victory by the USSR during 1941 and 1942.  I even doubt Hitler would have reduced the forces occupying France at this time had the UK capitulated.

@yamamato456:

Well actually the battle of britain itself was not necassarily a German mistake.  The way the battle of britain was fought was a mistake.  In the beginning of the battle the Germans were smart to only target the British airforce.  However, the air battle was lasting longer than Hitler wanted… so he decided he would bomb London instead.  All of the german generals thought this was a huge mistake and wanted to keep attacking the airforce.  In fact on the day that they started targetting london there were only 14 operational planes in the whole UK.  If the German generals would have had their way the Germans would have won the battle of britain.

Even assuming Germany “wins” the air war, they never win the battle of Britain. Britain never gets successfully invaded, Germany just doesnt have the operational power to do so.

The mistake was in attacking Britain, rather than the Med. Taking Egypt (and gaining access to Iran/Iraq oil) and depriving UK of supplies was the only way to “win” (which eventually would not have worked as the USA would eventually enter the war and supply Britain with whatever was needed).

Had the med been conquered and become an axis lake, you could delay Torch till 44. Perhaps egypt is never retaken until 45. Which would give Germany time to mass produce its "super-weapons). This also assumes the blunders on the eastern front are also ignored.

Squirecam