what do you guys think?

It's adorable you think that guy even comes close to Nelson, couldn't even defeat Nelson in a row boat.

(19-01-2017 07:24 PM)dogmatix Wrote:  It's adorable you think that guy even comes close to Nelson, couldn't even defeat Nelson in a row boat.

different time different thinking i suppose. Yamamoto was a genius when it came to naval strategies but so was nelson. it would be interesting to see who would win if they fought on equal ground

Ironically most of the Japanese command in WWII seemed to be thinking it was still 1800, except Yamamoto. His greatest strategic contribution was realizing just how badly fucked Japan was after it attacked America.

(20-01-2017 07:40 PM)dogmatix Wrote:  Ironically most of the Japanese command in WWII seemed to be thinking it was still 1800, except Yamamoto. His greatest strategic contribution was realizing just how badly fucked Japan was after it attacked America.

actually he knew the victors before it even happened. The imperial navy at the outbreak of the war was the best in the world. however its fatal flaws were that it could not resupply and rebuild at the rate of america, and its carriers lacked damage control procedures mostly because the attitude was the japan would never lose (stupid i know)

"In the first six to twelve months of a war with the United States and Great Britain I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success."

- 1940 Yamamoto

"The fiercest serpent may be overcome by a swarm of ants."

Statement in opposition of the planned construction of the Yamato class battleships. In this statement, Yamamoto implies that even the most powerful battleships can be sunk by a huge swarm of carrier planes. This remark also proved prophetic as both Yamato and Musashi would be sunk by overwhelming air attacks.



japan experienced success until half way through 1942. then the tables began to turn. so Japan actually did better then he expected. But you got to admire the guy for giving it his all and going to his death for his country knowing full well there was no hope and that the nationalist army militants had led japan to its horrible fate

6 months being the time it took America to actually mobilize.

I'm not sure how you're quantifying them being the best. The French armour at the beginning of WWII was superior technically to German armour, but the French doctrine split it up and put it with infantry units, so the Germans ran right through them. In fact there's a pretty good chance if France had gone on the offensive instead of waiting for Germany to finish in the East and whirl around, they could have significantly changed the outcome of the war. But they didn't, so their superiority at the start was meaningless.

I don't see why I should admire someone who supported an evil regime who wasted countless lives in a pointless war to prop up their own ego. Especially when he clearly knew it was basically going to end badly for them.

(21-01-2017 09:25 AM)dogmatix Wrote:  In fact there's a pretty good chance if France had gone on the offensive instead of waiting for Germany to finish in the East and whirl around, they could have significantly changed the outcome ...

They did go on the offensive, they just didn't get very far.

I mean the Saar Offensive barely even counts it was so half-arsed.

(21-01-2017 09:25 AM)dogmatix Wrote:  6 months being the time it took America to actually mobilize.

I'm not sure how you're quantifying them being the best. The French armour at the beginning of WWII was superior technically to German armour, but the French doctrine split it up and put it with infantry units, so the Germans ran right through them. In fact there's a pretty good chance if France had gone on the offensive instead of waiting for Germany to finish in the East and whirl around, they could have significantly changed the outcome of the war. But they didn't, so their superiority at the start was meaningless.

I don't see why I should admire someone who supported an evil regime who wasted countless lives in a pointless war to prop up their own ego. Especially when he clearly knew it was basically going to end badly for them.

and america is not an evil regime? who hasnt wasted countless lives? the british empire was probably more evil then the japanese m8 and u admire nelson

No it's not, and it certainly wasn't in 1945. The British Empire was not more evil than the Japanese, which is impressive given the ridiculous shit the British Empire did. I'm not trying to be an apologist for colonialism, its impact on the world has been significantly negative in a lot of ways, though a lot comes to arrogance and poorly guided intentions more than evil intent.

The Japanese meanwhile have war crimes with death tolls up to 10 million people including the Rape of Nanking, slavery of POWs, Comfort Women and Unit 731. The only reason they come 2nd in evil is that their allies were the Nazis.

Admiral Nelson had his flaws, he was a vain egomaniac which potentially contributed to his death.

(21-01-2017 04:43 PM)dogmatix Wrote:  No it's not, and it certainly wasn't in 1945. The British Empire was not more evil than the Japanese, which is impressive given the ridiculous shit the British Empire did. I'm not trying to be an apologist for colonialism, its impact on the world has been significantly negative in a lot of ways, though a lot comes to arrogance and poorly guided intentions more than evil intent.

The Japanese meanwhile have war crimes with death tolls up to 10 million people including the Rape of Nanking, slavery of POWs, Comfort Women and Unit 731. The only reason they come 2nd in evil is that their allies were the Nazis.

Admiral Nelson had his flaws, he was a vain egomaniac which potentially contributed to his death.

you know. over 60% of all japanese bodies found in the pacific were missing their heads, because American soldiers would cut them off and boil the flesh off to send home as a souvenir. thats not evil at all is it?