ORIGINAL: usersatch
Anyone read anything about the Solomons from the Japanese point of view to confirm/deny?
Recently I read Frank's Guadalcanal, which is written with research from both sides. I recommend it.
Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition
ORIGINAL: usersatch
Anyone read anything about the Solomons from the Japanese point of view to confirm/deny?
ORIGINAL: witpqs
ORIGINAL: usersatch
Anyone read anything about the Solomons from the Japanese point of view to confirm/deny?
Recently I read Frank's Guadalcanal, which is written with research from both sides. I recommend it.

ORIGINAL: usersatch
Do you think any of it (their lack of tactical soundness on Guadalcanal) had to do with their disdain and arrogance towards allied troops? Up until then, besides little old Wake Island and Corrigedor (sp?), who put up a hard fight against them? Perhaps they thought it would be a "cake walk" so they got lazy in their planning and execution. On paper, they should have mopped up the island fairly easily.
Anyone read anything about the Solomons from the Japanese point of view to confirm/deny?
ORIGINAL: sfbaytf
I watched a show recently about the Malay Campaign and it gave alot of credit to the IJAs use of bicycles, flanking tactics and ability to cross obsticles like rivers quickly using primative methods. I would guess like any army, much depended on he skill and imagination of their leaders and ability to adapt. If at Guadalcanal the Japanes were lead by the same leader that ran the Malay Campaign-Gen Yamishita would they have used the same frontal charge tactics
ORIGINAL: xj900uk
Alternatively perhaps his super-agressive tactics just weren't working...
True but I have always contended getting sucked into a major battle of attrition on Guadalcanal cost the IJ dear for little gain. During this campaign Yamamoto's strategic grasp of things must be called into serious contentionTrying to maintain both offensives is what ultimately defeated them
ORIGINAL: John Lansford
The Japanese were trying to maintain two offensives at the time the Marines were on Guadalcanal. The army wanted to get all the reinforcements to continue their push for Port Moresby, the navy wanted forces to retake Guadalcanal. Ultimately the Guadalcanal offensive got priority, but by that time it was too late to change the outcome; the Marines had gotten enough reinforcements and supplies to withstand any attempts. Trying to maintain both offensives is what ultimately defeated them.
ORIGINAL: xj900uk
I think it was lack of communication between the IJN and IJA ...
[/center]No tactics can work in the face of sufficient material superiority. Allied air superiority and constant naval presence around Guadalcanal meant that Japanese forces were doomed to be inadequate from the start, unless IJN beats the Allied fleet decisively. Except, after Midway odds already were against IJN and only successes of Japanese subs gave them even a chance of such victory. Except then IJN wasted it by not committing enough surface units when they had an edge (one of quite many cases when the fear of losses resulted in losses that would have been preventable otherwise). And tried to push the responsibility for resolving the situation on IJA, resulting in repeated failed offensives.ORIGINAL: xj900uk
Alternatively perhaps his super-agressive tactics just weren't working...
