0
Still curious? Ask our experts.
Chat with our AI personalities
Ross
Judy
DevinWhen looking at the facts: 1. The Russian railroad track (Siberian Railway) was recently completed; and the Russians were just now "warming up" and getting thousands and thousands of more men shipped to the front (far east); Russian manpower was a strong asset. 2. The Japanese were running abit low on men and were definitely running out of money (the war was bankrupting them). 3. True, 2 out of 3 Russian fleets were gone (destroyed/sunk) but they still had one remaining, the Black Sea Fleet; albeit locked up in the Black Sea by treaty. "Treaties" can be modified, amended, ignored, broken, or otherwise changed; and that fleet, since it still existed...could still be used. 4. The Japanese Fleet was still strong...and it would have put the Japanese & Russian fleets on level ground...1 against 1 (one Japanese fleet against one Russian fleet). 5. With the Russian railway completed; there actually wasn't a need to fight naval battles anyway! Russia's strong point was always an ARMY not a Navy! Japan's strong point was always a NAVY not an Army! Why should Russia fight Japan's way? Avoid Japan at sea and fight them where they were not as strong; ON LAND! 6. The only weakness the Czar was showing was indulging in high government luxury which was feeding the fuels of revolution. If he had taken more time/effort to learn about leading men in battle...and the science of war...and less time enjoying "royalty" then he may have slowed down the rising feelings of revolution. The common fighting man doesn't relish watching his commander(s) eating and living in royalty while he's sitting in a mud hole eating dog food (rations). But when the commander(s) eats and lives with the common fighting man in "mud holes" and eats "dog food" then the grunt RESPECTS his leader (commander) and will follow him anywhere and proudly obey his orders...even if it means possible death. The Czar didn't do this; and he paid for it. He lost the war and ten years later lost his throne & his life.
Any leader (King, Emperor, President, etc.) can be considered having a "weakness" if they lost a war. The Russian Czar actually fought an aggressive well executed war against Japan; and if Russia would have won, he would have been called a "great leader." The Tsar's (Czar's) army was beginning to gain ground (with the help of their newly constructed Trans-Siberian Railroad), and his navy had fought the most brutal and aggressive naval battles in naval history. The Tsar's navy had fought the only decisive battleship FLEET action in history. No other navy in history (other than Russia's opponent) had or since has ever fought such an action.
The German & British fleets in WWI (11 years later) demonstrated just the opposite of the Russian Navy's sea battle(s) of 1905. Whereas the Russian Admiral Rozhestvensky showed aggressiveness and determination with his battleships, the German & British admirals in WWI showed timidness, and fled from the field of battle; thus never engaging in decisive battle.
The Tsar's army and navy fought both aggressively and with determination, they lost due to the fortunes of war, a fate suffered by any other leader who has lost wars; Napolean, Hirohito, Attilla the Hun, King George, Rommel, etc.
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
President Roosevelt feared that the Russo-Japanese War would impact trade with what country?
President Teddy Roosevelt feared the Imperial Navy was becoming a threat which might dominate the Pacific; thus the cruise of the US Navy's "Great White Fleet" which commenced operations in 1907; a show of America's Seapower around the world...with the primary purpose of impressing Japan.
What does the use of kamikaze pilots show about Japanese culture?
The use of Kamikaze pilots reinforces the traditional Japanese values of honor and duty above life. It reflects the Bushido code employed by the Samurai from long before.
If Truman had found a way to show Japanese leaders a demonstration of the bomb would the Japanese have surrendered?
It is unlikely the Janapese would have surrendered in this scenario. The Japanese had a nuclear bomb program of their own that they had adandoned earlier in the war, so were likely as aware of the power of the device as the Americans at that time. A demonstration would have had little effect on their desire or lack of it to continue the war.
Is World War 2 Japanese currency valuable?
Yes to a currency collector, an honest one. Antique currency is valuable to some collectors, but not to the general public. Show it to the public and collectors may want the currency. Are you a collector? To Japanese collectors it could be priceless? It is their history like U.S. confederacy bills is to american collectors. The condition of the bills is important, and the amount? The gadfly
Why was it so important for the US to beat Japanese at midway?
the US called it "island hopping" which was a strategy to invade Japanese occupied islands. Their strategy was to fire an artillery barrage on the island shores by naval ships and then land infantry/armour on the island. Once the island was taken, the US would leave back a handful of ships and men to defend the island until the war was over. They did this to every Japanese occupied island. It was a turning point in the war because the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour earlier in the war and now it's the island of Midway for the Americans to avenge the attack. The mission was to secure Pearl Harbour from the Japanese since Midway was in between P.H and Japan itself.
