17-08-2005 13:33									#1
	Operation Downfall - How many casualties? Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Let's play a game of guess the deaths. If Operation Downfall went into action (for whatver reason), what deaths would have resulted? Would Japan have abandoned Manchukuo and sent all its troops into Kyushu? Only a week before the atomic bombs went of all school children were armed with bamboo sticks and chisels.. estimates vary greatly between MacArthur's 125,000 casualties in 3 months, to Nimitz' 49,000 in one month, to the Joint Chiefs of Staff total losses projected at 1.2 million casualties. I assume these are American and do not account for Japanese fatalities, which, I assume with weapons like chisels and bamboo sticks, would have been far higher.

How much of a bloodbath would Downfall have been?

	17-08-2005 15:13									#2
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

It depends on the timing I suppose.

If Olympic were to begin on November 1945 most of the troops in Manchuria would have already been obliterated by the Soviets.

	17-08-2005 16:26									#3
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

At that point not only would the Soviets have already utterly annihilated the Japanese forces in Manchuria, movement in the Sea of Japan was essentially totally interdicted. That's why the Navy wanted to starve Japan, with no oil at all on the islands, and complete interdiction, all they had to do was wait.

What would also be critical is how involved the Soviets become. Do they just conquer China, and then appoint Mao as a puppet? Or does Mao refuse to play puppet, and the Soviets find out what it is like to be on the receiving end of an insurgency? Remember, unlike the 1950's Stalin is in charge, and he may in this context decide he wants China. The US cannot stop him.

A bloodbath for Americans, voluntary genocide for the Japanese. Kyushu and Honshu may very well end up depopulated. Also the American occupation may end up being much more vindictive. Other possible results could be an American refusal to get invovled in any more wars in Asia, so neither Korea nor Vietnam occur. You could easily end up with all of Southeast Asia going communist, with India and Indonesia being the borders with those states and in a state of constant communist-assisted insurgency.

	18-08-2005 01:05									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Would a Soviet invasion of Hokkaido be feasable at this point too? IRC they had take the northern Japanese islands, and were planning an invasion of Hokkaido... could a division of Japan have occured?

	18-08-2005 01:15									#5
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Imagine the PDRJ (Peoples Democratic Republic of Japan) womens biathlon team

	18-08-2005 07:28									#6
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by Kalius Would a Soviet invasion of Hokkaido be feasable at this point too? IRC they had take the northern Japanese islands, and were planning an invasion of Hokkaido... could a division of Japan have occured?

Theoretically sure, though at that point Soviet sea transport capability was probably rather weak.

	18-08-2005 11:52									#7
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Actually, the Soviet sea transport capability was virtually non-existant. That's why I instead assign the Soviets the reconquest of China, and the US the primary Japanese islands. The only way I can see the Soviets in Hokkaido is that the US is tired of casualties, and offers them the transport in exchange for their taking the casualties.

The Soviets did have some paratroop units, and might have been able to engage in an airborne invasion. Withoutgood supply line though - ammo is heavy and combat ops of the time required ocean and/or rail transport - I don't see them doing very well.

	18-08-2005 12:13									#8
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by shawnmmcc Actually, the Soviet sea transport capability was virtually non-existant. That's why I instead assign the Soviets the reconquest of China, and the US the primary Japanese islands. The only way I can see the Soviets in Hokkaido is that the US is tired of casualties, and offers them the transport in exchange for their taking the casualties. The Soviets did have some paratroop units, and might have been able to engage in an airborne invasion. Withoutgood supply line though - ammo is heavy and combat ops of the time required ocean and/or rail transport - I don't see them doing very well.

I'll have to wait for my copy of Leonov's "Blood on the Shores" to see just how bad/good Soviet amphibious delivery transports were.