" FIREPOWER VS. JAPANESE LOG PILLBOXES " RESTRICTED WWII U.S. ARMY INFANTRY TRAINING FILM XD97565

[@sysmith9910]

I will keep this in mind for future reference.

[@thomasneal9291]

future reference based on something that happened over 80 years ago. genius.

[@Marius_vanderLubbe]

Yes. It wont be long now before they use all that knowledge on us.

[@MrOlgrumpy]

😉

[@SirCheezersIII]

​@@thomasneal9291Kings come and go, but the log bunker is eternal

[@lifeontheX]

​@@thomasneal9291I don't think that's what he meant.

[@thomasfarrell5396]

A method developed by British in Burma in 1943 was to use Lee/Grant tanks at close range to clear bunkers. It has been described in "Forgotten Armour: Tank Warfare in Burma". Artillery was used to clear jungle and then the tanks moved in using the 75 to blow up the bunker and the smaller turret with machine gun to keep any infantry at bay. Infantry support was also required. And engineers to get the tank to top of mountains. Well worth a read.

[@johnmarks227]

There is some good film footage floating around on KZbin about that.

[@edwardschmitt5710]

You know, just "engineers" to get the tank "to the top of the mountain".

[@edwardschmitt5710]

Trump said "Space Force", that "He created to do these types of things" ar working on it. Apparently he saw the video and though it was more modern, and in Panama.

[@jamesblackwell7752]

@@edwardschmitt5710 Engineers! got to love those 12 bravos

[@ladedk]

That 37mm with converted.50 cal tripod was sweet!

[@jeffreygreene1042]

Boy, it's a good thing there's a timer counting down fractions of a second in the middle of the screen. Really convenient for when I need to know that half second is up. Thank you

[@jameshammers5239]

HHA HA HA HA !!!

[@Crentshen]

its for frames if I am not mistaken

[@flipper184]

It makes it less likely that people will rip it off, They sell a version without that .

[@johnt.4947]

I think it's for copyright. Be thankful that it's free.

[@thomasneal9291]

If I ever time travel back to the SW pacific circa 1943, now I'll be ready.

[@Offroader451-rm5jz]

Marines be like "Screw this, get that flame throwing tank up here"

[@mabsoxie]

The army had more amphibious landings in the Pacific campaign. My father was an army infantryman at Okinawa

[@Offroader451-rm5jz]

@@mabsoxie Soldiers be like " Get that flamethrower up here"

[@adrianparker-e9f]

@@Offroader451-rm5jz Yes, i would have thought that more 'fire' based weapons may be of better effect here, ie; phosphorous etc. because even if the occupants of the bunker take action to stop flames getting inside ( which also stops them seeing and firing at any attackers ) the poisoning effects of smoke inhalation and lack of oxygen, as well as reduced visibility will have it's effects.

[@peterrobbins2862]

Which is absolutely useless in jungle terrain

[@Mechanized85]

@@Offroader451-rm5jzbut careful when you process to use flamethrower, they had shooter whose will cover their pillbox/bunker or they got marksman aiming your fuel tank to shooting.

[@richardjames1812]

Interesting video. Points I noted in particular: 1. The bunker was made to the same specs BUT pine is way less effective than palm trees. Pine is hard and shatters and splinters easily. Palm trees are fibrous and can absorb a lot more damage (this was a factor in the British defeat outside Charleston SC in 1776 when the American fort made of palmetto trees and sand was able to absorb a huge amount of damage). 2. The weapon the narrator described as the most effective, the M8 4.5" rocket fired out of a T35 ground launcher, was never fielded or adopted. Imagine setting that cumbersome thing up 60 yards from a Japanese bunker! 3. The modified 60mm mortar which could direct fire rounds, fired by a lanyard...looks a lot like the Japanese "knee mortar" which the US was also encountering in the Pacific! 4. Um, yeah, I think it's pretty clear that 105mm direct fire would work as well as anything explosive that you could shoot through the embrasures. No test needed for that!

[@SimonTemplar2247]

I fired a LR .22 on a coconut tree and it went through.

[@31terikennedy]

You're comparing 18th century firepower to 20th firepower, and you were serious about that ?! The SOP for neutralizing a position like this was base of fire and flamethrower.

[@richardjames1812]

@@31terikennedy It was dozens of cannon (firing solid shot and shells) from several British ships firing for like 2 hours. The pine test bunker in this video would have been quickly destroyed. Fort Sullivan wasn't. I agree that suppressing the embrasures with small arms fire superiority then use a flamethrower team would be idea. A flamethrower wasn't one of the weapons they used here. The point, though, is that pine is not a good proxy for palm type trees.

[@richardjames1812]

@@SimonTemplar2247 Must have been a small one. The point is that pine shatters and splinters, palm type trees stay together better and hold the real cover (sand, soil, dirt) where it is supposed to be for longer against sustained fire.

[@user-os6ch5pt7w]

@@richardjames1812 "It was dozens of cannon (firing solid shot and shells) from several British ships firing for like 2 hours." That's honestly irrelevant. How many shots were fired, and how many actually hit the intended target? THAT'S what actually matters. 5 minutes of accurate fire is 10 times more effective than 2 hours of inaccurate firing.

[@fredbrillo1849]

Coconut palm logs are soft and absorb the energy...combined with deep sand, they're almost impenetrable. Pine logs are strong but not near as flexible as palm logs. Although my father said that with enough 50 caliber bullets, they could cut a palm tree down, but it took a lot of bullets.

[@EricUnderwood-v2x]

Life Magazine February 1943 there's a photo of my Dad resting up against a palm 🌴 tree and the base of the tree is all battle scarred. The photo was taken in New Guinea Buna Beach Head...👉♥️🇺🇲🙏🗽🦅✌️

[@peterrobbins2862]

​@@EricUnderwood-v2xbuna was a very hard fought vicious battle

[@N4CR]

Many Palms are also hell on chainsaws, queen palms and others with the multiple grain directions just kill blades. Mate of mine won't even take those jobs, not worth it for him lol.

[@schwabrichard9829]

From what i have read, the toughness of the log bunkers in New Guinea. Was always multiplied by their density and concealment.

[@davidmoody2862]

I've seen what a 308 bar can do to a palm tree but covered with sand bags and etc. nah

[@CDMJDMHHC]

the sand filled oil drums sound very smart and very tough construction material for field works

[@1pcfred]

Too bad Japan had no oil. So no drums for them. If they had oil they'd have never had to start the war in the first place.

[@CDMJDMHHC]

@@1pcfred Japan started the war to cease oil supply and other resources.

[@TheDieselbutterfly]

All right fellas,now you know what to do,and knowing is half the battle

[@PoliticallyCensored]

but sir.....won't they be shooting back at us in that open field with machine guns? Isn't that the other half of the battle? .....sir?

[@thomasneal9291]

@@PoliticallyCensored sir is off getting a gin and tonic at the officer's mess.

[@TheDieselbutterfly]

@PoliticallyCensored "everybody gotta die sometime Red".....Staff sgt Barnes

[@Mechanized85]

@@PoliticallyCensoredthen improved overcome and adapt.

[@rikk319]

Yo, Joe!

[@peterrobbins2862]

The niponese forces were the absolute masters of defensive fighting in the Pacific especially if they had time to dig in and set themselves up properly with self supporting interlocking feilds of fire in depth, they were just about invisible in the jungle at anything but short range .they caused absolute carnage on allied forces taking these areas

[@gdfdasfsdafsf5299]

It really is not easy to blow up those fortifications with just small arms.

[@douglasharley2440]

lol, more like impossible.

By the time you know it's there, you are in the interlocking kill box of two others. The occupants never planned on leaving them alive.

[@ethericbliss23]

Yeah, a shining example of futility and sheer luck. Can't imagine nose-to-nose with kinetic weapons, trying to overtake a dug-in encampment like that. : / No thanks!

[@759NPR]

Wasn't intended to - the small arms/mortar shelling were developed & utilized for enemy troop exposure around or near entrances of the emplacements & then the possibility of fortification entrance penetration, effectively or altering the enemy inhabitants' capabilities during engagement. Secondary use was to clear overhead obstruction(s) above the emplacements to break down tree cover or other defensive overhead cover for effective fire impact of incoming heavy artillery that would then follow, providing maximum exposure. The larger mortars, 75 & 105 Howitzer fire, did the heavy work on the entrenched emplacement for effectiveness, once obstacles overhead were comprised. Each device had a specific methodical purpose in attacking enemy entrenched positions for maximum battlefield uses.

[@BeingFireRetardant]

​@@759NPR And yet, Pacific theatre logistics having the specific tool you needed, in the quantity you needed, where you needed it, when you needed it... was simply unlikely. Yes, a specific doorknocker for every type of door. Works well enough in theory, at Aberdeen. Perhaps not on Peleliu.

[@21jtk]

I can't seem to order ANY of these online....

[@procrastinator41]

😆 what a screw job !

[@derekgusoff6768]

S E Morison's Naval Operations in WW2 mentions the Navy took one of the minor Hawaiian Islands and recreated the emplacements they found on Tarawa so they could work out how to combat them better.

[@briancooper2112]

@derekgusoff6768 Morrison was a horrible historian. He wrote remarks about Fletcher which were untrue. He was the Ambrose of his time.

[@bkjeong4302]

Morison is NOT a reliable source.

[@bkjeong4302]

@@briancooper2112 Not to mention blatantly getting a massive amount of stuff wrong about Leyte Gulf, which contradict not just Japanese sources but also multiple American primary sources as well.

[@jamesneveaux4892]

Too bad they didn't use the real sound of explosions. I swear they only have 5 'explosion' sounds in all of Hollywood.

[@jonnyboi841]

I think the they only had video equipment with no audio equipment because cameras didn’t come with microphones back then.

[@CDMJDMHHC]

I remember the first time I heard the 81mm mortar fire, I nearly crapped my pant lol!

[@walterdove8727]

They were likely using 35mm or 16mm motion picture film cameras - no sound recording capability. Interestingly, much if not most actual US Army and Navy combat footage in the Second World War was shot on color film but the “release prints” were black&white.

[@christopherconard2831]

Unless it's a longer "rolling" explosion, the sound will often come through only as a "whomp". This is the shockwave passing the mic causing it to temporarily shut down. If the distance is greater it will sound more like what you would expect from an explosion. Though what you are hearing is both the original explosion and multiple echos from surrounding surfaces.

[@Frezzed]

Good to know :)

[@gregedmand9939]

Can you imagine being assigned to set up that 4.5" M8 rocket launcher in full view of an armed enemy pillbox? The effective range of that weapon as an artillery piece, was quite good. But against a hardened target, maybe 60 yards or so. You would want some form of small arms shielding to give you time to do all the fiddling setup and aiming. It would work best as a Bunker buster, if you could mount it on an AFV and roll up within range ready to fire.

[@richardjames1812]

Which is why that weapon system (the T35 ground launcher) was never employed, never adopted.

[@Tsnor150]

Eventually flame throwers were used. Effective range 20-25 yards (18-23 meters). Imagine carrying the fuel tank to 20 meters with people shooting at you knowing that if you made it there then they were toast. Makes the rocket look easy to deploy.

[@gregedmand9939]

@Tsnor150 Yep. Anyone who had used a flamethrower against other human beings, would vividly be aware of what all that fuel and propellant cound do to the person carry the tanks.

[@towingmoose]

Watching them fire off all that by plugging their ears almost gave me tinnitus

[@markmywordswithmarknelson9232]

Very interesting. Thanks for sharing this piece of history.

[@l.robertvandyke4398]

Thanks for a GREAT FREE VIDEO!!!!!

[@eldergroan]

how many different weapon systems in the military were designated "M1A1?"

[@hippiesaboteur2556]

You dont actially even wanna know lol

[@JohnCBobcat]

A huge pile. When the US Army switched nomenclature systems in the 1920s-30s, they adopted a huge pile of items that all got called "M1": Helmet, Rifle, Carbine, 105mm howitzer, 2.36-inch rocket launcher, 105mm shell, 75mm pack howitzer, 57mm anti-tank gun, 76mm tank gun, .30-caliber ball cartridge, 81mm mortar, 8-inch howitzer, 37mm anti-tank gun, 40mm anti-aircraft gun, 90mm anti-aircraft gun, 120mm anti-aircraft gun, 240mm howitzer.... And that's just things I remember offhand plus a quick skim of artillery and ordnance lists. "M1A1" will be the first adopted Alteration of any M1 item.

[@erroneous6947]

Thanks. Love the war films.

[@8888swatt]

This makes one realise just how much warfare has changed with the advent of low cost drones.

[@robertmorey4104]

Interesting but the results show the mentioned weapons are effective at near point blank and direct fire mode. Very hazardous if you are facing hidden infantry in pill boxes. I think they eventually concluded flame thrower to be the best over all these weapons. The T35 rocket especially would get you killed before you could set it off.

[@LBG-cf8gu]

my thoughts as well. still, very interesting.

[@richardjames1812]

Yes, I noted that the thing they lauded the most for effectiveness, the M8 rocket with the T35 launcher, never entered service.

[@robertmorey4104]

@richardjames1812 Hopefully nobody got killed to figure that one out. 🙂

[@richardjames1812]

@@robertmorey4104 No, it was never used in action. I'm sure they realized there was way too much fussing around 60 yards from the target for that thing to be viable.

[@edwardschmitt5710]

Looked like me and my friends in the 1980s in the woods with fireworks.

[@yvc9]

Apparently, coconut logs are more resistant due to their fibrous nature.

[@jamesrogers47]

Looks like a job for a Bangalore and a flamethrower.

[@peterrobbins2862]

If you live long enough to use either

[@voiceofraisin3778]

Thr Briish found the M3 Lee/Grant useful. 75mm hi ex to clear away the vegatation then use the 37mm firing AP rounds and the MGs to suppress the firing points. While the tank is being loud and obnoxious the infantry section has crept in ready to assault with grenades. Since 37mm has no blast and fragmentation they can get in very close.

[@jethrox827]

Another interesting one 👍

[@PeriscopeFilm]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@JohnBowman-o4e]

What was the moisture content % of pine logs? The coconut trees would have been 90% or better. They'd've absorbed most of the rounds fired into them.

[@nymalous3428]

My mother's father was a Marine. He taught new Marines how to use mortars right around this time.

[@patrickwentz8413]

I liked the carbine-fired grenade. I have seen adapters on carbines before but never one firing a grenade.

[@uwillnevahno6837]

I wonder if they accounted for the difference of soil vs sand?

[@michaelchallen]

and they certainly didn't allow for a hail of small arms fire, machine guns and artillery the occupants would bring to bear.

[@uwillnevahno6837]

@@michaelchallen they were testing to determine the most effective weapon system(s) to use in damaging/destroying the bunkers. What occupants would bring to bear to defend by suppressing/disabling/destroying an attacking force is irrelevant.

[@paullandreville5394]

Interesting video. Lots of work went into testing

[@Dragonbear13-k2r]

Very interesting film. I really enjoy watching these actual test films conducted by the Army. Never saw or heard of that ground emplaced 4.5 inch rocket launcher nor that portable 37mm. AT gun. Both are clever adaptations.

[@richardjames1812]

The T35 ground emplaced 4.5" rocket was never adopted. The other little 37mm is a much older weapon and was, according to some sources, used in the defense of the Philippines late 41 - early 42. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_d%27Infanterie_de_37_mod%C3%A8le_1916_TRP

[@keystone117]

How come they didn’t test a 16 inch battleship shell?

[@rozza2012]

The U.S forces were coping the Japanese Type 89 foot mortar's ability to be used as a direct fire weapon, it was Japan's best light weapon innovation.

[@richardjames1812]

Yes the modification to use the US 60mm shown in this firm seemed very much based on that.

[@Carlschwamberger1]

Aberdeen Proving Ground: Back in. the 1980s I did a day or two of reserve training there.

[@madmanmechanic8847]

Wow all built old school with hand tools even though they had chain saws back then I am not even a shadow of those brave tough men. I wouldnt last an hour

[@1pcfred]

Chainsaws weren't really a thing until the 1950s. They may have existed but they just weren't in wide use.

[@nonamegiven2024]

how about a single axle similar to a car axle . Fit with steel shields and long trailing arms like A/T lightweight guns. Man handled over the ground, 3 or 4 units. Cheap to make at the factory. Would divide the fire from a bunker. Troops stay in cover armed with f/throwers or grenades?

[@pizzafrenzyman]

Refreshing

[@1pcfred]

I've never even seen that tripod rocket launcher before. Was it used in combat? I can't imagine setting one of those up 60 yards from a fortification. I mean good luck with that. You wouldn't be paying the wire out as calmly as Opie was in this film. Because you'd be under fire doing it.

[@jupitersstone]

The exact time this was released would be interesting to know.

[@Faydakin-xp7bk]

You know just they other day I was walking along and think dam what weapon would I need if I happened to come across a Japanese log pillbox. Thank you for easying my worries. I now have the knowledge to overcome said pillbox if I ever by happenstance come across one.

[@novascotianinfj]

Ill try this out tomorrow

[@Veteran-Nurse]

Excellent briefing

[@joeconrad3828]

I don’t see a date on this film. 1943, perhaps? This kind of practical testing at Aberdeen must have had a big impact on development of the M20 recoilless rifle, which was ideal for bunker-busting. Fielded only in the last few months of that war, though.

[@peterloader974]

Some of these handheld weapons are new to me. I haven't seen them used in a war movie yet.

[@1pcfred]

Some never made it past testing. Like that rocket tripod thing. It never saw combat. The T35. This is the only place I've ever seen it.

[@peterloader974]

@@1pcfred Thanks.

[@dash1141]

All right, gents, see you out there

[@ramilv739]

I miss field guns 😢

[@markcoveryourassets]

Is ash stronger than pine?

[@M1903a4]

I'm pretty sure my dad would have an issue with the claim the pine logs were stronger than coconut ones. Hell, the ones in Maryland aren't even close to being as strong as a Southern Yellow pine log. My dad was in the infantry in the Pacific from Guadalcanal in early 1942 until the very end. Like most real combat vets he never talked about his experiences, but he did tell me about the bunkers once. I found some old pictures and asked him about a photo of one of them. He said they were almost indestructible. He said they had plenty of time to build defenses, and many bunkers were multi-story like a layer cake, with each story having layers of coconut logs crisscrossed with railroad rail, and filled with coral. They'd go down when artillery or mortars started landing on the roof and pop back up when it ended. He said the only way to knock one out without getting too close was if you had air support that could drop napalm on it later when that was available or if a battleship or heavy cruiser could hit the top with a big gun.

[@sunwolf8290]

The Aussies used Centurian tanks very effectively agains NVA/VC bunkers in vietnam

[@johndaut2838]

Mortars do not go thunk. They are loud and boom. I was a Mortar gunner, I know!

[@lrmbvv]

drones helped a lot also

[@dmac716]

2:35 almost like we were not observant.

[@noecarrier5035]

The weapon used after the bazooka but before the mortar is a projectile from a T-27 Xylophone rocket artillery piece, by the way.

[@Crabby303]

Zippy little stinger!

[@garywayne6083]

And the Calliope on top of Shermans - problem was poor accuracy, hence the multi-tube launchers sending a whole bunch of them off hoping to hit something.

[@richardjames1812]

M8 rocket in a T35 ground launcher - which was never adopted for use in the field. For sort of obvious reasons, imagine setting that up 60 yards from a Japanese bunker!

[@roncoburn7771]

wow so cool I was a gunner on apg back in the day.

[@danwilliams5867]

Thinking an M4 Sherman with just low velocity 75mm gun (the ones they hated in Europe) would do the trick. You just have to teach infantry to work with the tank and protect it from sappers.

[@sailordude2094]

Was this like a gun show for the troops to watch?

[@justinmacewen9091]

Training film to orientate US military personnel deploying to the Pacific theater in understanding the difficulties in destroying Japanese constructed fighting positions and bunker-type fortifications. Also, this appears to be a filmed ballistic tests conducted at Aberdeen Proving Grounds which was the US Army's main facility to test weapons to include capture enemy weapons, vehicles, and ammunition. It still functions in various weapons and equipment testing.

[@littlehills]

r&D

[@SteepSix]

Couldn't you make your watermark just a bit transparent? You know, so we can see the sometimes important stuff that's behind it... Please?

[@PeriscopeFilm]

Here's the issue: Tens of thousands of films similar to this one have been lost forever -- destroyed -- and many others are at risk. Our company preserves these precious bits of history one film at a time. How do we afford to do that? By selling them as stock footage to documentary filmmakers and broadcasters. If we did not have a counter, so that they can identify the material they need to license, we could not afford to post films like these online, and no films would be preserved. It's that simple. So we ask you to bear with the watermark and timecodes. In the past we tried many different systems including placing our timer at the bottom corner of our videos. What happened? Unscrupulous KZbin users downloaded our vids, blew them up so the timer was not visible, and re-posted them as their own content! This particular film in fact, has ended up all over the Internet in "blown up" content -- including on Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_Army_AH-1G_Cobra_overview_video.ogv) We've had to use content control on KZbin to have the videos removed and shut down these channels. It's hard enough work preserving these films and posting them, without having to spend precious time dealing with policing thievery -- and not what we devoted ourselves to do. Love our channel and want to support what we do? You can help us save and post more orphaned films! Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/PeriscopeFilm Even a really tiny contribution can make a difference.

[@smokinhalf]

@8:00 yeah 60 yards a long time to set up... The enemy will be firing at you.

[@BSB-rf8nv]

... so, why the time code on this, otherwise, excellent film?

[@douglasharley2440]

extremely interesting!...but imo the testing could have been significantly improved. rather than a single extremely accurate pillbox, they should instead have broken the pillbox into a few discrete elements (e.g., roof, wall without windows, wall with windows, etc.) and constructed multiple instances of each elements and tested each weapon against its own for each element.

[@thomasneal9291]

how do you know they didn't? all you saw was 2 minutes of video ffs.

[@douglasharley2440]

@@thomasneal9291 0:58 lol, they described in detail what was constructed. my point is severalfold...by building a complete structure, it's much more complicated and time/resources intensive, while simplifying the problem doesn't affect the outcomes, and in fact it improves them, because you aren't conflating results of previous testing with various weapons on the same structure; you can easily have a dedicated wall/roof/wall-with-windows/entrance/etc. elements replicated for each weapon, and see *exactly* what it can do against that element. engineering be like.

[@sharonrigs7999]

Japanese bunkers were very different and in some ways better than German bunkers. They were simple, discreet and well camouflaged in contrast to imposing, well engineered concrete bunkers. The Japanese answer was to absorb incoming fire with sand and strong, fiberous coconut logs that was unlikely to produce wounding shards upon impact/detonation. The German bunkers were built to withstand and deflect incoming fire. However, concrete shards were a hazard. Japanese bunkers were field expedient and were built using abundant local materials and reused oil drums. They could be built by a dozen men with simple hand tools. German bunkers required precise engineering, heavy equipment and significant time to construct.

[@bustedfender]

Why do Americans measure calibre in mm, but use furlongs per cubic fortnight for everything else?

[@davepowell7168]

Mountains should be an 8 thousander (meters) or 5 milers high 🤔

[@grandrapids57]

We use both. Calibre is 100ths of an inch, for arms, while artillery is generally MM. Why does the rest of the world use 66 different Greek and Latin named units, stuffed with irrational fractional numbers resulting from not particularly good number theory?

[@bustedfender]

@ the key phrase in your indignation is “the rest of the world” 🤦 Like Churchill said, you’ll come around to it eventually, but not until you’ve exhausted every other option 😂 All the best 👍

[@grandrapids57]

@@bustedfender The rest of the world is generally either too smug or lazy to spend 20 minutes to learn another system. Perhaps when the rest of the world adopts alphabets and gives up their highly inflected languages for English, maybe we'll think about making some changes. Viva la difference

[@bustedfender]

@@grandrapids57 Are you by any chance American?

[@jg2072]

Basically the arms available were not very good for bunkers.

[@FrostWing-k5u]

In reality, those trees and bushes would be conversing in a foreign language with traps laid all over the jungle

[@zombie-parts]

1:20 ouch

[@anibalcesarnishizk2205]

The NVA turned out to be good pupils.They learned from the japanese to build such pillboxes.

[@procrastinator41]

No BatMan ! Nooo!

[@garywagner2466]

Hmm. The bigger the shell, the more effective the damage. Whodathunkit?

[@dtrain1634]

Every weapon - the M1 lol 😜

[@camptube7621]

Now they can fly in a drone.

[@JP-xh4fq]

Very irritating to have text in the video so hard to read because of a black bar with numbers.

[@johncashwell1024]

I know!

[@Alboalt]

"Hey, this delicious free ice cream is not the flavor I want"

[@thomassmigielski9033]

You are viewing free content from an organization that normally sells access to the media you are enjoying at no cost to you.

[@JP-xh4fq]

@@Alboalt They could literally just not put it over the text. Being free doesn't mean it needs to be without thought or effort. GFY.

[@juslitor]

@@thomassmigielski9033 Doesnt change the fact that the black bar is retardedly placed, would work just as well in the top of the image, where text more seldomly is placed.

[@marccrotty8447]

Most Japanese did not give up! Their training and culture were very different from USA.

[@1pcfred]

Towards the end that changed somewhat. A lot more surrendered in Okinawa. By then they knew it was over. But early on yeah they wouldn't give up. We only captured 12 prisoners on Tarawa. That was out of a force of 20,000.

[@marccrotty8447]

@1pcfred It is always sad to read about the senseless loss of life. That is war.

[@1pcfred]

@@marccrotty8447 is any loss of life really sensible? Is anything sensible for that matter? The philosophical debate rages on. We're here and then we're gone and that's life.

[@jefflary5457]

Sounds like Bob Barker doing the narrative

[@huddunlap3999]

My Dad was a lumberjack and he would have laughed at these guys working with the axes.

[@douglasharley2440]

they probably get paid by the hour (or fixed salary), and was your dad paid by the tree?

[@huddunlap3999]

He never said. He only did it to get through school.

[@JP-xh4fq]

Why would he laugh? They are building something and that's how you did it. I spent years swinging tools, you aren't flat out all the time. Seems like you just wanted to comment but had nothing worth saying.

[@huddunlap3999]

You can’t be serious. I used to load trucks to get through school. If you weren’t pushing hard all day long you got fired.

[@Dcaveman-lu6ru]

My dad was a tree and he'd laugh at your dad trying to photosynthesize.

[@Revivethefallen]

War is different now with drones.

[@jimsmith9819]

they should have tested concrete bunkers too

[@DavidHugh-y4b]

They need Elon’s robots

[@rl1271]

I love how the narrator is just casually saying JAP like it’s nothing. Amazing time to live in!!

[@vanceb1]

I have some WWII videos of chemical weapons tests. They use the same terminology.

[@downunderrob]

If you're fighting a War against a fanatical and cruel enemy, who has less regard for you than they do for a farm animal. Then you aren't particularly concerned about hurting their feelings with harsh words. And you can be damned sure the Japs, Kraft's or Dago's weren't concerning themselves with such niceties. In 1940 when the Australians captured the City of Bardia in North Africa. Old Mussolini didn't mince words. On a Radio Rome Broadcast, he called us, "....barbarians..." I'll bet civilians from Perth to Sydney, blushed! 😅😅😅😅

[@paulreilly3904]

What's the problem?

[@rl1271]

@@paulreilly3904the problem is we don’t talk like this today

[@richardjames1812]

@@rl1271 And what do you think the Japs were calling us in 1943?

[@ľőŵďǒpė86]

im calling bs lol

[@SevenSixTwo2012]

So the biggest, most powerful projectiles are also the most effective against dug in fortifications. Got it. Looks like another case of pointless government spending, lol.

[@thomasneal9291]

you think it's obvious, but based on what, exactly? your vast engineering training? your PhD in physics? How do you know large explosives would penetrate instead of spending all their energy on the outside? you don't know, until you test it. stop being so damn clueless.

[@Eric-683]

Conversely, it's about knowing the smallest loads the troops will need to be equipped with and capable of deploying over the shore and through the jungle.

[@SevenSixTwo2012]

@@thomasneal9291 Watch the video again, dumdum. They tried pea shooters and big projectile cannons, concluding that the big projectile cannons are the most effective against dug in fortifications. LoL! 🤔

[@drmarkintexas-400]

🎖️⭐🙏❤️‍🩹🏆🛐