Khalkhin-Gol: The Battle that shaped WW2

[psi29a]

http://www.siberianlight.net/2008/01/21 ... -nomonhan/

In August 1939, just weeks before Hitler invaded Poland, the Soviet Union and Japan fought a massive tank battle on the Mongolian border - the largest the world had ever seen.

Under the then unknown Georgy Zhukov, the Soviets won a crushing victory at the batte of Khalkhin-Gol (known in Japan as the Nomonhan Incident). Defeat persuaded the Japanese to expand into the Pacific, where they saw the United States as a weaker opponent than the Soviet Union. If the Japanese had not lost at Khalkhin Gol, they may never have attacked Pearl Harbor.

The Japanese decision to expand southwards also meant that the Soviet Eastern flank was secured for the duration of the war. Instead of having to fight on two fronts, the Soviets could mass their troops - under the newly promoted General Zhukov - against the threat of Nazi Germany in the West.

In terms of its strategic impact, the battle of Khalkhin Gol was one of the most decisive battles of the Second World War, but no-one has ever heard of it. Why?

This was a great article, sans a few spelling and grammatical mistakes. I really had no idea bout this part of World War 2. It will be greatly appreciated by those who follow history, specifically Japanese history.

[MrFelony]

wow that's pretty cool.

[halfnhalf]

the russians dont kiss and tell, and the japanese obviously didnt play risk. Asia is too hard to take over, unless you were very good at mind fucking with people.


also its like Dresden, everyone keeps on thinking about how destructive it was for the US to drop two atom bombs, but no matter what the Bombing of Dresden has been the worst in causalties.

[The Prince]

the russians dont kiss and tell, and the japanese obviously didnt play risk. Asia is too hard to take over, unless you were very good at mind fucking with people.


also its like Dresden, everyone keeps on thinking about how destructive it was for the US to drop two atom bombs, but no matter what the Bombing of Dresden has been the worst in causalties.

Also the firebombing of Tokyo during the days leading up to an anticipated full ground campaign (invasion) of the Japanese mainland resulted in Atomic Bomb mass casualty-type numbers as well. Though we all know, a full on invasion (Normandy type scenario), was conveniently avoided by the US going the atomic route.

But H.H is right in that the bombing campaign of Dresden resulted in more casualties than that of Hiroshima and/or Nagasaki (not sure both in total though). Although the remaining people of Dresden and the immediate viscinity, didn't have to worry about the aftermath of Nuclear Fallout.

A little note on the side, if you visit historical parts of Hiroshima where walls of building destroyed in the explosion are preserved, you may see still see the shadows imprinted on the wall of those vaporized during the initial blast.

[psi29a]

I remember having to do a research paper on this for Western Civ 2.

Given all the information, I would have been comfortable dropping the atomic bomb over that of a full mainland invasion. The numbers are staggering. Going the atomic route ultimately saved lives. Though it would be the catalyst for things to come later, but that is another point for another thread.

[Buzkashi]

I once read, in western civ, that there was actually alot of talks of surrender by the japanese which is contrary to popular belief. The thing was that the U.S wanted an unconditional surrender and the Japanese wanted to keep there emperor. Since negotiations broke down at that point we decided to use the bomb.

[The Prince]

I once read, in western civ, that there was actually alot of talks of surrender by the japanese which is contrary to popular belief. The thing was that the U.S wanted an unconditional surrender and the Japanese wanted to keep there emperor. Since negotiations broke down at that point we decided to use the bomb.

This is all news to me.

My father always told me that though for Japan losing the war was inevitable, the Japanese Army was committed to holding out to the bitter end and had prepared itself (hunkered down) for an anticipated US invasion. Even the citizens were re-signed to the possibility and were still resilient in their Nationalist loyalty to the country and/or Emperor (whatever), thanks to a powerful propaganda campaign. Where the citizenry thought that Japan still had the upper-hand.

Though the Japanese Navy at that point, which was exhausted, may have thought differently of the situation. Considering Yamamato (who was dead at that point) opposed going to war with the US from the beginning, and headed a Navy that was at complete odds with the Japanese Army and its leadership throughout the war. I assume if there was ever talk of surrender it would have had come at their end.....not from the Emperor nor the Commanding Army.

But once again, from all accounts that I've heard, it had to have had taken something as extraordinary as an atomic bomb over a major city for the leadership to have surrendered at that time. And like psi suggested, even many Japanese believe to this day, that if the US hadn't bombed Hiroshima (as horrible as it was), many more Japanese lives would have been lost in the long run....let alone American soldiers. I didn't say Nagasaki because I'm not sure the Emperor would not have eventually surrendered without the second bomb, though it certainly haistened the decision.