3 ms·
Remember that the war was basically over at that point, and they were fighting against an enemy starved of resources and experienced manpower, particularly pilo
by rangibaby 11y ago
Remember that the war was basically over at that point, and they were fighting against an enemy starved of resources and experienced manpower, particularly pilots (cf. kamikaze tactics).
The "79 fighter planes" claim doesn't pass the sniff test to me either. Remember that two months after this, the Japanese didn't even bother sending fighters to even try to intercept the planes that bombed Hiroshima (for example).
I'm not saying that the claim is definitely false, but I wouldn't take anything written in the press during the actual war at face value.
- hydrogen18 11y agoI always figured the Japanese assumed the plane in the case of Hiroshima was a reconnaissance plane gathered ground photographs and checking on the weather. As you correctly noted, they didn't have many resources. I'd figure a lone reconnaissance plane would rank pretty low on the list of targets they were trying to intercept.
- LordKano 11y agoThat's a common interpretation of the Japanese reaction. I admit to a limited amount of knowledge on this subject but I have never seen anything that contradicts that view.
- Raphmedia 11y agoEven a lone bomber plane would not have been that much of a threat at this point. Bomb the weapon factories, the war is over. If they had known what was coming they would have deployed a lot more and evacuated the civilians. We all know what happened instead.
- jessaustin 11y agoThe "79 fighter planes" claim doesn't pass the sniff test to me either. Remember that two months after this, the Japanese didn't even bother sending fighters to even try to intercept the planes that bombed Hiroshima (for example). The first proposition is a reasonable explanation for the second. If you're not willing to lose 79 fighters, then don't engage a B-29.