Troops land on Iwo Jima for 65th Anniversary

[Z77 3]

Kind of hard to believe that the island has been mostly untouched since the war... 

US Marines land on Iwo Jima to mark anniversary

AP – U.S. Marines salute the flags on Iwo To, Japan, on Tuesday, March 2, 2010. Hundreds of Marines landed …

By ERIC TALMADGE, Associated Press Writer 

– 

1 hr 59 mins ago

IWO TO, Japan – Hundreds of U.S. Marines landed on the remote island of Iwo Jima on Tuesday to prepare for the 65th anniversary of one of 

World War II

's bloodiest and most iconic battles.

The Marines flew in trucks, water and food from Washington to support Wednesday's commemorations of the 1945 battle that was a turning point in the 

Pacific theater

. It claimed 6,821 American and 21,570 Japanese lives in 36 days of intense fighting. A 

drill team

 also arrived on the island.

The commemoration was to be attended by about 1,000 people, including Marine Corps commandant Gen. 

James Conway

, members of Japan's parliament and representatives of the Iwo Jima survivors' association.

Only about two dozen American veterans of the battle are expected to attend the "reunion of honor" ceremony because few of the survivors — now in their 80s and 90s — are able to make the trip.

It was not known if any of the fewer than 1,000 Japanese who survived the battle would be able to attend.

Inhabited only by about 300 Japanese troops, Iwo Jima, a tiny island the size of 

Manhattan

, is a maze of tunnels, caves and dense, scraggly underbrush. It is believed to be covered with too much unexploded ordnance left over from the battle to be developed, and has been largely untouched since the war.

It is, instead, an open tomb.

Though dozens of remains are recovered every year, about 12,000 Japanese are still classified as 

missing in action

 and presumed killed on the island, along with 218 Americans.

The island formally reverted to its old name of "Iwo To" in 2006. Both "to" and "jima" mean island, but the name of "Iwo Jima" carries the stigma of the treacherous battle and subsequent two decades of occupation.

The Marines who arrived Tuesday from the 3rd 

Marine Expeditionary Force

 on the island of 

Okinawa

, many of whom have been to battle either in 

Iraq

 or 

Afghanistan

, said they were visiting hallowed ground.

"I can't imagine fighting in this kind of terrain," said Cpl. Daniel Flynn, 24, of Mount Airy, North Carolina. "I fought in Afghanistan, but that was in open desert. I probably would not have had the same experience here had I not been to Afghanistan."

Joined by Japanese troops and U.S. Navy sailors, many of the Marines trekked down to the beach where the invasion of the island began on Feb. 19, 1945, and filled bottles with its famous black volcanic sand. Others jogged to the top of Mount Suribachi, where the U.S. flag was raised on Feb. 23 — an image captured by 

AP photographer Joe Rosenthal

 that became one of the most enduring ever taken of war.

Iwo Jima was declared secured on March 26, 1945. 

Japan

 surrendered in August of that year.

 

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

It is sad but true that unless someone does something to call attention to history, it becomes forgotten.  How many people these days remember why there is a great monument to peace standing on a battlefield at Ypes, France?

When the going gets tough and you can't get Canadians, send in the U.S. Marines.

[Larks2242 251]

Originally posted by: N_O_Body

When the going gets tough and you can't get Canadians, send in the U.S. Marines.

quote>

Are you saying that the U.S. Marines are not as good as Canadians?

[sneakeypete 16]

It might be wise not to make this into a "your country's military is worse than our countries military" discussion. it'll only end in tears (or rage). Besides every military deserves equal praise in WW2. Most were just normal people thrust into a bloody slaughterhouse.

Maybe we should just focus on the fact that a rather large number of peolpe died for what was effectivly a rock.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Originally posted by: Larks2242

Originally posted by: N_O_Body

When the going gets tough and you can't get Canadians, send in the U.S. Marines.

quote>

Are you saying that the U.S. Marines are not as good as Canadians?quote>

Considering the combat record, yes.  Your PR is better and I have a great uncle who was a U.S. Marine.

I believe that Canadian troops do a better job when the going gets tough.  Our guys spend a lot of time

on the pointy end  for example;  Battle of Vimy Ridge; Juno Beach; Cyprus; former Yugoslavian civil war; Afghanistan.

For a small country, we seem to be the one that NATO and the U.N. want before they want cannon fodder.

[sixers33 3]

In the Pacific war with US/Australia/Britain vs Japan it's fair to say the Americans did a very good job, especially against Japanese forces who would kill themselves if they were killing their enemy in the process, they were insane fighters.

In saying that, Japan would have taken Australia if it wasn't for the U.S. and i don't believe Canada could have stood up to that kind of level of war at that point in time of history.

If you're talking specifically troops vs troops now, it's not ridiculous to say that Canadian troops are successful and maybe better than Marines.

[CHR 2]

Originally posted by: sixers33

In saying that, Japan would have taken Australia if it wasn't for the U.S. and i don't believe Canada could have stood up to that kind of level of war at that point in time of history.quote>

The Japanese never really had any plans to invade Australia, it was mainly propaganda to get Australians behind the war effort. They were already quite stretched in terms of troops and supply lines. To occupy all of Australia would require a huge number of troops (owing to its size). If they were to invade only part of Australia, it would have to be the in the northern part, which provided little advantage to the war effort, and would be vulnerable to counter attack (there are no natural barriers to stop at, such as getting to the end of an island).

[sneakeypete 16]

CHR's got it right. I'm sure the Japanese would have liked to invade Australia, however, as it was, they didn't have anywhere near the resources at the time in the 40's to invade Australia. They were pretty content with just trying to occupy important air and naval bases to the NE of Australia to cut us off from the USA and effectivly put us out of an offensive war. And heck, they almost did. If they'd won the battle of Milne bay things could have been dramatically different, as the Japanese would have been able to intercept convoys going to and from Australia. (or try to. they did kind of get half of their fleet destroyed at that point, so its even arguable that their stratergy of cutting us off would have worked).

[sixers33 3]

Originally posted by: CHR

Originally posted by: sixers33

In saying that, Japan would have taken Australia if it wasn't for the U.S. and i don't believe Canada could have stood up to that kind of level of war at that point in time of history.quote>

The Japanese never really had any plans to invade Australia, it was mainly propaganda to get Australians behind the war effort. They were already quite stretched in terms of troops and supply lines. To occupy all of Australia would require a huge number of troops (owing to its size). If they were to invade only part of Australia, it would have to be the in the northern part, which provided little advantage to the war effort, and would be vulnerable to counter attack (there are no natural barriers to stop at, such as getting to the end of an island).

quote>

1. Japan didn't have immediate plans to invade

2. Japan focused on securing islands nearby and around Australia as to have a suitable base to potentially attack and invade (which they wanted for living space and resources)

3. If it wasn't for the USA, Japan would have eventually invaded Australia, no doubt about it. 

4. Japan landed some troops in Australian territory, and made several attacks

5. If Japan would have attacked Australia without Americas help to defend, we would have been easily taken over, alot of our troops were in Europe and just returning, and we have a far inferior force. Just days prior to USAs arrival, it was feared that Australia was doomed, to the point where they began setting up the sabotaging of bridges and other key resources.

[Larks2242 251]

Of course Japan and Germany would have tried to control the entire world.

[astronelson 339]

We have a thread for the role of various countries in World War 2... it's called The Role of Various Countries in World War II.

Please stay on the topic at hand, please.

On the topic at hand, it was a bloody effort that cost too many lives on both sides. The fact bodies are still being found attests to this. May we never have to fight with such force and so much resulting loss of life ever again.

[A Nonny Moose 8,261]

Well, returning to our muttons, I just saw a video essay on the use of war dogs by the U.S. Marines in the Pacific.  Very moving, and a great tribute to man's best friend.

There can be no doubt that the Marine Corps of the United States of America performed a valiant and bloody service in the cause of freedom.  I agree it is beyond conscience for any such sacrifice be asked of anyone again.  A whole generation of young men were lost or damaged beyond belief.