From: Jack (milveh@sbcglobal.net)
Date: Tue Nov 16 2004 - 09:21:07 PST
Slightly off topic, but not a bad thread...if your
interested in military history.
Re my comments: "Japanese were outnumbered 2 to 1 and
they were breaking the all rules of conventional
thinking by coming down thru the jungles of Malaysia
to attack Fortress Singapore from the rear, hardly
cricket, eh?"
Reply: "Neither was Pearl Harbor. Looks like both
countries got caught on the wrong side of the
unthinkable and the unconventional, and were forced to
adapt to new realities accordingly."
Rebuttal: The major difference between these two
disastrous events was the US was attacked in peace
time and without warning. To make matters worse it
was while diplomatic negotiations were under way.
On the other side of the pond, Singapore had been
constructed to be fortress in the event of war and
when war came they WERE on high alert.
Before the actual battle for Singapore the British had
fought skirmishes with an unexpected quickly advancing
enemy through miles of jungle while suffering heavy
casualties that shocked those who believed Japanese
were inferior fighters and couldn't win a real battle
against professional soldiers.
Soon there was little doubt about the ferocity of the
Japanese solider as the advanced and slaughtered
wounded and captured allied soldiers alike. It has
been well documented they used gasoline to burn some
captured Australians alive and wreaked absolute havoc
on the local civilian population, just to make a
point.
As they closed on Fortress Singapore there was about
100,000 defenders. The Japanese were tired, close to
starvation and without armoured or air support.
Barely 60,000 strong with many unfit for combat.
Unfortunately, Japanese on rickity bicycles, tires
worn off and clanking along on the rims made the
British think tanks were approaching. When a
concentration of Japanese forces attacked a weak
defensive area, that action convinced the 2 faint
hearted British generals in charge that it was a
hopeless situation and they failed to support their
men with reinforcements. Rather than fight to bitter
and die with their men as ordered by Churchill, those
commanders choose surrender. They were same lot that
failed to issue the heavy weapons to troops because
they hadn't been properly trained to use them!
That fateful decision sold-out the garrisoned British
soldiers, good soldiers that were prepared to take on
the more experienced Japanese and if necessary fight
to the death just as Churchill had ordered.
I've spoken to few of the survivors and I believe this
is absolutely true and most history books support
this. I also believe this sort of action would likely
have turned the tide of battle, brought honour to the
British Empire at a time when it was needed most.
Instead it was one of the darkest days in British
military history.
Quite a bit of difference between Pearl and Singapore,
wouldn't you say?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat May 07 2005 - 20:37:41 PDT