What do you think?
Rate this book
World War 2 Japan:
The story of Japanese involvement in WWII is one that includes a number of amazing events between 1939 and 1945. The Japanese went from fighting against just the Chinese to attempting to practically take on the entire world at the one time.
- The Attack on Pearl Harbor
- The Pacific War Begins
- The Completion of the War Plan.
- Attacking Australia and Further Expansion
- Battle of the Coral Sea
- The Battle for the Solomon Islands
- The Bomb
- The Japanese Surrender
And much more!
This is a story of rapid expansion, an attempt at consolidation, and ultimately, retreat and massacre. It is a story of honor, of Allied unity, and eventual surrender. The role of Japan in the Pacific War is a part of WWII that cannot be forgotten.
- The Attack on Pearl Harbor
- The Pacific War Begins
- The Completion of the War Plan.
- Attacking Australia and Further Expansion
- Battle of the Coral Sea
- The Battle for the Solomon Islands
- The Bomb
- The Japanese Surrender
And much more!
This is a story of rapid expansion, an attempt at consolidation, and ultimately, retreat and massacre. It is a story of honor, of Allied unity, and eventual surrender. The role of Japan in the Pacific War is a part of WWII that cannot be forgotten.
34 pages, Paperback
Published March 13, 2016
323 people are currently reading
222 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews
December 25, 2023
Quite disappointing with too many form'atting, [pr'o]gramm'atical and hi-stor'ical errors...
This is a 2016-edition that I’ve been storing for a long time, so there may be a new edition by now. If so, many of these errors found in my review might have been revised.
The 2016-vers'ion is a bit of a disappointment as a complete product on the market with its price tag on it as well as a complete work of a professional author and publisher.
(Kindle Edition, location 22)
...resulting in the dropping of the atomic bombs towards the end of the war, which killed tens of thousands of people.
Sounds like NOT a big deal. Tens of millions of Russians were killed during the same WWII, and even today already hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians (probably around the same number of casualties on the Russian side) have been killed in the recent Russo-Ukrainian War just in last one and half years.
The Battle of Somme during WWI, too, witnessed hundreds of thousands of KIAs just in that one single battle, not to mention the tens of thousands of "ancient" Roman KIAs in the single Battle of Cannae in 216 "Before the Chr'ist."
As far as I have learned, the two atomic bombs killed between 129,000 and 226,000 peopl'/ popul'ation (except those who would e-wind'/ -vent'ually lose their lives due to the exposure to nuclear radiation).
(Kindle Ed., loc. 22)
...there was a lot of internal trouble...
...troubles...
(Ibid., loc. 22)
...The country’s problems were further exacerbated when the United States entered the Great Depression as they were a main supplier of a number of goods...
Correction: ...The problems were further exacerbated when the United States entered the Great Depression as the country was a main supplier of many things vital for Japanese Empire at the time...
(Ibid., loc. 33)
As a result, Japan believed that many of its Asian neighbors would be in a position to help, although their way of tackling the problem was not the diplomatic route. This would ultimately lead to what became known as the Second Sino-Japanese War starting in 1937.
Correction: As a result, Japan started to lay eyes on its neighbors’ rich resources, and this would ultimately lead the country to invade Manchuria in 1931 followed by a full invasion of mainland China, also known as the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1937.
(Ibid., loc. 33)
War with their Neighbors.
A formatting issue: Some of these “subtitles” don't have periods lacking the bas'ic “coherence” in form’atting.
The same sort of issue's found with the Marines as well. There's no coherence with some spelled marines while the others spelled Marines. As a Marine myself, I'd say the "Marines" is correct.
(Ibid., loc. 33)
...The situation only continued to turn against Japan when they alienated the U/S. after attacking a U.S. gunboat.
What is the U/S.? Revise the work “before” it is published!
(Ibid., locs. 33-44)
Being in a desperate situation can lead to taking desperate actions, and that was the case with Japan. They knew they had to get their hands on certain resources, and they only had two options: either Siberia or the South Pacific.
No, it was the Middle East, therefore the Japanese had to confront the Western powers occupying South East Asia, which was the shortest water passage towards the Middle East from Northeast Asian waters under the Empire of Japan, thus the fam’ous 1940-ABCD Line against Japan at the time (also called the ABCD Encirclement: America — British Malay Peninsula — China — Dutch Indonesia).
Japan would invade the South Pacific way later while fighting the U.S. for the supremacy over the Pæx/ Pac’ific in attempt to cut the ways between the United States and Australia.
(Ibid., loc. 44)
First, they attempted to go to Siberia but lost at the Battle of Khalkhin in 1939. This forced their hand into the second option, which was the South Pacific, although what followed was another example of poor military decision making and not thinking through the potential consequences..
Why there are two periods? Again, revise the book before the peopl’/ publ’ic-at’ion!
And seriously: Does the writer really believe the Japanese decided to fight all the Western allies after a small defeat by the newly-established USSR? It decided to sail across half the Pacific and bomb the US Pacific Command because of that small failure deep in the con-tæn’/ -tin’ent?
The writer's logic doesn't make sense.
More study is needed to write a book in this specific top'ic, otherwise the book would only spread the already-serious Truth Decay among the innocent people.
And Tokyo did think hard about the consequences. The decision to wage an all-out war against the US and UK, despite the possible "devastating" consequences, was out of “desperation” with the UK-led ABCD Encirclement choking up the pass'æge for its most-needed oil import.
(Ibid., loc. 44)
Due to their desire to seek out oil and iron matched with their failure to reach Siberia, Japan realized that they had to turn to the South Pacific to get the resources they required to fight against China...
What “oil” in the South Pacific? Again, NO. They needed to secure the water passage towards the Middle East, and for that they needed to fight the Americans and British on the way in the Western Pacific and Indian Ocean.
(Ibid., loc. 44)
Japan did not think that this would be an issue. They had been on the side of the allies in WWI, and this had put them in a favourable position. They wrongly believed that countries owed them something in return for their earlier support.
Then what about Italy, which was also on the Allied side during WWI? Again, wrong! The writer’s NEVER read an’y of the newspaper records from the 1930s to learn how the Empire of Japan was portrayed among the Western powers? Just google "cartoon japan invades 1930s," and anyone can find tons of them. Definitely NOT qualified to write a book in this topic.
(Ibid., locs. 44-55)
However, Japan did also have several issues with both Britain and the United States. Primarily, they were irritated by the actions of the United States in 1939 after they placed restrictions on both oil and metals as a direct result of their war with China. This only further fuelled the fire, and this was matched in 1940 when Britain began to close down certain routes in order to restrict the materials that could reach the Japanese. The year 1940 is regarded as a turning point in the involvement of Japan in WWII. After the British closed down the Burma Road supply route to China, the U.S. then sought to disrupt what it saw as the Japanese war machine by introducing new laws and restrictions on the export of certain materials just a few days later. These actions further forced the hand of the Japanese who responded in September 1940 in perhaps the only way that they felt they could respond—by invading French Indochina.
Yeah, the ABCD Line! Why self-contr'a-dict'ing? Feels a lot like this is a highschool homework patched with lines from several different books.
(Ibid., locs. 55-65)
When it comes to important moments in WWII, the attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor is perhaps one of the more memorable. It is important to note, however, that even though this attack did signal the start of the Pacific War, it was not the sole attack on December 8, 1941. Throughout the year, since the signing of the Tripartite Act, Japan had been working on a plan to dominate the South Pacific. They were still suffering from a chronic shortage of raw materials, and for them, the only solution was to capture vast swathes of both Southeast Asia as well as the Dutch East Indies. The Japanese military formulated a plan whereby they would attack the American, British, and Dutch interests simultaneously across a vast area to gain access to those materials...
1. The Dutch East Indies was in Southeast Asia! Only a tiny part'/ port'ion of the archipelago touched the South Pacific!
2. About the date (December 8th, 1941, not the known date of December 7th), read more since the author's right.
(Ibid., loc. 65)
The Pacific War began in earnest on the morning of December 8, 1941 when Japan attacked British Malaya and quickly made some progress with pushing inland, despite the British still having some troops stationed in the country. At the same time, the Japanese also attacked various other locations around Southeast Asia in a meticulously planned assault. In addition, they also attacked British interests in Hong Kong and Singapore with Thailand also a target.
Already said the British Malaya, but why “Singapore” sever'/ separ'ate-ly? The writer wanted to say Malaysia and Singapore? Singapore was part of the British Malaya. I wonder how the publisher (Hourly History) chooses its "author[æt'ie]s?"
(Ibid., loc. 75)
...President Roosevelt sent a peace appeal directly to Hirohito, although it is noted that he received no reply. We do know a number of details regarding the attack on Pearl Harbor like that it begam at dawn...
What's "begam?"
What, is this a first draft? Very disappointing. Revise and edit the work professionally to make it a real book and product on the mar'k-et!
(Ibid., loc. 75)
...Initially, the first targets were the battleships based in the harbor as well as the airfields used by the U.S. Air Force...
Nope! The US Air Force wasn’t even established till 1947, and the imperial Japanese government's first target was the US Navy aircraft carriers, but the Japanese pilots found none there: An intelligence failure.
(Ibid., loc. 75)
The attack was largely a success although it should be noted that they did miss aircraft carriers that were in port, and hitting those would have led to even further damage to the U.S. war effort...
Nah, they'd definitely've been spotted if they'd been in the port, and that would've ended the war right then and there. They were on the move somewhere in the Pacific. For example, USS Enterprise was sailing not really far from Hawaii at the time. "Midway" would never have happened if the US carriers had been spotted and destroyed there at "Pearl."
(Ibid., loc. 88)
...Wake Island surrendered to the Japanese on December...
“On” what date?
(Ibid., loc. 88)
...but the leader of the American forces, General MacCarthur, made a number of blatant errors...
Who's General MacCarther? Revise the work before publishing it!
(Ibid., loc. 98)
...they had attacked Singapore, British Malay...
Again...sigh. Unprofessional!
(Ibid., loc. 109)
...The country was regarded as a British stronghold in the region, and a number of people referred to it as being the Asian Gibraltar...
Very important point, and it is the same today: It is the People’s Re-peopl’/ -publ’ic of Chin’a, however, which wants to lay hands on the land and the water passage, thus the ongoing South China Sea crisis today.
(Ibid., loc. 121)
...If Japan believed that Australia would want no part in this war, then they would were mistaken.
Correction: ...If Japan believed that Australia would want no part in this war, then they were mistaken.
(Ibid., loc. 131)
...an attack on Columbo harbour in Ceylon where a total of 26 allied aircraft were destroyed in one single attack.
Correction: ...an attack on Columbo harbour in Ceylon, where a total of 26 allied “aircrafts” were destroyed in one single attack.
(Ibid., loc. 131)
Japan had surpassed themselves and were further surprised by the lack of fight being put up by the Allies...
Correction: The Japanese had “surprised” themselves and were further surprised by the lack of fighting being put up by the Allies...
(Ibid., loc. 142)
...they had certainly not put a lot of thought...
Correction: ...they had certainly not put a lot of thoughts...
(Ibid., loc. 199)
...on August 26th,Australian troops were sent to New Guinea to tackle the Japanese forces...
The missing space doesn't really tackle the flow of reading, but still the writer must revise the work like a professional.
(Ibid., loc. 199)
...By the the second half of 1942,
Like a first draft.
(Ibid., loc. 226)
...This formed a key part of a future plan held by the Allies who hoped to then island hop their way towards Japan...
Correction: ...This formed a key part of the Allies' future plan that would hop their way towards Japan by taking one strategic island after another from the enemy...
(Ibid., loc. 306)
...they were aware that some advances had resulted in both the Central and Southern Pacific pushes by the Allies were being connected...
Correction: ...they were aware that some advances in both the Central and Southern Pacific pushed by the Allies were being connected...
(Ibid., loc. 318)
...At the same time, the largest naval battle in the entire war was also taking place where torpedoes hit several Japanese ships, including IJN Taiho and IJN Shokaku...
(Ibid., loc. 341)
These smaller attacks were merely a prelude to the main event of October 1944: the Battle of Leyte Gulf. This battle would go on to become not only the biggest naval battle in the Pacific War, but the biggest naval battle in WWII. Aside from being the largest naval battle of the war, it was also the last time that battleships came into direct conflict with one another...
The largest battle and the biggest battle? Are they different? The book's got quality of a first draft.
(Ibid., loc. 330)
...but were aware that the losses Japan was incurring in Burma could led to completely recapturing the country...
Correctuon: ...but were aware that the losses Japan was incurring in Burma could "lead" to completely recapturing the country...
(Ibid., loc. 341)
October would prove to be yet another disastrous month for not only Japanese forces, but also the Japanese mainland. It began on October 11 when the U.S. conducted an air raid on Okinawa...
The author doesn't even know the four mainland islands of Japan? Who says "Okinawa," which was only annexed by Japan in 1879, has ever been any part of "mainland" Japan?
(Ibid., loc. 353)
...Finally in 1944, U.S. troops invaded parts of the Philippines in order to set into action their plans to reconquer the country.
Correction: ...Finally in 1944, U.S. troops invaded parts of the Philippines in order to set into action of their plans to reconquer the country.
(Ibid., loc. 374)
...the most disturbing action took place on March 27th when 279 B-29's firebombed vast areas of Tokyo...
Correction: ...the most disturbing action took place on March 27th when 279 B-29s firebombed vast areas of Tokyo...
(Ibid., loc. 406)
It could be argued that Japan overstretched itself too quickly and they then ran into problems with supplies as well as getting the raw materials that they wanted so desperately. Why did this happen? Perhaps due to a lack of planning or foresight into what the reaction would be for their actions although this is possibly due to a lack of understanding of global politics rather than anything else.
A great point for the con-clos'/ -clus'ion, but it is missing the wartime atrocities the Imperial Japanese forces imposed on innocent civilian peopl'/ popul'ations all over the Indo-Pacific region.
This is a 2016-edition that I’ve been storing for a long time, so there may be a new edition by now. If so, many of these errors found in my review might have been revised.
The 2016-vers'ion is a bit of a disappointment as a complete product on the market with its price tag on it as well as a complete work of a professional author and publisher.
(Kindle Edition, location 22)
...resulting in the dropping of the atomic bombs towards the end of the war, which killed tens of thousands of people.
Sounds like NOT a big deal. Tens of millions of Russians were killed during the same WWII, and even today already hundreds of thousands of Ukrainians (probably around the same number of casualties on the Russian side) have been killed in the recent Russo-Ukrainian War just in last one and half years.
The Battle of Somme during WWI, too, witnessed hundreds of thousands of KIAs just in that one single battle, not to mention the tens of thousands of "ancient" Roman KIAs in the single Battle of Cannae in 216 "Before the Chr'ist."
As far as I have learned, the two atomic bombs killed between 129,000 and 226,000 peopl'/ popul'ation (except those who would e-wind'/ -vent'ually lose their lives due to the exposure to nuclear radiation).
(Kindle Ed., loc. 22)
...there was a lot of internal trouble...
...troubles...
(Ibid., loc. 22)
...The country’s problems were further exacerbated when the United States entered the Great Depression as they were a main supplier of a number of goods...
Correction: ...The problems were further exacerbated when the United States entered the Great Depression as the country was a main supplier of many things vital for Japanese Empire at the time...
(Ibid., loc. 33)
As a result, Japan believed that many of its Asian neighbors would be in a position to help, although their way of tackling the problem was not the diplomatic route. This would ultimately lead to what became known as the Second Sino-Japanese War starting in 1937.
Correction: As a result, Japan started to lay eyes on its neighbors’ rich resources, and this would ultimately lead the country to invade Manchuria in 1931 followed by a full invasion of mainland China, also known as the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1937.
(Ibid., loc. 33)
War with their Neighbors.
A formatting issue: Some of these “subtitles” don't have periods lacking the bas'ic “coherence” in form’atting.
The same sort of issue's found with the Marines as well. There's no coherence with some spelled marines while the others spelled Marines. As a Marine myself, I'd say the "Marines" is correct.
(Ibid., loc. 33)
...The situation only continued to turn against Japan when they alienated the U/S. after attacking a U.S. gunboat.
What is the U/S.? Revise the work “before” it is published!
(Ibid., locs. 33-44)
Being in a desperate situation can lead to taking desperate actions, and that was the case with Japan. They knew they had to get their hands on certain resources, and they only had two options: either Siberia or the South Pacific.
No, it was the Middle East, therefore the Japanese had to confront the Western powers occupying South East Asia, which was the shortest water passage towards the Middle East from Northeast Asian waters under the Empire of Japan, thus the fam’ous 1940-ABCD Line against Japan at the time (also called the ABCD Encirclement: America — British Malay Peninsula — China — Dutch Indonesia).
Japan would invade the South Pacific way later while fighting the U.S. for the supremacy over the Pæx/ Pac’ific in attempt to cut the ways between the United States and Australia.
(Ibid., loc. 44)
First, they attempted to go to Siberia but lost at the Battle of Khalkhin in 1939. This forced their hand into the second option, which was the South Pacific, although what followed was another example of poor military decision making and not thinking through the potential consequences..
Why there are two periods? Again, revise the book before the peopl’/ publ’ic-at’ion!
And seriously: Does the writer really believe the Japanese decided to fight all the Western allies after a small defeat by the newly-established USSR? It decided to sail across half the Pacific and bomb the US Pacific Command because of that small failure deep in the con-tæn’/ -tin’ent?
The writer's logic doesn't make sense.
More study is needed to write a book in this specific top'ic, otherwise the book would only spread the already-serious Truth Decay among the innocent people.
And Tokyo did think hard about the consequences. The decision to wage an all-out war against the US and UK, despite the possible "devastating" consequences, was out of “desperation” with the UK-led ABCD Encirclement choking up the pass'æge for its most-needed oil import.
(Ibid., loc. 44)
Due to their desire to seek out oil and iron matched with their failure to reach Siberia, Japan realized that they had to turn to the South Pacific to get the resources they required to fight against China...
What “oil” in the South Pacific? Again, NO. They needed to secure the water passage towards the Middle East, and for that they needed to fight the Americans and British on the way in the Western Pacific and Indian Ocean.
(Ibid., loc. 44)
Japan did not think that this would be an issue. They had been on the side of the allies in WWI, and this had put them in a favourable position. They wrongly believed that countries owed them something in return for their earlier support.
Then what about Italy, which was also on the Allied side during WWI? Again, wrong! The writer’s NEVER read an’y of the newspaper records from the 1930s to learn how the Empire of Japan was portrayed among the Western powers? Just google "cartoon japan invades 1930s," and anyone can find tons of them. Definitely NOT qualified to write a book in this topic.
(Ibid., locs. 44-55)
However, Japan did also have several issues with both Britain and the United States. Primarily, they were irritated by the actions of the United States in 1939 after they placed restrictions on both oil and metals as a direct result of their war with China. This only further fuelled the fire, and this was matched in 1940 when Britain began to close down certain routes in order to restrict the materials that could reach the Japanese. The year 1940 is regarded as a turning point in the involvement of Japan in WWII. After the British closed down the Burma Road supply route to China, the U.S. then sought to disrupt what it saw as the Japanese war machine by introducing new laws and restrictions on the export of certain materials just a few days later. These actions further forced the hand of the Japanese who responded in September 1940 in perhaps the only way that they felt they could respond—by invading French Indochina.
Yeah, the ABCD Line! Why self-contr'a-dict'ing? Feels a lot like this is a highschool homework patched with lines from several different books.
(Ibid., locs. 55-65)
When it comes to important moments in WWII, the attack by the Japanese on Pearl Harbor is perhaps one of the more memorable. It is important to note, however, that even though this attack did signal the start of the Pacific War, it was not the sole attack on December 8, 1941. Throughout the year, since the signing of the Tripartite Act, Japan had been working on a plan to dominate the South Pacific. They were still suffering from a chronic shortage of raw materials, and for them, the only solution was to capture vast swathes of both Southeast Asia as well as the Dutch East Indies. The Japanese military formulated a plan whereby they would attack the American, British, and Dutch interests simultaneously across a vast area to gain access to those materials...
1. The Dutch East Indies was in Southeast Asia! Only a tiny part'/ port'ion of the archipelago touched the South Pacific!
2. About the date (December 8th, 1941, not the known date of December 7th), read more since the author's right.
(Ibid., loc. 65)
The Pacific War began in earnest on the morning of December 8, 1941 when Japan attacked British Malaya and quickly made some progress with pushing inland, despite the British still having some troops stationed in the country. At the same time, the Japanese also attacked various other locations around Southeast Asia in a meticulously planned assault. In addition, they also attacked British interests in Hong Kong and Singapore with Thailand also a target.
Already said the British Malaya, but why “Singapore” sever'/ separ'ate-ly? The writer wanted to say Malaysia and Singapore? Singapore was part of the British Malaya. I wonder how the publisher (Hourly History) chooses its "author[æt'ie]s?"
(Ibid., loc. 75)
...President Roosevelt sent a peace appeal directly to Hirohito, although it is noted that he received no reply. We do know a number of details regarding the attack on Pearl Harbor like that it begam at dawn...
What's "begam?"
What, is this a first draft? Very disappointing. Revise and edit the work professionally to make it a real book and product on the mar'k-et!
(Ibid., loc. 75)
...Initially, the first targets were the battleships based in the harbor as well as the airfields used by the U.S. Air Force...
Nope! The US Air Force wasn’t even established till 1947, and the imperial Japanese government's first target was the US Navy aircraft carriers, but the Japanese pilots found none there: An intelligence failure.
(Ibid., loc. 75)
The attack was largely a success although it should be noted that they did miss aircraft carriers that were in port, and hitting those would have led to even further damage to the U.S. war effort...
Nah, they'd definitely've been spotted if they'd been in the port, and that would've ended the war right then and there. They were on the move somewhere in the Pacific. For example, USS Enterprise was sailing not really far from Hawaii at the time. "Midway" would never have happened if the US carriers had been spotted and destroyed there at "Pearl."
(Ibid., loc. 88)
...Wake Island surrendered to the Japanese on December...
“On” what date?
(Ibid., loc. 88)
...but the leader of the American forces, General MacCarthur, made a number of blatant errors...
Who's General MacCarther? Revise the work before publishing it!
(Ibid., loc. 98)
...they had attacked Singapore, British Malay...
Again...sigh. Unprofessional!
(Ibid., loc. 109)
...The country was regarded as a British stronghold in the region, and a number of people referred to it as being the Asian Gibraltar...
Very important point, and it is the same today: It is the People’s Re-peopl’/ -publ’ic of Chin’a, however, which wants to lay hands on the land and the water passage, thus the ongoing South China Sea crisis today.
(Ibid., loc. 121)
...If Japan believed that Australia would want no part in this war, then they would were mistaken.
Correction: ...If Japan believed that Australia would want no part in this war, then they were mistaken.
(Ibid., loc. 131)
...an attack on Columbo harbour in Ceylon where a total of 26 allied aircraft were destroyed in one single attack.
Correction: ...an attack on Columbo harbour in Ceylon, where a total of 26 allied “aircrafts” were destroyed in one single attack.
(Ibid., loc. 131)
Japan had surpassed themselves and were further surprised by the lack of fight being put up by the Allies...
Correction: The Japanese had “surprised” themselves and were further surprised by the lack of fighting being put up by the Allies...
(Ibid., loc. 142)
...they had certainly not put a lot of thought...
Correction: ...they had certainly not put a lot of thoughts...
(Ibid., loc. 199)
...on August 26th,Australian troops were sent to New Guinea to tackle the Japanese forces...
The missing space doesn't really tackle the flow of reading, but still the writer must revise the work like a professional.
(Ibid., loc. 199)
...By the the second half of 1942,
Like a first draft.
(Ibid., loc. 226)
...This formed a key part of a future plan held by the Allies who hoped to then island hop their way towards Japan...
Correction: ...This formed a key part of the Allies' future plan that would hop their way towards Japan by taking one strategic island after another from the enemy...
(Ibid., loc. 306)
...they were aware that some advances had resulted in both the Central and Southern Pacific pushes by the Allies were being connected...
Correction: ...they were aware that some advances in both the Central and Southern Pacific pushed by the Allies were being connected...
(Ibid., loc. 318)
...At the same time, the largest naval battle in the entire war was also taking place where torpedoes hit several Japanese ships, including IJN Taiho and IJN Shokaku...
(Ibid., loc. 341)
These smaller attacks were merely a prelude to the main event of October 1944: the Battle of Leyte Gulf. This battle would go on to become not only the biggest naval battle in the Pacific War, but the biggest naval battle in WWII. Aside from being the largest naval battle of the war, it was also the last time that battleships came into direct conflict with one another...
The largest battle and the biggest battle? Are they different? The book's got quality of a first draft.
(Ibid., loc. 330)
...but were aware that the losses Japan was incurring in Burma could led to completely recapturing the country...
Correctuon: ...but were aware that the losses Japan was incurring in Burma could "lead" to completely recapturing the country...
(Ibid., loc. 341)
October would prove to be yet another disastrous month for not only Japanese forces, but also the Japanese mainland. It began on October 11 when the U.S. conducted an air raid on Okinawa...
The author doesn't even know the four mainland islands of Japan? Who says "Okinawa," which was only annexed by Japan in 1879, has ever been any part of "mainland" Japan?
(Ibid., loc. 353)
...Finally in 1944, U.S. troops invaded parts of the Philippines in order to set into action their plans to reconquer the country.
Correction: ...Finally in 1944, U.S. troops invaded parts of the Philippines in order to set into action of their plans to reconquer the country.
(Ibid., loc. 374)
...the most disturbing action took place on March 27th when 279 B-29's firebombed vast areas of Tokyo...
Correction: ...the most disturbing action took place on March 27th when 279 B-29s firebombed vast areas of Tokyo...
(Ibid., loc. 406)
It could be argued that Japan overstretched itself too quickly and they then ran into problems with supplies as well as getting the raw materials that they wanted so desperately. Why did this happen? Perhaps due to a lack of planning or foresight into what the reaction would be for their actions although this is possibly due to a lack of understanding of global politics rather than anything else.
A great point for the con-clos'/ -clus'ion, but it is missing the wartime atrocities the Imperial Japanese forces imposed on innocent civilian peopl'/ popul'ations all over the Indo-Pacific region.
September 16, 2016
World War II Japan: A different look at the war
When I first started reading this book, I figured that it would be a typical presentation of the war between Japan and the U.S. and her allies from 1942 to 1945. And all of this is covered well here. But the focus is shifted from most histories that we read here in America. Instead of focusing on our part of the war, and what we did in these years, this book focuses on Japan, and what she did. I read of Japanese generals who are completely unfamiliar to me, and got a better idea of how the Japanese people dealt, or did not deal with the war. This new focus kept the material new and interesting and gave me a slant on the war which was different. Many of the details are the same, but seeing them from this viewpoint keeps them fresh. Thanks for another great book in the hourly History series.
When I first started reading this book, I figured that it would be a typical presentation of the war between Japan and the U.S. and her allies from 1942 to 1945. And all of this is covered well here. But the focus is shifted from most histories that we read here in America. Instead of focusing on our part of the war, and what we did in these years, this book focuses on Japan, and what she did. I read of Japanese generals who are completely unfamiliar to me, and got a better idea of how the Japanese people dealt, or did not deal with the war. This new focus kept the material new and interesting and gave me a slant on the war which was different. Many of the details are the same, but seeing them from this viewpoint keeps them fresh. Thanks for another great book in the hourly History series.
April 28, 2016
Excellent synopsis
Although brief it does give an excellent overview of the pacific field of battle. It is clearly written and a wonderful stepping stone to readers who want to persue this further. Well done.
Although brief it does give an excellent overview of the pacific field of battle. It is clearly written and a wonderful stepping stone to readers who want to persue this further. Well done.
January 16, 2019
Informative
I found this book to be a helpful and detailed timeline of the Japanese side of WWII, namely, the different battles. It’s a quick read but covers quite a bit without going into excessive detail. Recommend!
I found this book to be a helpful and detailed timeline of the Japanese side of WWII, namely, the different battles. It’s a quick read but covers quite a bit without going into excessive detail. Recommend!
December 5, 2016
Wonderfully Written
I enjoyed this book it gave me some idea of what my family went through during this conflict.I would definitely recommend this
I enjoyed this book it gave me some idea of what my family went through during this conflict.I would definitely recommend this
June 19, 2021
Just ok
Enjoyed part of book however the editor did a bad job picking up simple mistakes. An example is misspelling Mac Arthur in and stating that the attack on Pearl Harbor occurred on the 8th (In all fairness he corrected this mistake on the next page).
The author also focused on some details that the addition of a single sentence or two could have improved understanding of the event. One example is the mention of the sinking of a ship where 900 sailors were killed. The sentence leads one to believe the event lead to a decision to drop the A-bomb. I believe he was referring to the Indianapolis which was returning home after delivery of the bomb.
I could go on but you decide.
Enjoyed part of book however the editor did a bad job picking up simple mistakes. An example is misspelling Mac Arthur in and stating that the attack on Pearl Harbor occurred on the 8th (In all fairness he corrected this mistake on the next page).
The author also focused on some details that the addition of a single sentence or two could have improved understanding of the event. One example is the mention of the sinking of a ship where 900 sailors were killed. The sentence leads one to believe the event lead to a decision to drop the A-bomb. I believe he was referring to the Indianapolis which was returning home after delivery of the bomb.
I could go on but you decide.
December 29, 2020
Many better books available
This book seemed to be written by a non-English speaker, which would normally be ok with me except for the disjointed laying out of "facts" that were simply not true; aircraft carriers missed being attacked that were in port @ Pearl? Chinese conterparts took the Marianas along with US forces? A quick read that does include CBI actions alongside the usual narrative of Island hopping that seems to be from a Japanese perspective although there are many, many better books to choose from.
This book seemed to be written by a non-English speaker, which would normally be ok with me except for the disjointed laying out of "facts" that were simply not true; aircraft carriers missed being attacked that were in port @ Pearl? Chinese conterparts took the Marianas along with US forces? A quick read that does include CBI actions alongside the usual narrative of Island hopping that seems to be from a Japanese perspective although there are many, many better books to choose from.
October 19, 2021
Very good presentation of the timeline of Japanese aggression in south-east Asia and the Pacific. Yes, the treatment is of the topic is skin deep, if that; but, to have the collected timeline of general cause and effect in one resource is priceless. If you want in depth detail, go elsewhere. If you want to understand the general progression of aggression, as well as its causes, this is your book.
November 9, 2021
Concise at to the point
Most people will not remember Pearl Harbor in another 10 years, because of 911. The new enemy is internal, no uniforms, great hackers, and no consciousness about killing civilians. The dropping of the bomb bought as 70 years of no world wars, but not we fight an invisible war through misinformation and sabotage.
Most people will not remember Pearl Harbor in another 10 years, because of 911. The new enemy is internal, no uniforms, great hackers, and no consciousness about killing civilians. The dropping of the bomb bought as 70 years of no world wars, but not we fight an invisible war through misinformation and sabotage.
June 7, 2021
High school journalism
Glossy simplification. Lightly dismissive of Coral Sea and Midway. What of the Bataan death march, rape of Nanking, medical atrocities on civilians and military prisoners etc.. If this was a hard cover book I'd throw it in the trash.
Glossy simplification. Lightly dismissive of Coral Sea and Midway. What of the Bataan death march, rape of Nanking, medical atrocities on civilians and military prisoners etc.. If this was a hard cover book I'd throw it in the trash.
June 13, 2021
Too General
This book was written at then 50,000 foot level and is just a very general overview. It is a good introductory book for someone just learning about the Pacific portion of World War Two.
This book was written at then 50,000 foot level and is just a very general overview. It is a good introductory book for someone just learning about the Pacific portion of World War Two.
dnf
September 13, 2022Hourly History tries to keep years and events in only 40 or so pages. I was fine with this format, but with this book- Yikes! It was so choppy i stopped after less than 10 minutes.
Read only if you need to, if you can.
Read only if you need to, if you can.
November 25, 2022
Informative
I'm always interested in WWII history and read most WWII history books and this one is one of the best, goes into the History of what the Japanese plan of action was and went into a lot of detail.
I'm always interested in WWII history and read most WWII history books and this one is one of the best, goes into the History of what the Japanese plan of action was and went into a lot of detail.
May 22, 2020
It shows a clear explanation about how that happened. I always learn with these excellent books of Amazon; Thank you !!
May 31, 2020
Very informative, I would have liked a little more of an objective view but it wasn’t unbearable. It was a good book I just tend to be very picky with my ratings.
October 2, 2020
Info
Too condensed, there are many books out there about the Pacfic during WWII, This one actually seemed to side with the Japanese.
Too condensed, there are many books out there about the Pacfic during WWII, This one actually seemed to side with the Japanese.
October 11, 2021
I only knew pieces of this story, and it’s kind of awful.
January 14, 2022
Good, brief summary of Japan's military in the Second World War. I learned some new information particularly about the war in Burma and Southeast Asia.
Very quick read as it was designed to be.
Very quick read as it was designed to be.
August 13, 2022
Great and fast read
The book is very interesting and a good insight to the war. I learned a few things about the Pacific War.
The book is very interesting and a good insight to the war. I learned a few things about the Pacific War.
December 20, 2022
Many errors in such a short book. According to the book IJN Shokaku was sunk in both the battle of the Eastern Solomons and Phillipine Sea.
January 26, 2023
World War 2 Japan
I thought the book was well written and gave a overall time line of the Pacific War in a precis manner. It pointed out the main phases of the war, a good introduction and overview of the Pacific War
I thought the book was well written and gave a overall time line of the Pacific War in a precis manner. It pointed out the main phases of the war, a good introduction and overview of the Pacific War
Displaying 1 - 21 of 21 reviews