OT- WWII/Pacific question - Gun Hub
Gun Hub

Go Back   Gun Hub > Battle Rifles > M1 Garand

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-24-2005, 05:03 PM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Central FL
Posts: 3,404
OT- WWII/Pacific question

I have been racking my brain and digging thru my books and cannot find it. This seems to be the place for our WWII buffs.
In WWII, there was a US Army division that rolled onto the beaches of one of the islands with Jap skulls mounted on the front of thier amphibious tanks. It was at the end of the war. I thought it was Okinowa, but I can't find it in my books. I thought it was the 8th division (8th army, maybe?). Elenore Roosevelt was so bothered by it that she proposed they get a year of re-civilization before being let back in American society (appreciative lady, huh?)
Does anyone know which unit this was, and what island the battle was for?
Cowboy is offline  
Old 03-24-2005, 05:29 PM   #2
 
Join Date: May 2002
Posts: 2,098
It was Okinawa and it was probably the Marines. What unit, I don't know.
Blood of Tyrants is offline  
Old 03-24-2005, 05:48 PM   #3
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Central FL
Posts: 3,404
Marines would have been my first guess, but I really think in this instance it was an army unit. Thanks Blood. Okinowa makes sense, I seem to remember the landing as being unopposed, which Okinowa was.
Cowboy is offline  
 
Old 03-24-2005, 08:43 PM   #4
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 365
I know it was not the 8th ID, they were in Germany at the time. I would like to know more about this. I don't recall hearing about it.
Mechanized is offline  
Old 03-25-2005, 01:50 AM   #5
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,099
WWII Pacific

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cowboy
Marines would have been my first guess, but I really think in this instance it was an army unit. Thanks Blood. Okinowa makes sense, I seem to remember the landing as being unopposed, which Okinowa was.
Cowboy, someone mis-informed you.....I lived on Okinawa for 10 years after the war, and there wasn't a tree standing when I first got there in the mid 50's---they fought from caves, and "hakka's", dug into the coral island...they may have been un-opposed for a very short time , but then all hell broke loose. It was also the first , worst experience with the Kamikaze.
US KIA 12K---WIA 38 K
JAP. KIA 107 K
CIV KIA 100 K
34 SHIPS SUNK, 368 DAMAGED
OUR FLEET ALONE LOST OVER 600 PLANES

.TOTAL KIA MORE THAN NAGASAKI, AND HIROSHIM A-BOMB COMBINED !!
SOUNDS LIKE SOME MORE LIBERAL REVISIONIST HISTORY TO ME, JUST LIKE LAST MONTHS MEMORIAL OF THE BOMBING OF TOKYO, WHERE THE JAPANESE CALLED THAT STRIKE, GENOCIDE, , AND A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY
I have persomal memory of both events, and the way history is taught today, is not the way I remember the same events.

SEMPER FI !!
john williams is offline  
Old 03-25-2005, 04:09 AM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Central FL
Posts: 3,404
I know the island itself was fought over (dad lived there for a short time in the late 50's or early 60's). But weren't the actual landings unopposed? I thought it was the island where the Japs held back from the beaches and focused exclusively on fighting inland. I know the battle was real bloody, its why we dropped the A-bomb. Okinowa is essentially one giant grave. Just so ya'll know, I'm not bothered by the skulls on the tanks, its not a criticism, its just an interesting fact that i'd like to pinpoint. Imagine how the media would react if the Marines had al Queda skulls on thier vehicles in Afganistan .
I just don't want anyone thinking that I beleive the Japs were mistreated or misunderstood. They starved the people on the island, and used them as human shields. they starved our POWs, well, the ones they didn't murder outright. Even without Okinowas, we should have used the bomb. The estimates for Operation Olympic (invasion of Japan) were roughly one million US casualties. But even if the expected casualties had been 1/10th that, we still should have used it. They fought a total war against us, so they shouldn't whine about us fighting one against them.
Just wanted you to know we are on the same page
Cowboy is offline  
Old 03-25-2005, 04:31 AM   #7
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,099
WWII in the Pacific

Cowboy said :Just wanted you to know we are on the same page

You got it, Cowboy, I know we're on the same page , I just had to let loose on the liberal revisionists, who think they can re-write history, and shift the balme on US of A--- Just a month ago, I listened to Mullah's blaming the US for the TSUNAMI !!!
Anybody wants to know the true meaning of war, they can ask my wife of 45 years-----Yes, I married an Okinawan ORPHAN---the japanese, we must remember took all those Islands by CONQUEST...they didn't ask for a vote......then they ENSLAVED the native pop. , and stamped out the local religion and culture.....during the time of their occupation, it was illegal to own a weapon (sound familiar ? )the punishment was to have the upper regions of your body severed , or even speak the native language (Okinawa ho'gen).... Next, the Lib's (revisionists)...will be re-writing the Roman-Punic wars, too !!

Semper Fi !!
john williams is offline  
Old 03-25-2005, 06:47 AM   #8
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 181
Cowboy, the invasion of Okinawa was the largest amphibious landing of WWII. Yes, larger by far than the Normandy invasion. 10th army consisted of two corps, one mostly Marines, the other mostly Army. 7th, 27th, 77th and 96th were the Army divisions. They landed mostly unopposed and for about 5 days had relatively little action. Then, for more than two months, it was inch by inch. I am not familiar with the 'Jap skull' incident. You might be able to come up with something by researching the division histories.
sevenL4 is offline  
Old 03-25-2005, 05:02 PM   #9
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,665
Quote:
Cowboy, the invasion of Okinawa was the largest amphibious landing of WWII. Yes, larger by far than the Normandy invasion.


Hmmm.....

Is that true... I thought Normandy was the largest. With all of the troops including the Brits, Okinawa was still a larger landing?

Mike
ltcboy is offline  
Old 03-26-2005, 03:35 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SE PA
Posts: 3,023
Yeah, I thought normandy was the largest whats-his-face-landing thing.

I agree with the anti-liberal speak though. Liberals piss me off. Especially when they try to rewrite history. My 11th grade history teacher was definitely not a liberal. He was sadist, though. He told us the cold hard facts, and didn't feel the least bit of need to sugar coat it, or add his own take on it. He explained to us that the nazis were bad, and so were the japs, and we were the good guys, and we ripped them apart. He told us how the japs raped, and murdered the chinese, and how they did some pretty vile things to U.S. POW's. The liberals are a bunch of spineless, gutless, nutless, hopeless, godless morons with nothing better to do than blame everyone else for all of lifes problems, while they sit back, and do nothing to fix it. I think if the liberals jerked their heads out of their asses, and got jobs, they might begin to see the world through republican eyes. I'm sorry about that, I'm just sick of liberals having all the answers to questions nobody asked.

yes, we're justified in nuking the japs. they had it coming. If you can't take it, don't dish it out. Its kinda like the prison thing where they humiliated haji to get him to talk. Do I care if they stripped haji, and led him around by a dog leash if it means he gives up his terrorist buddies? Not one bit. if the liberals don't like it, TS!
Cap'n Dex is offline  
Old 03-26-2005, 07:40 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Northeastern Wisconsin
Posts: 858
Capt'n Dex,
+2 !! I also don't care what our soldiers do to those people if the results help save American lives!!!!
Bravo One Niner is offline  
Old 03-26-2005, 09:39 PM   #12
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 417
Revisionist history - sport of liberal college professors

Revising history is to second guess the facts by wishing for a new outcome. A lot of historians think the U.S. has always been wrong because the Americans always came out on top until we were so undermined by the liberals so that our own Congress doubted we could win in Vietnam. So guess what, our soldiers won in the field and our politcians threw away their blood decrying our vicious treatment of the VC and NVA. You may be recalling the habit of some American tankers to 'execute' VC and NVA on the end of the cannon barrel and 'ride' the corpse around for a while still noosed on the artillery barrel. I'm not edorsing the actions or condemning it, just recalling the field day the press had with this and some of the other 'trophy' practices. No need to start an off-topic thread on those topics either. Perhaps the facts of one conflict have overlapped into another's popular mythology. No doubt the Marines could have beheaded some of the Japanese, although in WWII I would suspect that the Japanese left behind enough skulls from their own executions of POW's and locals to make quite a show for any visiting press. Beheading was a tradional punishment among the Japanese land forces for years before WWII.

As to bombing Japan in the closing days of WWII, the bombing was to serve as reminder that all was not forgotten about the Japanese bombings of old wooden cities in China and killing innocent women and children to the tune of 600,000 casualties in one three day raid on a city of 1.5 million. Not only did they burn them alive, but the Japanense strafed the refugeees as they fled the buring cities. Such was not forgotten by the Chinese and their American Allies when the A-bomb became available. A million Allied casualties would easily have been taken by Americans and Australians if the bomb hadn't been dropped. I wonder if the Japanese would decry their own atrocities including the genocide practiced for years against the Chinese in the absence of any Japanese restraint throughout the 30's and 40's. Pure revisionist bull droppings as the guilty party tries to shift blame. Without a Pearly Harbor there never would have been a Hiroshima.
mackbob is offline  
Old 03-27-2005, 04:58 AM   #13
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 27
As I read this I was reminded that the Okinawa beach landing was on Easter Sunday,1,April,1945.
My old boss was there and told me he was the second guy on the beach in his sector of the 96th Division.He is typical of most combat veterans in that he is modest about his combat experience to a fault even though he has two purple hearts and has only told me a small part of what happened to him.
Not long ago I asked him if I came over would he talk more about it,and he said "There's not much more to tell...no heroics or anything." So I left it at that,but for the "no heroics" part,I think they all were heroes.
Rebelsoul is offline  
Old 03-27-2005, 06:08 AM   #14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: SE PA
Posts: 3,023
I was never in combat, so I couldn't say for sure, but war is hell. And I can't say as I wouldn't want a little payback if the enemy tortured, or killed my best friends. And it probably wouldn't be as simple as blasting him between the eyes, and getting it over with. I'd imagine war breeds a certain hatred that changes a man.

What bothers me about rewriting history is that the whole reason why we study history is so we don't repeat it. its boneheaded to think we can change what happened by wishing things were different. Germany just completely denies WW2 ever took place from what I understand. Which is dangerous, and stupid. and it all comes down to people passing the buck instead of owning up to their crimes/sins/past.
Cap'n Dex is offline  
Old 03-27-2005, 08:47 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,716
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cap'n Dex
I was never in combat, so I couldn't say for sure, but war is hell.
Me neither, but here is my $0.02.

Quote:
And I can't say as I wouldn't want a little payback if the enemy tortured, or killed my best friends. And it probably wouldn't be as simple as blasting him between the eyes, and getting it over with. I'd imagine war breeds a certain hatred that changes a man.
I disagree. I think that war actually conditions most people to want, deep inside, to just get it over with. No revenge beyond smashing the enemy's ability to fight, and if you can pop one between the eyes, then you do it as quick as you can and move on. the mindset that allows cruelty, revenge and torture has less to do with war and more to do with the underlying culture. americans, brits, italians did not torture or try to exterminate people. the nazis and the japs did. the russians were somewhere in the middle, they were soooooooooo pissed off over what the nazis did to them, but they were more like us and less like the nazis/japs. I spoke to a WWII german vet in germany, american vets in america, and a british vet too (but not in britain), they had no hatred, except for a couple americans that would have nothing to do with anything japanese, they were that furious over what the japs did in WWII. but I don't think it was hatred, not the kind that would lead to torture or murder. it was anger, the kind that leads to victory, but allows for a just and fair peace like only we have done.


Quote:
Germany just completely denies WW2 ever took place from what I understand. Which is dangerous, and stupid. and it all comes down to people passing the buck instead of owning up to their crimes/sins/past.
the germans don't deny WWII. they don't like to talk about it or hear about it because it is still a huge embarassment to them. they know damm well what happened and what their forebears did. some deny knowledge of the extent of the Holocaust, and I do think that a certain number of people really did not know what was going on, and others did not want to, but some did. that they don't speak of it does not mean they don't believe it. the neo-nazi crap we see would happen no matter what germany did about WWII and history, there is a certain combination of stupidity, nationalistic fever and ignorance that will triumph over the truth - any truth.

again, my $0.02, free for the taking and worth what you paid for it....
delloro is offline  
Old 03-27-2005, 11:07 AM   #16
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,099
For Cowboy--OT-WWII in the Pacific

Cowboy, sorry it took so long, but I finally found the info you first asked for-at this link, you can find all the info on the Units that were involved in the Okinawa battle
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... battle.htm

HTH

Semper Fi !!
john williams is offline  
Old 03-28-2005, 08:51 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Central FL
Posts: 3,404
Thanks John. Good site. I've got a book or two on this battle, but they are so broad that its hard to get the basics out of it, like what units were involved, and what date this and that happened. This site boils it down pretty well.
Cowboy is offline  
Reply

  Gun Hub > Battle Rifles > M1 Garand

Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
WWII barrel stamp question Armybrat M1 Garand 3 04-07-2007 01:18 AM
Question on old box of M2 Ball from WWII bsmd M1 Garand 2 04-01-2007 06:57 AM
WWII Small Arms references question Diamondback Curio and Relic 3 04-27-2006 06:26 PM
Question about WWII 1911 bkelm18 Handguns 6 11-20-2005 10:55 AM




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2002 - 2020 Gun Hub. All rights reserved.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.