Reasons Japan Lost The Pacific War Were Evident In Early Stages Of The War

(Memoirs of a Japanese Top Aviator, Part 4 ) Watch our video" Reasons Japan Lost The Pacific War Were Evident In Early Stages Of The War" and
"Dive into the gripping WWII series that unveils the transformative journey of Japan's most renowned aviator, from leading the pivotal attack on Pearl Harbor to experiencing the devastating aftermath of Hiroshima. Witness firsthand the battles that reshaped the Pacific: Midway, Leyte Gulf, and the steps leading to the historic surrender aboard the USS Missouri. Beyond the war, explore a remarkable story of reconciliation and redemption as this former Imperial Japanese Navy officer finds peace through faith, forming unlikely friendships with American icons, including former Presidents and military adversaries. This series not only challenges the conventional narratives of the Pacific War but also presents a unique perspective of enmity turned into alliance. Join us as we traverse the thin line between war and peace, enmity and friendship, through the eyes of a man who lived through it all."
Link of the playlist
• Memoirs of a Japanese ...

[@WW2Tales]

Ladies and Gentlemen, this is Part 4 of memoirs of a Japanese top aviator, who was a Japanese captain in the Imperial Japanese Navy Air Service and a bomber observer in the Imperial Japanese Navy before and during World War II. He was best known for leading the first wave of air attacks on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941. Working under the overall fleet commander, Vice Admiral Chūichi Nagumo, he was responsible for the coordination of the entire aerial attack. Link of the playlist kzbin.info/aero/PLGjbe3ikd0XExLXiIvA7VxTMwhaiHo2eP Link of part 1 kzbin.info/www/bejne/aIjIc6SAntmMmMk Link of part 2 kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y2LbemVsoJaBhKc Link of part 3 kzbin.info/www/bejne/b4XJgZ2Ybc1rppI

[@ericneville8043]

wait til you see the monster the US becomes in the near term.. sincerely, an American combat veteran..

[@Barry4B]

I can barely imagine the unimaginable cruelty and suffering that would have been unleashed upon the world had Japan won the war

[@treystephens6166]

I’m sure they would have calmed down after victory.

[@dl2415]

​@@treystephens6166lol only if their supremacy was acknowledged explicitly by those they allowed the privilege of life.

[@johncaldwell-wq1hp]

In Naru & island in the pacific,--there is a concrete pill-box,--where the natives,who refused to work,for the japanese,-were "squashed-inside"--petrol poured through a "man-hole"-and then ''set-alight"-and burned to death !!--it is still there,--and the natives will show it to you !!--all part of the "co-prosperity-sphere"--then they just "worked them to death"--also President Bush (senier)-when he ditched his torpedo bomber,--the japs caught his 'Gunner"-tortured him & ate him-on (chichi-jima)--(it is in the log)

[@hazchemel]

​@@treystephens6166hi. but if you were to ask the opinion of the many and various tribes, nations, islanders etc who were occupied after Dec 1941, you will find that nobody welcomed them, very large numbers were enslaved and exploited to death, random and arbitrary punishment and executions of civilians and of p.o.w.s, no medical care ... they will have a different view.

[@treystephens6166]

@@hazchemel were the Japanese that mean from Day 1⁉️

[@jackbelk8527]

I'm hooked on these!! No 'music' or phony machineguns, just honest words from another world.

[@TiredMSG]

Check out Hard Core History. Way more detail.

[@luciuslomax336]

Man, these guys pull off a surprise attack, pat themselves on the back, and shortly thereafter find themselves arranging deck chairs on the Titanic. There's even more hubris with the Japanese than with the Germans, and that's saying a lot.

[@dl2415]

They took turns outoing one another

[@bucky5869]

They had a feeling of utter superiority because for the first 6 months of the war, they dominated the battlefield. Mostly through surprise attacks or, if not, by only attacking with overwhelming superior numbers. They were convinced of inevitable victory in the war after this uninterrupted string of one-sided victories.

[@MrDavePed]

"A fleet capable of advancing to the Pacific Ocean, of attacking not only Hawaii but also the West Coast of the mainland United States with prompt and decisive action. We might thereby have paralyzed the fighting spirit of the American people." Nope. It would have made absiolutely no difference. The war ended with 101 aircraft carriers in the US fleet. That amount of production capability dwarfed the Japanese, whose ships were largely irreplaceable. America's fighting spirit wasn't going anywhere. It is better to understand your foe before you make war with him. ..

[@blockmasterscott]

Let’s put it this way. We had a barge that accompanied these 101 aircraft carriers that did nothing but make ice cream. 😂😂😂

[@TiredMSG]

👍🤓🍦

[@larrytischler570]

The Japanese Army running the government made the mistake of seeing US infantry training with dummy guns during the depression when ultra low funding went for military spending and making the bone headed conclusion that the US would not fight and would gladly accept a Japanese offer of pease for Japan keeping most of their newly conquered territories. That conclusion was ridiculous based on our past history. And it got them nuked because of how Japan began attacked on Pearl while pretending to negotiate for peace. No more negotiating with them would be allowed. They simply could not be trusted with any treaty was the overwhelming sentiment in the US. Japan's military government had no plans for a long war against the US bc they misjudged us so badly. they thought if they could get another decisive major win in a carrier battle they could dictate terms to end the war and they would have won a huge empire. But that plan was paper thin because they did not secure a strategic victory at Coral Sea as they believed bc their carrier planes reported they had sunk two fleet carriers and Japan had lost one light carrier and Zuikaku lost too many planes, pilots, and crews to fight for two years and Shokaku suffered major damage. Added to that right away Col. Doolittle raided Tokyo with twin engine B-25s flown off of the carrier Hornet with Enterprise giving cover. This attack caused huge turmoil in the Home Islands setting off many questions about the IJN'S ability to defend them. Then after Midway came their defeats at Mort Moresby on New Guinea by the Aussies and Japan lost bases at Guadalcanal & Tulage to the US and the tide was turned by the end of '42. But it was close. The US Navy was down to one carrier, the Enterprise, it it was damaged at the time that year.

[@richardthornhill4630]

Pride goes before destruction.

[@DennisMSulliva]

They knew the American productive potential. But they didn't know the American fighting spirit. "...If you know yourself, but not the enemy, for every victory gained, you will also suffer a defeat."

[@Johngabe100]

Love listening to these. Thank you so much for making them.

[@edwardwright4633]

Agreed. Yes, thank you

[@Roaoul]

Are these not read by an AI?

[@Roaoul]

Actually, I really do enjoy these a lot. I thought AI because of the occasional mispronunciations made with perfect enunciation. But now I think it's a person very carefully editing a very nice text to speech converter. So thank you for your labors. I love getting the Japanese perspective on the war. ❤

[@astolatpere11]

The Japanese gambled at Pearl Harbor that they would knock out the Pacific fleet and the US would negotiate to Japan's benefit. They had no other plan.

[@Privat2840]

The only goal of the attack should have been the aircraft carriers or occupation of the islands.. History has shown the all the damage done to US war ships was of little consequence to the US. I guess if Japan had brought troops and occupied Hawaii it might have had some affect on the US.

[@jestice75]

They were under the impression they had no other choice. As the McCallum memo points out, the US tried to force them to attack.

[@davidsmith7372]

Doing my part for the algorithm. 👍

[@WW2Tales]

Thank you so much sir , very much grateful

[@Macombdji]

Charles Lindbergh , of Atlantic Flight, went over to the pacific. He found that he could increased the Lightning P-38 's now 900 mile range to the point that the oil rich targets could and were destroyed..

[@michaelgeraghty3989]

After Pearl Harbor Yamamoto urged a second attack against the surviving US carriers. He didn't get much enthusiasm supporting his urgency. The Doolittle raid changed that, showing the vulnerability of Japan to the US carriers. He received the OK for attacking Midway and luring the US carriers out of Pearl Harbor. He succeeded, but in the opposite way he intended and the tide of the Pacific war turned.

[@paullove3082]

At the time, neither side realized that the new advantage was carrier power. Yamamoto knew and Nimitz knew, but the medalled class of each side still clung to battleships. Dolittle changed that but the Japanese still pursued completion of the Yamoto which along with the Bismark were the ultimate white elephants of WWII.

[@larrytischler570]

​@@paullove3082 The US knew it. Nimitz was wanting fast battleships to provide AA protection for his carriers. He started putting more and more fast shooting 1.2 " Orlikans on battleships until they had the 40mm Bofors automatons then the BBs became real AA platforms. The battles of Eastern Solomons and Santa Cruz caused up to 60% loses in Japanese planes, and the flight leaders that made it back were incoherent with fear of the accuracy of AA firepower screening US carriers. They were just getting a taste of proximity fuses and radar directed AA guns. They would get their fill at Leyte.

[@MichaelMitchell-nv4lf]

The reason they lost the war was evident ten minuts after pearl harbor.

[@MrDavePed]

The "Battle of Hawaii"? How could a people so entrenched in a code of honor call that a battle? It's a very strange thing this Japanese honor. I suppose you could argue the embargo was an act of war. Neverthless the soldiers and servicement who were killed in this "battle" were not struck by surprise so much as by dishonorable subterfuge.

[@MrDavePed]

@@davidkeller6156 It was a dishonorable tactic to schedule the declaration only one hour before the planes were to arrive. It was intended to give the Japanese moral and legal cover but to deny any substantive military value to the timliness of the declaration. They might as well have scheduled their declaration of war for one minute before the attack commensed. It was the same intent. As it turned out they screwed up and received the full impact of the wrath of the United States.

[@rudygregory7482]

Good point

[@SeattlePioneer]

The idea of a "Westward" strategy, anticipating attacks on the mainland of the United States is absurd. Even a renewed and determined attack on Hawaii seems pointless, and just playing to the strengths of the United States and the weaknesses of Japan.

[@williamdrake2315]

I am always suprised when they say "Great victory in the battle of Hawaii." It was a sneak attack on a Sunday morning when the armed services were stood down to attend relegious services. What victory is there to conduct an attack when you are not at war while your opponent is attending church?

[@seventhson27]

Four years later: "Unfortunately, the B29 is a fine aircraft." -- Empress of Japan in her diary.

[@michaeldonovan8773]

Mitsuo Fuchida is well known for stretching the truth especially when the lies place him in a more favorable light. Remember he wrote this account years after the events he is describing. Read Shattered Sword for more on Fuchida's deceit.

[@personnelente]

The reason Japan lost the war was evident before the war even started, and it was economic.

[@bunkstagner298]

pride of what? A cowardly attack on peaceful innocent people? But when you sow the wind you will surely reap the whirlwind.

[@michaelrivard4879]

They hated cowards and yet they were incredibly cowardly the entire duration of the war

[@Bob.W.]

Just finished Harada no. 1 on another channel.

[@davidtrindle6473]

Japan’s first mistake was attacking a country which had 10 times the industrial capacity of Japan itself. This is roughly equivalent to my three-year-old grandson taking on a sumo wrestler.

[@SeattlePioneer]

No, it's not. That's really an absurd comparison, in my view. Compare the success of Vietnam of wearing out the will of the United States to continue a long war.

[@NotchFox]

​@@SeattlePioneerBad example, the U.S. had absolutely nothing at stake in the Viet Nam. No one wanted to go die for a meaningless cause. Idiot LBJ and McNamara just slaughtered our troops with obscene "rules of engagement"! We could have won it, if necessary, in two years with total war on North Viet Nam. Of course China/Russia might have gotten involved, + Europe. Total devastation for nothing!

[@abarrister1506]

But the United States had to import all its oil from Texas.

[@SeattlePioneer]

@@abarrister1506 I have no idea what you are trying to prove with this post. And in any case, the United States has usually had fairly diversified sources of oil produced within the United States, and has often been the largest exporter of oil in the world.

[@SeattlePioneer]

@@peterloichtl4512 > Japan was a country most Americans did not care about. > Vietnam killed off 55,000 Americans ==== twenty times as many as were killed at Pearl Harbor > Vietnam certainly contradicts the idea that industrial power is more important than anything else. That is actually being illustrated repeatedly around the world these days, as military forces discover new ways to wage asymmetric warfare. The Hamas attack from the Gaza strip is illustrating that today. Israel can launch all the conventional warfare it likes and still is losing support for itself and Hamas is WINNING, unfortunately.

[@ibuprofenPill]

Nothing that Japan was capable of doing would have ever broken the spirit of the American people. Rather, it would only make them more determined. They were intoxicated with their own hubris and clearly didn’t understand Western society.

[@mikejones9961]

click share, then copy to boost the algorithm

[@SammyNeedsAnAlibi]

Since they didn't send in the 2nd Wave, literally millions of gallons of fuel oil were spared, not a single submarine was even damaged, and the Shipyard was in great shape- all of which would come back to haunt them. 4 days after the attack, the US submarine USS Gudgeon deployed off the coast of Japan and sunk the Japanese submarine I-73 a couple weeks later- the first IJN ship sunk by a US ship. They shudda sent in the 2nd Wave, but thankfully, they didn't!

[@donaldtireman]

Sammy, two waves were launched in the Pearl Harbor attack. Admiral Nagumo, feeling the element of surprise was lost and not knowing the location of the US carriers, elected to withdraw his fleet rather than launch a third attack, leaving our fuel, repair and submarine facilities intact to eventually grind down the Japanese fleet.

[@TiredMSG]

Armchair Admiral Fuchita.

[@michaelrivard4879]

How arrogant you have to be to say that your skill levels are god-like,

[@alainaaugust1932]

A super comment about Mitsuo Fuchida was removed just as I tapped a response to it, also removed.

[@DennisMSulliva]

Why? something obnoxious?

[@WW2Tales]

Sir probably KZbin hiding comments, considering them offensive and holding them for review Someone complained the very same on yesterday's video

[@SueDoeNimh]

👍😁

[@rickstevens1479]

Handing out medals for a sneak attack is strange coming from a society that puts such a high value on honor and Valor... more like sneaky pete award..

[@larrytischler570]

It was not just a sneak attack, they were preparing to do the attack while pretending to negotiate for peace. This treachery was what made the US cry out for a complete and total unconditional surrender since we could never believe the would honor and armistice.

[@Iamkcs2c]

Fushida seems a lot more problematic than most of the other WWII Japanese memoirs that this channel has featured. In my opinion there is a lot of hindsight going on. One example - he claims that he thought at the time the oil facilities needed to be wrecked.

[@SeattlePioneer]

Should Japan have avoided antagonizing the allies, avoiding Roosevelt's ultimatum and WAR? Just soldiered on in China, as Japan had been doing since 1937? With Korea and Manchuria and continued access to world trade, Japan should have been able to do well enough. What would have ultimately happened with the war against the Nationalist Chinese ----and the Communists? Perhaps if Japan had avoided being diverted into the Pacific War, they would have come out of that doing well.

[@99beowulf99]

The United States embargo due to Japan's war in China had cut off their oil supplies as well as the steel, Japan had very little room to maneuver. IMO it would have been better for Japan NOT to attack Hawaii but instead to 'just' attack the Philippines and Dutch East Indies. The American War plan in case of an attack by Japan was called 'Plan Orange' which was the sortie of the American Fleet to defend the Philippines. In that case I think it is likely that the Japanese Navy would have sunk the American Battleships in deep water which would have prevented their being raised, like they were from the harbor at Pearl.

[@SeattlePioneer]

My post: > My question was what Japan might have done to avoid antagonizing the Brits and Americans, rather than provoking war. After all, Japan was a British ally before and during WWI. It seems that the Washington Naval negotiations and treaty didn't promote peace, but war and distrust instead. What if that had been avoided and Japan had remained an ally of the Brits? The whole Pacific war might have been avoided. If course the militarists gained control of the Japanese government and were determined to have war and not to knuckle under to the west. So as a practical matter that wasn't going to happen. But I'm suggesting that it could have happened and would have been the prudent thing for Japan to have done.

[@99beowulf99]

I agree, I wish that Japan had avoided war and jumped over the War going instead straight to the post war period. I agree that the Washington Naval Treaty was a start of the slippery slope.@@SeattlePioneer

[@miketrusky476]

Read, "We DESTROYED 4 AMERICAN Battleships, what Japan had wanted to do for 30 years". NEXT time some source says Japan attacked AMERICA because of an oil embargo by the USA, you can tell that person to get a brain, that is Japanese propaganda a flat out lie.

[@myjeepwjarebuildpaulsteven7986]

✅🇺🇸

[@johnrusche8256]

This is all very good, but: The narrator treats war as 20:20 hindsight. It is still very good, it is his opinion of "Why he lost". I do not believe all of it. Nobody knew in hindsight! I might add that the greatest weapon that Japan had was their naval torpedo and it compliment the worst weapon the Americans had, their naval torpedo until late 1943. Even the first Yorktown was sunk by a torpedo, not to mention the Wasp.

[@steveschlackman4503]

There is an awful lot of "I was right and everybody else was wrong" by the author. Do not forget that the author, a survivor, is writing after the fact and knows the outcomes. His conclusions, in another video, that the Japanese navy lost at Midway due to hubris and over confidence seem correct.

[@RonJohn63]

9:03 They'd have taken Bungo Strait to go to the big naval base at Kure. 18:41 The mini-submarines that did _nothing._ 24:18 These citations sound like what the US military calls Presidential Unit Citations. 33:43 US Navy battleships were _very_ useful during the war (but mostly for shore bombardment using guns too large for land). 34:17 Pfft. Japan was destined to lose, no matter how agile and carrier-centric it's Navy: *not enough resources* (honestly: a tiny little island that needs to import iron and oil can't win against a very angry continent), not enough pilot training, not enough convoys, not enough convoy escorts and FFS *invading the Asian mainland.* The complete lack of Civil Defense until 1945 was the personification of arrogant stupidity. 35:34 Because you didn't have enough carriers. 38:14 That would have delayed US victory by six months to a year. The war was over as soon as we got The Bomb. 51:04 You thought tactically, not strategically. Japan needed oil in order to sail around the Central Pacific waiting for the USN to reappear.

[@blockmasterscott]

I love this part in your post, well said, a tiny little island against a VERY angry continent. "(honestly: a tiny little island that needs to import iron and oil can't win against a very angry continent)," Japan had no chance whatsoever in winning.

[@scottmcdonald5237]

😮

[@Johngabe100]

I commented earlier . Went on to read other comments. I look at these stories as a former US Army veteran who followed orders, just as these soldiers did. In our own US history we have also been wrong and cruel, ask the women of France and Germany. Ask the Filipinos ask the people in a small hamlet in Vietnam. Or bombing civilians in Dresden, Hamburg and Tokyo,Yet I don’t judge the whole history of the US military by some bad behavior of some. I believe these soldiers were following their beliefs and honor as soldiers as well as any other military. Though I don’t believe their cause especially in China and treatment of prisoners anything other than wrong,it does somewhat explain why. I also understand better that their gamble the USA may try to negotiate with Japan after Pearl Harbor was not totally unreasonable. The vast majority of Americans were not willing to go to war even when it looked like Britain might go down in flames and the American first party had a big following. There is no country that does not have some things to be ashamed of. These stories are not so much political as single view points of soldiers who actually lived through it and still strive to maintain pride and some honor. Be careful about harshly judging these men unless you’re truly willing to hold up your own countries war crimes. More than one WW2 general said if we had lost that war we could have been brought up on war crimes including the General of bomber command. Please understand, I’m not talking about Himlers camps personal or the death squads of what happened in Nanking etc. I’m talking about these men on these stories

[@jannarkiewicz633]

Luke if you can't say anything nice don't say anything at all

[@nancygrote742]

The arrogance displayed by this author is really disgusting to me. Self confidence I can understand but he goes WAY beyond that! 😖

[@brianholly3555]

He’s a pilot.

[@jackbelk8527]

He was a Japanese pilot officer. That's why Japan was so tough to defeat, but he says himself, the war was lost in the first year. Pride and bull-headed tradition killed millions.

[@joshuarosen465]

How much of this is fiction? Were they really using the term Special Attack for the minisubs at Pearl Harbor? If that's true then kamakases weren't just something that Japan came up with at the end of the war when they no longer had any other options. It says that they placed zero value on human life from the very beginning. Both Italy and Britain successfully used mini subs and those were not suicide missions although they were very dangerous.

[@jameshammond7312]

The mini subs were real and at pearl. I believe one that was sunk was recoverd 80 years after the pearl harbor attack

[@joshuarosen465]

@@jameshammond7312 I wasn't asking if the mini subs were real, they were. I was asking about them being suicide missions. The Brits and the Italians didn't send their crews to die, there was a plan for them to escape. When kamikazes were introduced at the end of the war the chances of a Japanese pilot surviving a conventional attack was essentially zero, they were poorly trained, their planes were obsolete and they were outnumbered. Under those circumstances there was a certain logic to the idea that if you were going to die anyway then you might as well do it in a way that does the maximum amount of damage to the enemy. But at Pearl Harbor Japan was in the driver's seat. Japan picked the date, they had time for planning, they were prepared while the US wasn't. They had no reason to do suicide tactics and yet in this video the expression Special Attack was used which was the euphemism for suicide. I was under the impression that they didn't coin that term until late in the war. But the implication here is that they were employing those tactics from the first day.

[@jameshammond7312]

@joshuarosen465 I miss understood. The mini subs at pearl after their mission were supposed to return to their mother ship. I believe there were 5 launched four returned and one was sunk an American destoryer.

[@joshuarosen465]

@@jameshammond7312 This answers my original question about how much of this is fiction. By using the term Special Attack in a post war memoir the author is being deliberately misleading. They weren't Special Attack missions, they were commando operations which is not at all the same thing.

[@padre4306]

Children playing at war and pretending as if it makes them “Honorable”….

[@ERASE.ISRAEL]

😢

[@dave09m]

click share, then copy to boost the algorithm