Become a channel member: th-cam.com/channels/MmaBzfCCwZ2KqaBJjkj0fw.htmljoin or patron: www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals to watch exclusive videos, get early access to all videos, learn our schedule, join our private discord and much more! You can donate through Paypal paypal.me/kingsandgenerals as well.
Great video again. Don't forget the other fronts even if only an overview of a minute or so about what happened there for month period. Nth Pacific, Burma, China and both navies submarine war etc
There is NO honor in killing the people! If you don't think so, then there is No difference between you and an animal! Make a video about genocides and war crimes committed by arabs in Greater IRAN!
Only in the last couple of months did my dad tell me some stories of his battles in Iwo Jima, New Guinea, and other battles that he did not detail. He got malaria and has only said that the conditions were horrendous and that he spent a lot of time in the swamps. My dad is 101 years old.
My father died in 2003. In 1999 I offered to take him back to Peleliu, he refused. I can't repeat what he said, but he never wanted to see that place again.
The fact that the Aussies took Gona's machine gun defences under their OWN artillery fire speaks about them as finest warriors there are. It is very unfortunate that these quality soldiers were prior used by unsound strategists to push through Kokoda into north New Guinea while to any intelligent eye this is undoable without having sea control due to logistic horror of supply through one single jungle mountain path. Luckily the Japs didn't learn from that mistake and payed their own price fully on their similar counteroffensive. Neither could have made it in a million years as planned. Also later, when in front of Buna and Gona, again the price was payed through frontal attacks ordered by a mad "I shall return" cowboy.
@@z000ey Marines were garrison unit and had secure the perimeter for last 3 months, GIs were the attack unit to get the IJA off Guadalcanal starting from late December
I'm old enough to remember when the history channel was all about really good history programs. It was my favorite channel. I also remember when the Ancient Aliens thing took hold and well... The rest is history.
@@mrgeorgematthew yes same. I remember when i first started watching it was mainly real history programs then over time it became ancient aliens pawn stars and swamp people lol
@@65stang98 First history. Than there was that strange period of time of super early computer graphics and even rome total war being used to show battles. Than it was Hitler. Than it was Hitler conspiracy happy hour. Than Occult Hitler. Than Aliens. Than Hitler with aliens.
Apart from all the well-deserved kudos you get, K&G, one thing I want to highlight that you do well is help frame the sheer scale and intensity of this theater. I've been sitting on the edge of my chair as I watch each and every video you put out in this series, and it feels like we've only scratched the surface of the many battles fought in the Pacific.
If the 39th didn't manage to crack the Gona defenders on 8th December, any further effort to take Gona would have to be abandoned. Just like at Isurava, it was up to the 39th. But what really cracked the Japanese bunkers were the fact that the Australian 25 pounders were now using delayed action fuses. Which had a drastic effect on the Japanese bunkers. After the Australians had cleared out Gona, they counted just 16 prisoners, 10 of whom were wounded. The landscape around Gona had been turned into something that looked like a timetravel back to the Great War. An Australian reporter with the 21st Brigade recorded the scene at Gona: Rotting bodies, sometimes weeks old, formed part of the fortifications. The living fired over the bodies of the dead, slept side by side with them. In one trench there was a Japanese who had not been able to stand the strain. His rifle still pointed at his head, his big toe on the trigger, and the top of his head was blown off.... Everwhere, pervading everything, was the stench of putrescent flesh. The Australian found 638 Japanese bodies in this scene of horror. Gona has finally fallen.
That issue with the fuses was a never ending issue. The failed prelim shelling and bombing on Iwo Jima was a disgrace. It was obvious the Japs were underground, but most of the munitions used were basic HE. They looked good exploding in the volcanic sand, but did nothing the the Japs or their defenses. On Iwo we took more casualties than the Japs.
The reason for the delayed fuses were for the shells to bury themselves deeper in the mud before detonating and so make them less effective. This reduced Australian casualties as they were attacking the Japanese in close quarter combat before the bombardment had finished.
@@Sendu7 Those fuses gave the shell enough time to penetrate about 1 meter (3 feet) into the soil. And given the layout of the land it turned out to be quite effective.
@@wolfu597 There were effective, especially at keeping the Japanese in their bunkers while allowing Australian soldiers to advance earlier than expected. It was a new tactic that took advantage of the deep swamp mud and the habit of the defenders of waiting for the bombardment to finish before returning to their machine gun positions. It was a desperate tactic that seemed to work.
@@Sendu7 Interesting. Most times the delay was to allow shell to penetrate dugin defenses, trenches and caves. They needed them at Iwo Jima, but were seldom fired or dropped. That tragic flaw was also a factor in Vietnam
Gen. Eichelberger was the man. Leading from the front is an exceptional leadership quality as it is, but Eichelberger took it a step further by picking up a rifle and fighting alongside the enlisted men. Rarely in any army would a Corps commander be expected or even permitted to act so carelessly, but it was needed for US troops in New Guinea at the time and it paid off.
Absolutely intense fighting, and well done by the Australians. Their strength and tenacity set the pulse for further battles in the war. My hats off to them.
As stated the ones that escaped from Gona were mostly the Takasago Volunteers. Regardless of the war, you have to respect the valiant effort of 1 thousand men holding out for over 3 weeks against 4 to 1+ odds with limited equipment and the sheer pounding that they took.
The National Guard Divisions weren't the best but it's what the US had in abundance at this point. Most eventually became excellent formations but the road was a long one for sure.
they were sent because Macarthur didn't have any ground troops to command that were American, and he felt that the veteran Australian troops were not up to the task.
The troops did well, considering the enemy they fought, the command they had and the conditions they endured. A lot of new units crack under that sort of pressure.
I want to thank all those who bitched about one of the channel's sponsors. As a result of your complaints, we are greatly reduced in videos each week. I am sure all of you immediately joined the channel with monetary contributions. Please increase your contributions, so those of us who can't afford to contribute can again enjoy the greatest history channel on u-tube. To the channel team. I am 80 years old, taking care of a disabled wife. Our only income is my Social Security, which only covers our basic needs of food, housing and heat. I understand why you have had to cut production. I applaud you for paying your staff a livable wage. Thank you for putting out such an excellent product. I hope you are not offended by my wishing your team a Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year.
@@robc1342 I don't consider it any more of a scam than most ads. You read into the ad more than was actually said. All advertisement is a scam of some sort. I am not motivated to buy things by video ads. If you believe everything said in an ad, you are being taken for a ride. The ad delivered exactly what it promised. You got a nice certificate and could call yourself Lord whomever on your social media and your credit card. Of course, you can legally call yourself anything you want as long as it's not to commit fraud. It didn't say you use it on a passport or drivers license, but you probably thought it did. Will this buisness be gone tomorrow? Probably along with most fads. I'm assuming your were already donated to the channel, and have increased your donation to cover the loss in revenue.
As a European, one is familiar with the battles of Stalingrad, Kursk or El-Alamein. I only found out about Gona through K&G. An educational gap that I was able to close thanks to you
Nice to see an historian doing his research, thanks Kings. That line by that actor in the mini series The Pacific makes us look like fools "Your army is still chasing Rommel around in the desert" No, other Australian forces were beating the Japanese up in New Guinea, at Milne Bay and Kokoda, the first land defeat of the Japanese!??? WTF?
After succeeding Waldron as the commander of the 32nd Division, Byers himself was wounded on December 16 and became the third American General to be shot at Buna, Brigadier General Hanford MacNider having been shot earlier in the fighting. Of the three, none was more than 75 yards from Japanese lines when wounded. Eichelberger then assumed personal command of the division as he was the only general left in action. He wore his three silver stars while at the front throughout the campaign despite the risk of being targeted by Japanese snipers because he wanted his troops to know their commander was present. 32nd Infantry Division was in combat for 654 days, more than any other United States Army unit during World War II, with 7,268 casualties and eleven of its men were awarded the Medal of Honor. Both Waldron and Byers were awarded the Distinguished Service Cross after Buna, which, Eichelberger would later write, "obviously was a different kind of battle."
This channel is the ultimate proof that students at school love to learn about the history but schools don't know the right way to teach the kids. Literally it would be so cool if you were my history teacher 🙏🙏🙏
I saw the sanitized history textbooks and a vast supply of used historical texts and history books by unapproved authors and dropped history in high school. Never regretted it
as a career history teacher... this is NOT what is needed. It is difficult to follow movements of units spoken at high speed by a foreign voice. It is Just NOT classroom material. No personal engagement, Maps for obsessive compulsives.
I am going to be bold enough to suggest that you might rather have been in my class. Go to the meaning more ... some of these dox will go on about the diameter of lug nuts. I engaged students ability to empathize and not to watch little icons move on a map,
@@donofon101 While I agree with you students can't really keep up with units movements and it's unnecessary for them to do so to learn history. But you failed to recognize the main argument is that school teachings are too dry for students to have any interest in history. For foreign accent issue, school can fund some people to make their own documentaries with animation like this video but narrated with local voices and focus on more overview of the events instead of deep dives into battles (you can still repurpose them into special lessons to excite students). Maps can be changed to overview map with arrows for event directions. For personal engagement, it's to make students feels excited, emerged in the events to learn them; not boring lectures with repetitive questions just to make them fall asleep
I appreciate learning about all these various battles. In grade school, my teacher only talked about the battles of Iwa Jima, Tara, and Okinawa, when she covered WWII.
I feel like that is rather standard in terms of a grade school education. They can't teach every event of the war. Good on you for continuing to learn.
MacArthur and his direct subordinates: "It's a failure of the commanders in the field; they're just not aggressive enough!" It amazes me that after getting his ass handed to him in the Philippines, MacArthur STILL refuses to consider that the root of the problem is that the Japanese are actually competent soldiers and enjoy defensive positions too strong for worn-out light infantry backed by occasional (but not properly coordinated) artillery or air support is just plain insufficient to take Buna/Gona by direct assault without heavy losses and the passing of time.
This was a problem all over the Pacific and old Doug was not the only one afflicted with this nor was the US the only country with this problem. The Japanese were always underestimated early in the war thankfully after time and a lot of casualties they learned their belated lesson. Thank god the navy did not suffer this affliction for very long they adapted much quicker and accepted that the Japanese were highly capable and won some battles that were on paper in Japans favor.
I studied the Buna / Gona campaigns including the Kokoda battles as an officer Cadet at OCS Portsea, Victoria, australia - would have loved to have had this resource - alas in 1972 twas a bit early...
Keep up the good work, K&G! I never miss a week without watching your content on various history topics, even the fringe ones that give my country a passing mention which are not usually mentioned in history classes. Thanks for giving these new perspectives!
Brilliant movie as ever! So impressive to me there was only one narrated Japanese individual who didn't get his unit shattered, and other forces were also reduced to dust to be smashed, cut down, or cleaned out. 2yrs and a little til cities'd be leveled.
3:28 the universal carrier Or more popular known as bren guns carriers My great grandad was a driver for one in the north Africa, Sicily, Italy and Normandy campaigns
*Whew* Thought I missed you guys this week. Sorry that TH-cam is making life harder for you and your great documentary videos. At this point - it's one year (for the U.S. and Pearl Harbor) and the start of the World War - and at this point it is still up in the air as to who will win.
My grandpa was 126th c company. While watching this, it makes me glad I was just in the desert for most of my stay in Afghanistan. Jungle Warfare sounds like hell!
You have an accent that implies English is not your first language (although it probably is), the beginning of each word is sharp and enunciated, almost like German and the rest of the word kind of spills out after. The scripts are masterfully written, sometimes I lose track of the battles and just listen to those sweet sentences. I love it, it makes for really good videos
This is a battle that truly deserves a new book written about it. What it deserves is someone who has read all the available material and put together what actually happened. The story told here is straight from the Australian perspective from around the time it happened--and never much changed thereafter. Never have I come across a book that puts the whole battle into context including an honest look at the American side of the events that transpired. In order to understand the narrative of this documentary, and many recounted tales that have accompanied it, you must first go back to the bad blood that was generated between the US and Australians when Gen. MacArthur told Australian commander Blamey that he didn't think that the Australian militia forces (not the regular professional Australian soldiers) were up to the task of stopping the Japanese coming overland toward Port Morsby. Although he was probably right, in that they had repeatedly been outflanked by the Japanese forcing numerous retreats, the Australian command let word get out to the public that MacArthur had said this and from there on out, the Australians were out to paint the US forces as being as inept as possible. The end of this story makes for a nice little tale of the Australians proving their fighting man's fortitude, bravery and acumen and leaves the US forces as inept, unmotivated and even cowardly. I've read many, many books and official military reports on this battle on both the allied's sides and what I can tell you is that the information you get from this mainstream perspective is selective at best. There are so many mitigating circumstances never told, so much of the narative based on official Australian battle histories, which today read more like propaganda, that what actually happened and the course of the battle itself has never been honestly and thoroughly told. It's obvious when reading the official Australian military's history of the battle that the purpose was not for learning but as a means to idealize the Australian fighting man. The US versions look at the hard facts of the battle--including the mistakes made in order to make sure they didn't happen again. Some--but far from all--of the mitigating conditions of the US forces in this battle: An honest appraisal would take into account that the US forces had very little training prior to the battle in that they were forced to do nothing but build forwarding camps right up to the eve of their deployment into the battle. Not just was there very little training but there was zero jungle training. The soldiers who had the best chance of making an impact on the front lines were wasted by jungle disease practically from the moment the attack began due to unexpected delays and having to move long distances through the jungle to arrive at the scene. One third of the force that was supposed to be fighting in Buna ended up being sent into the Australian zone in order to help there. Another ninth were sent on a hell-trip over the mountains that devastated their battalion. Even though barely alive when they finally reached the battle front, this battalion of barely walking survivors were fed right into the battle because there was no one left fit to fight. One could claim that the Australians were fighting under the same conditions, but they weren't. The Americans were forced to live and attack through waterlogged swamps in order to engage extremely well positioned and prepared defenses that happened to be on high, dry ground. Imagine doing that while running a fever upwards of 104 degrees, which most of the US forces left standing were suffering from due to malaria. And, yes, the Australians did get sick like the Americans but what's never mentioned is that they were regularly being replaced with fresh troops while the US soldiers had none available. The Americans were fighting and subject to the depravations of the jungle from the very beginning of the fight. If I recall correctly, it was estimated during the battle that three weeks of just living in these disease-ridden swamps was enough to reduce a fighting force by half. The American forces were so reduced that any idea of measuring the actual number of troops attacking in a battalion, company or platoon ended up being a tiny fraction of those who actually engaged. The bulk of Japanese reinforcements happened to arrive on scene at extremely inopportune times with the vast bulk of these fresh forces fed into the American sector. The US forces were up against fighting positions that rivaled anything during World War One, but had none of the equipment that even those armies had. The artillery they had was of too low calibre and of insufficient quantity to have any effect on the dug-in Japanese and aircraft did more harm than good due to a tree canopy that kept the air force nullified. The technology that was counted on to end trench warfare--tanks especially--was only available at the very end of the battle when it was deployed by the Australians, who then ended up taking credit for the win. Without any of the tools needed to defeat trenches, the US forces had to approach them in ways that not even those who fought in WWI would even consider. I better stop here or I'll end up writing the book myself. But I hope you get the idea. Since the concurrent Guadalcanal campaign was so much at the forefront of the national consciousness at the time and the Buna-Gona battle sidelined by the US media, Americans have rarely studied this battle and the views and those US soldiers who actually fought there are rarely read in the few books that cover the American perspective. Whether or not a book is ever written from this wholistic point of view is perhaps doubtful since If someone were to write the US perspective, I would expect it to reach a very small market, whereas the battle of Buna-Gona I assume will always have a strong market in Australia due to the accepted nationalistic tied-with-a-bow narrative.
You make some valid points. However, the 39th and 53rd Australian militia that were the first troops sent up the Kokoda Track to engage the enemy were untrained, like the US 32nd. They had spent months in Port Moresby unloading ships and building roads. They were given no training, they had no adequate protection so most were suffering from malaria, average age 18 or 19 city kids, some of the 53rd were even shanghaied from the streets of Sydney so they were very reluctant and disgruntled. Most had to "walk" the Track, 10 days of exhausting climbling, scrambling, while carrying a 60lb pack and rifle. They had one WW1 Lewis Gun, no entrenching tools, no mortars, no jungle clothing so their desert uniforms stood out against the green jungle. The 39th did have good leadership, ex WW1 veterans, so too the 53rd, but many of them were unfortunatly killed. Rifles and Brens , Thompsons, bayonets and grenades was all they had. The Japs had light and heavy machine guns, wore jungle greens, and had portable mountain artillery, plus experienced troops who had been fighting in China. So the Australians, initially, were as untrained as their equivalent US 32nd. Division. They delayed the Japanese advance to Port Moresby by 3 weeks, the Japs had given themselves 14 days to get to Moresby. When they were joined by the AIF they were on the verge of being wiped out where they had planned to make their final stand at Isurava, about half way to Morseby. They continued to fight even when they were ordered to go to the rear. Yet they were called cowards by Blamey and Macarthur who had no idea of the conditions facing the troops in New Guinea. In 1974 I met a US veteran who was at Buna he told me, in front of his nephew who then was serving in the US Army; "We did not know how to use our weapons, the Aussies had to show us," and, "We were too scared to go into the jungle and swamps, the Australians had to go in before us."
@@blueycarlton The fact that the Australian militia were untrained, or at least under-trained to fight professional, experienced Japanese soldiers is uncontested. That's why in my comment I pointed out that these were militia forces, not professional Australian soldiers. Any unfair accusations that they performed inadequately were silenced decades ago. I don't know when Blamey's "Running Rabbits" speech began to be contested, maybe you do, but possibly during the war itself. What I'm referring to here--80 years later--is the misconceptions that continue concerning the US Army's performance during the battle and which are not even recognized today as evidenced by this very video. (BTW I don't recall MacArthur ever saying the the militia were cowards--that was implied by Blamey. MacArthur just asserted that they weren't--as I recall in his words--"up to the job" of stopping the Japanese advance.) How much the Australian militia was able to hold back the Japanese advance above and beyond what would reasonably be expected of them cannot be judged by the Japanese perception of how long it would take them to get over the Owen Stanleys in that their intelligence on the condition of the track was next to nothing when they started out. Assuming you've read about the battle, you know from the Australians themselves just how difficult that path over the mountains was. The Japanese were quickly forced to ditch anything motorized they counted on to get them through and shortly thereafter, even the bicycles they had effectively used before were unceremoniously tossed off the track. They ended up having to coerce the local population into manually porting the material over the mountains, a strategy that never made up for their expectations for supplies. You might want to check even Australian military history that doesn't claim the militia force along with reinforcements were able to stop the Japanese "half way to Port Moresby." The Japanese had already crossed the Owen Stanley mountains proper and were about to push into the foothills leading away from them. At night, they could even see the lights of Port Moresby in the distance. It was at this point that the Japanese commander was ordered to disengage the enemy and return all the way back over the mountains. I suppose you know the answer to why this was in that I assume Australian histories acknowledge that it was because the Japanese high command decided their inability to retake Guadalcanal was the most threatening to their plans and had cost them so dearly up to that point thereby requiring the Port Moresby expedition as reinforcements and so as not to dilute their supply capabilities. A balanced view of things--and in defense of the Australian narrative--was that the Japanese forces were indeed nearing exhaustion at the time the retreat was ordered. But that certainly never convinced their commander, who was devastated by the order, and who thought another victory would bring them the captured supplies necessary to continue the drive as it had in the past. How that battle would have played out we''ll never know. The fifty years that have past may have served to alter your recollections of the conversation you had with that US soldier who had fought at Buna, in that the Australians were never at Buna until the final days of the months-long battle. It may have been at Sanananda when US forces passed through the Australian forces to relieve them. But that was momentary, and I don't recall any time spent for much chit-chat let alone a retraining session for the entire US division. Other than that I can't recall a time when Australians were fighting alongside any American troops up until the last drive on Buna. And by "alongside" I don't mean shoulder-to-shoulder, just that they shared different ends of the same field of battle. A particularly irksome point of all of this, coming from an American's point of view, is that the Australian histories never seem to connect why it was the US troops found themselves in such an unready, precarious position to begin with. It was in an attempt to end a heated argument between the British--who wanted the professional Australian divisions to remain in North Africa--and the Australians--who wanted all their divisions home to defend against what they and others thought was an impending attack by the Japanese on their homeland. The US stepped in and offered to rush a division to Australia in order to smooth over the incident. This being a particularly harsh period for British and Australian relations post Singapore. But, of course, first and foremost to all of this was to keep Australia from what was thought by all at the time to be at threat of falling to the Japanese. In effect, these green, under-trained US troops were rushed there in order to protect Australia, ending up enduring a battle that was certainly amongst the worst--if not the very worst--in terms of general human suffering of the Pacific War. And yet even now they are still being misrepresented as cowardly (as in your own questionable anecdote) after 80 years as a consequence of doing so by the very people they were sent to help. With all this said, it shouldn't be my responsibility nor that of any of my fellow citizens to make right any history so long misrepresented. It should be the responsibility of any modern, open country with its cultural connections spanning back to the Enlightenment to correct their own histories for themselves. Notice that in none of what I have said have I ever slighted the Australian fighting man, who I have the greatest respect for. The US and Australians today--and especially recently--have become about as closely aligned as two countries can be. The Anglosphere is finally coming together at levels never thought possible before, due to a shared language and shared threats, but mostly due to our unique cultures and shared ideals. And if any of our enemies wanted to attempt to separate us it would be by inflaming long ago passed grievances. So I have pointedly not focused on any cheap attacks on Australia or Australians in any of my comments. I merely ask that you relook your history and perhaps make some long overdue revisions that might make any fellow ally bristle.
Isurava was not where they stopped the Japanese. It was where their commander Ralph Honner said that they have to dig in, knowing full well that the AIF were coming to their aid. If they had got through Isurava then the troops coming up the track would be in grave danger of being defeated. Their stand at Isurava deprived the Japanese of what they didn't have and that was time. Even when the AIF arrived they too were forced into fighting retreats because of the overwhelming strength of the enemy. Imita Ridge is where the final stand for the Track was to be made where the engineers had winched 25 pounder guns to the ridge top. By the time the Japs got near Imita they were a spent force, starved, diseased, with many wounded. They got the order to withdraw back to the northern beaches, and they got back as fast as they could, chased all the way by the Australians. What that US veteran said to me, is fact. I always thought he was joking until I read about Buna. Macarthur got into the ear of Prime Minister Curtin who believed him, and urged Blamey to go to New Guinea and give the troops a dressing down. Macarthur always belittled the Australians, never giving them credit. Any Australian victory was press released as an Allied victory, whereas a US victory was just that. Now he was going to show the Aussies how a "real army" fights. After the US debacle at Buna, Blamey told Macarthur that he (Blamey) would prefer the Australian Militia, because, at least, he knew they would fight.
If all you want is to hear how the Americans won the war, just pick up any American publication on NG campaigns, they are virtually all based on Macarthur's reports. They will tell you how the Americans captured Buna and how the Australians were not much good and the reason for the American victory was his genius 😂
@@robertheuston8378 You've been away from the conversation for awhile. The opinions on MacArthur today are brutally critical of almost everything he did during WWII. And if you take MacArthur's own accounts of his role in Papau New Guinea that would be a very small amount of documentation without many specifics. And I'm not here to defend MacArthur, although at times he is overly criticized. I read a recent book called MacArthur's Coalition by Peter J. Dean, an Australian author. The book only had critical things to say about the man with no quarter given. When after several chapters he started making the claim that a long-planned island assault that was slated for the US Marines ended up being given to the US Marines, he cried foul that it was unjustly stolen from the Australians, I started to wonder about his objectivity. Without objective accounts, how can we know whether someone's view on history is accurate or not? We're forced to guess by weighing them against the things we do know. The problem as I stated was that due to the US distraction of Guadalcanal, little was ever written about the battles in Papau and that the story line was therefore taken over by the Australians who used Australian after action reports to write their history when any objective person could see that those reports were made for propaganda purposes, unlike American after action reports perhaps whose primary task was to fix systems and strategies that did not work. Because Americans who are interested in such subjects have only Australian popular writings to form their own judgements and few go to the American source material, such as after-action reports or official military accounts, the Australian narrative goes undisputed. The problem is that Australia never bothered--and as far as I'm aware, still hasn't--to look critically at their own source material nor delved into American source material. The only place where this theater of battle is addressed in popular American written titles is vis a vis MacArthur, which results in sweeping strategic overviews of the war as he reported them but with no attempt to get into anywhere near the details of any given battle. So my argument was never one where I claimed MacArthur was right, but that our one source of deep historical reporting on the battles in Papau, the Austrailians, has been negligent in its acceptance of the old narrative story line. The American literary storyline never delved into the details of the battles nor by focusing on MacArthur's life claimed they did. It's the Australians who are claiming to be deep-diving into the subject but are coming up short of their goal. And so whenever an attempt to write history--such as in encyclopedias or wikipedia--decides to broach the subject, they invariably end up reciting the Australian mythology concerning the war. So what little was said by MacArthur on the subject can easily be attributed to the statements of a blowhard, the Australian accounts have far deeper implications on how history will be written--and so it is incumbent on them to maintain a higher standard of reporting. Because one man, who has already been discredited, made a cursory sweep of the battles, does not give carte blanche to Australian writers and academics to be just as biased in their far more serious, in depth accounts on which we all rely on to report history accurately.
another good video from Kings and Generals Pacific War also the battle and siege of Buna Gona was nothing more than a test, because later in the war the battles and sieges are going to longer and much blooder. also, can you a video about the battle of Bismark sea when it gets closer 🙏
Damn man. Your content is so good. Why would you need to do that. Even if the money was great. You know that we know that you know what those titles imply.
The Japanese were seasoned veterans fighting the Chinese and Russians for years. Early in the war us army soldiers were rookies. Army leadership had to be the most incompetent outta the American services.
True. US looked pretty bad in North Africa at first too. There is practice and then there is game day. They needed to get up to speed and weed out the unfit.
@@jamessnee7171 even in Vietnam those poor kids they drafted and tossed in the jungle to fight the V..C .that was criminal. It's was after that debacle we decided to have a full time highly trained, professional military.
I believe the reason that Honner's troops went in and fought for 2 minutes through their own artillery fire is because Honner had noticed in North Africa that when troops accidentally attacked too early and attacked through their own artillery that casualties were actually lighter so he decided to keep the artillery going for an extra minute. However, the officer leading the charge in came to the same conclusion and so attacked a minute early.
Bottcher was a fascinating man. An immigrant from Germany, he was involved in labor activities and attending college before joining the Republican army in the Spanish Civil War, where he amassed a distinguished record. He enlisted. He entered the Army in January 1942. Awarded a battlefield commission and the Medal of Honor, he was killed in action in the Philippines in 1944. Bottcher is buried in the Manila American Cemetery,. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Bottcher
OK so no wonder there is not a lot about New Guinea in American documentaries. Combat commanders relieved, sick starving men stumbling around the jungle. Details best left unsaid. I figured as much.
Honestly it needs to be. It was the hard lessons learned that would lead to victory in 1944-45, unfortunately it took hundreds of Badgers and Wolverines to learn it. John C McManus has made some important in roads in that regard with his ongoing book series on the US Army in the Pacific.
Love these vids. Maybe the week-by-week stuff is getting a little slow compared to the lightning Japanese advances near the beginning of this part of the war.
The Australian and American air support made all the difference, not that the Japanese were ever going to defeat the Australians, but having supply by air was a huge advantage.
@Kings and Generals, I have a question for you. Have you ever done or will you ever do a video on what exactly the rectangles and circles are marking? maybe its a silly question but I've been curious, I understand the circles are detachments where there are men present and fighting, but what about all the other symbols behind them? like in this video for example at 10:10 what does that 32nd division rectangle really mean? is that a reserve force of that division? are there units there? is it a temporary camp? I feel like understanding what exactly you mean when you have these symbols could be helpful sometimes, because if the size of the rectangle indicates how many troops there are, then it seems that they are hardly using all the troops present in a very desperate situation. But I assume that would make sense because you want to rotate out units so no one gets too exhausted. To put it simply, do the rectangles actually mark the location of a group of people belonging to that division or regiment. Or do they just tell you that there are regiments or companies in the area connected to it. maybe just one video explaining how these rectangles might look if you were able to zoom in on the people present there? (operations room style)
Pls, do a video about Thomas Blake Glover, known as the Scottish Samurai. He is a Scottish merchant who made some progress in the Bakumatsu and Meiji periods in Japan (fun fact: there is a statue of Glover in the Glover Garden, Nagasaki)
Don't hate me fellas, but maybe part of the reason why the Japanese enjoyed such good tactical success for so long was because their officers seem to lead from the front, not observing the battle way behind the lines. Say what you want, but very few of those Japanese officers were damned for lack of fighting spirit.
The Japanese(at least in the first half of the war) put their officers and men through a very detailed and rigorous training regimen that encluded lots of study. Low level US observers in China repeatedly stayed how well lead and trained(and extremely violently brutal towards civilians)the Japanese forces were. US Fleet and Air commanders took this information to heart but MacArthur never seemed to get the memo.
The Aussie sentiment of the US Army troops was a common issue. As the USMC advanced across the islands they too were assigned Army units. In many cases, Tarawa, the Marshall Islands and Saipan, the Army units performed poorly, with no desire to fight and poor leadership. In Korea in 1950 the same problems were present, and those Army units suffered heavy losses. Astonishingly, many of the generals and most of the colonels in 1950 had NO Battlefield COMMAND EXPERIENCE!! Gen. Ridgeway would relieve them all, causing the "Army Staff" many nervous days.
I find that to be a misleading conclusion. For instance, on Saipan, the Army's 27th Infantry Division was assigned the toughest part of the island to attack in: the mountainous center, where Japanese defenses were the strongest. Not only that, but when the Japanese decided to conduct their banzai charge on Saipan, the largest of the war, it hit the 105th Infantry Regiment's sector of the line. Two battalions were nearly destroyed in heavy fighting, and only those remnants plus artillery laid in direct fire and the regimental Headquarters Company held them back. And in Korea, it was the actions of an Army regiment, the 23rd RCT of the 2nd Infantry Division, with an attached French battalion, that finally checked the Chinese advances in February 1951, despite being outnumbered 15 to 1. So I think to say as a generality that Army units performed poorly and would not fight is dishonest. I'd recommend Fire and Fortitude by John C. McManus if you want to get the Army's perspective of the Pacific War, and a really good book by T.R. Fehrenbach, This Kind of War, describes the Korean War in general.
@@SirCheezersIII Your comments have some validity, but on Saipan the USMC warned the 27 that the attack was coming and they did not prepare. After the Japs ran through them it was Marine service and support troops who routed the Japs. In Korea the 2nd Div was slaughtered during the great "Bugout" in Dec 1950. (Which is the timeline I listed in my comment.) Their was no leadership in that unit at all, and no one took command of the high ground over the pass they had to traverse. (River and the Gauntlet by SLA Marshall.) After Ridgeway took over he straightened out the Army units by bringing in leaders from WWII. This Kind of War is one of my most cherished books, and a big part of the inspiration for my works, Fatal Flaws 1-3. Those works trace 9/11 back to WWI. Fahrenbach hits hard the failuers of the Army units and commands in his book. Goodbye Darkness by Manchester is another great read.
Richard Meo Even with the participation of those elements of the 10th Marine Regiment that doesn't detract from the fact that the majority of the fighting and dying in that particular engagement was done by men of the 105th Infantry, and they certainly didn't cower in that regard. Three men alone in the 105th were given Medals of Honor posthumously that day, including the 1st Battalion Commander, LTC William O'Brien. With the fierceness of that attack, the largest banzai charge of the war, I don't think a Marine unit would have fared significantly better. And in the context of Korea, every UN unit on the line in December, 1950 suffered immense loss, the ROK, the other Allied battalions, and the Army and Marines in equal measure. While the 1st Marine Division's stand at the Chosin Reservoir rightly stands as one of the greatest American feats of arms (which also included elements of the 31st RCT of the 7th Infantry Division), it ultimately failed to stop the Chinese advance. The 2nd Infantry Division, though mauled at the outset, was the outfit that would claim that distinction as I've said at Chipyong-ni and turned the tide of the rout, arguably benefiting of course from Ridgeway's reordering of the 8th Army. Look, it's hard enough for the American servicemen of those to get the recognition they deserve when their conduct is placed under intense scrutiny by foreign armchair observers, it does nobody much good when Soldiers and Marines resort to this tit for tat struggle of one uppance on top of that. In the end, they all gave some, though some still would give all, regardless of the patches on their shoulders.
@@SirCheezersIII While that one unit did well in the Banzai attack on Saipan, their commander was relieved because they were not keeping pace with the Marine units on each side. That resulted in a U shaped advance causing increasing casualties. When Fehrenbach , (Lt in Army in Korea), wrote his fine book he was direct in his complaints of the Army Command, but also of the Doolittle Board which took disipline from the unit commanders. SLA Marshall did the same. It is not a matter of chest-thumping, but in recognizing the problems and their causes. My work Fatal Flaws Book 1 1914-1945 hit Ike, USAAF and the Navy for their many failuers which cost thousands of unnecessary casualties to the poor grunts. (D-Day being one of the worst.) Stay well R
@@SirCheezersIIIwhile it is a reasonable point that respect is warranted, by the same measure, it is not in any way a fair assessment to call Australian officers "foreign Armchair soldiers", especially considering that this was deemed to be a war of survival for their country.
I really enjoy your hard work to teach me the gaps I don't know. I wish I could toss money around like, um someone with money. but Like and comment will do it's job. I hope. Arigatou gozaimasu sensei Kings Nd Generals. I love history. 💖🦊🌹
Become a channel member: th-cam.com/channels/MmaBzfCCwZ2KqaBJjkj0fw.htmljoin or patron: www.patreon.com/kingsandgenerals to watch exclusive videos, get early access to all videos, learn our schedule, join our private discord and much more! You can donate through Paypal paypal.me/kingsandgenerals as well.
wo 22 seconds ago
@@TheDude1980 wow
Great video again.
Don't forget the other fronts even if only an overview of a minute or so about what happened there for month period.
Nth Pacific, Burma, China and both navies submarine war etc
@@Wayne.J yeah
There is NO honor in killing the people! If you don't think so, then there is No difference between you and an animal! Make a video about genocides and war crimes committed by arabs in Greater IRAN!
Only in the last couple of months did my dad tell me some stories of his battles in Iwo Jima, New Guinea, and other battles that he did not detail. He got malaria and has only said that the conditions were horrendous and that he spent a lot of time in the swamps. My dad is 101 years old.
Cool!
Your father is a very brave man. Far more courageous then most people I know... :)
God Bless your Father for his service and have a Wonderful Merry Christmas.
My father died in 2003. In 1999 I offered to take him back to Peleliu, he refused. I can't repeat what he said, but he never wanted to see that place again.
Your dad is a hero. And aught be lauded as such him and his ilk are why I speak English not Japanese.
"Gona's gone" As an Australian I have to say that's very in line with our humour.
The fact that the Aussies took Gona's machine gun defences under their OWN artillery fire speaks about them as finest warriors there are. It is very unfortunate that these quality soldiers were prior used by unsound strategists to push through Kokoda into north New Guinea while to any intelligent eye this is undoable without having sea control due to logistic horror of supply through one single jungle mountain path. Luckily the Japs didn't learn from that mistake and payed their own price fully on their similar counteroffensive. Neither could have made it in a million years as planned.
Also later, when in front of Buna and Gona, again the price was payed through frontal attacks ordered by a mad "I shall return" cowboy.
@@z000ey
He had to beat GIs on Guadalcanal for his own glory
@@Wayne.J GI came into Guadalcanal after quite a while, until then it was Marines, but I get your point.
@@z000ey
Marines were garrison unit and had secure the perimeter for last 3 months, GIs were the attack unit to get the IJA off Guadalcanal starting from late December
"Gona's gone and Buna's buggered " was the complete message sent to H.Q. in Port Moresby.
You guys are the History Channel we never had growing up 😁👍
You mean the Ghostory Channel? 🤣
I'm old enough to remember when the history channel was all about really good history programs. It was my favorite channel. I also remember when the Ancient Aliens thing took hold and well... The rest is history.
@@mrgeorgematthew yes same. I remember when i first started watching it was mainly real history programs then over time it became ancient aliens pawn stars and swamp people lol
@@65stang98 First history. Than there was that strange period of time of super early computer graphics and even rome total war being used to show battles. Than it was Hitler. Than it was Hitler conspiracy happy hour. Than Occult Hitler. Than Aliens. Than Hitler with aliens.
@@mrgeorgematthew yeah I was ab to say history channel when I was a kid rocked
Apart from all the well-deserved kudos you get, K&G, one thing I want to highlight that you do well is help frame the sheer scale and intensity of this theater. I've been sitting on the edge of my chair as I watch each and every video you put out in this series, and it feels like we've only scratched the surface of the many battles fought in the Pacific.
Thanks for the kind words!
If the 39th didn't manage to crack the Gona defenders on 8th December, any further effort to take Gona would have to be abandoned. Just like at Isurava, it was up to the 39th. But what really cracked the Japanese bunkers were the fact that the Australian 25 pounders were now using delayed action fuses. Which had a drastic effect on the Japanese bunkers.
After the Australians had cleared out Gona, they counted just 16 prisoners, 10 of whom were wounded. The landscape around Gona had been turned into something that looked like a timetravel back to the Great War. An Australian reporter with the 21st Brigade recorded the scene at Gona:
Rotting bodies, sometimes weeks old, formed part of the fortifications. The living fired over the bodies of the dead, slept side by side with them. In one trench there was a Japanese who had not been able to stand the strain. His rifle still pointed at his head, his big toe on the trigger, and the top of his head was blown off.... Everwhere, pervading everything, was the stench of putrescent flesh.
The Australian found 638 Japanese bodies in this scene of horror. Gona has finally fallen.
That issue with the fuses was a never ending issue. The failed prelim shelling and bombing on Iwo Jima was a disgrace. It was obvious the Japs were underground, but most of the munitions used were basic HE. They looked good exploding in the volcanic sand, but did nothing the the Japs or their defenses. On Iwo we took more casualties than the Japs.
The reason for the delayed fuses were for the shells to bury themselves deeper in the mud before detonating and so make them less effective. This reduced Australian casualties as they were attacking the Japanese in close quarter combat before the bombardment had finished.
@@Sendu7 Those fuses gave the shell enough time to penetrate about 1 meter (3 feet) into the soil. And given the layout of the land it turned out to be quite effective.
@@wolfu597 There were effective, especially at keeping the Japanese in their bunkers while allowing Australian soldiers to advance earlier than expected. It was a new tactic that took advantage of the deep swamp mud and the habit of the defenders of waiting for the bombardment to finish before returning to their machine gun positions.
It was a desperate tactic that seemed to work.
@@Sendu7 Interesting. Most times the delay was to allow shell to penetrate dugin defenses, trenches and caves. They needed them at Iwo Jima, but were seldom fired or dropped. That tragic flaw was also a factor in Vietnam
Gen. Eichelberger was the man. Leading from the front is an exceptional leadership quality as it is, but Eichelberger took it a step further by picking up a rifle and fighting alongside the enlisted men. Rarely in any army would a Corps commander be expected or even permitted to act so carelessly, but it was needed for US troops in New Guinea at the time and it paid off.
Just funny Name in you speak german 😂😂
Absolutely intense fighting, and well done by the Australians. Their strength and tenacity set the pulse for further battles in the war. My hats off to them.
The production is just top tier. The narration, music and everything is goosebumps. Thank you!
As stated the ones that escaped from Gona were mostly the Takasago Volunteers. Regardless of the war, you have to respect the valiant effort of 1 thousand men holding out for over 3 weeks against 4 to 1+ odds with limited equipment and the sheer pounding that they took.
The National Guard Divisions weren't the best but it's what the US had in abundance at this point. Most eventually became excellent formations but the road was a long one for sure.
they were sent because Macarthur didn't have any ground troops to command that were American, and he felt that the veteran Australian troops were not up to the task.
Screw Macarthur and this campaign. Isolation and starvation would have been a better strategy.
@@kirbyculp3449 it essentially was but some bases had to be taken so the Allies could isolate the 18th Army.
@@kirbyculp3449 and agreed MacArthur was very overrated as an operational commander.
The troops did well, considering the enemy they fought, the command they had and the conditions they endured. A lot of new units crack under that sort of pressure.
I want to thank all those who bitched about one of the channel's sponsors. As a result of your complaints, we are greatly reduced in videos each week. I am sure all of you immediately joined the channel with monetary contributions. Please increase your contributions, so those of us who can't afford to contribute can again enjoy the greatest history channel on u-tube.
To the channel team. I am 80 years old, taking care of a disabled wife. Our only income is my Social Security, which only covers our basic needs of food, housing and heat. I understand why you have had to cut production. I applaud you for paying your staff a livable wage. Thank you for putting out such an excellent product. I hope you are not offended by my wishing your team a Merry Christmas, and a Happy New Year.
Taking money from a bad scam to finance a good video is not justification for promoting a scam. You went 80 years with those faulty ethics?
@@robc1342 I don't consider it any more of a scam than most ads. You read into the ad more than was actually said. All advertisement is a scam of some sort. I am not motivated to buy things by video ads. If you believe everything said in an ad, you are being taken for a ride. The ad delivered exactly what it promised. You got a nice certificate and could call yourself Lord whomever on your social media and your credit card. Of course, you can legally call yourself anything you want as long as it's not to commit fraud. It didn't say you use it on a passport or drivers license, but you probably thought it did. Will this buisness be gone tomorrow? Probably along with most fads. I'm assuming your were already donated to the channel, and have increased your donation to cover the loss in revenue.
This is the greatest documentary series i had ever watched, thanks for your ultimate production
This was the last attack of the Australian 39th before it disbanded with just 6 survivors who could still stand and fight.
o7
As a European, one is familiar with the battles of Stalingrad, Kursk or El-Alamein. I only found out about Gona through K&G. An educational gap that I was able to close thanks to you
Nice to see an historian doing his research, thanks Kings.
That line by that actor in the mini series The Pacific makes us look like fools "Your army is still chasing Rommel around in the desert"
No, other Australian forces were beating the Japanese up in New Guinea, at Milne Bay and Kokoda, the first land defeat of the Japanese!??? WTF?
Much thanks to the Australians for supporting the U.S. in WW II. You contribution should never be underestimated.
I love the extra added gunfire from all the bunkers! Videos keep getting better and better
After succeeding Waldron as the commander of the 32nd Division, Byers himself was wounded on December 16 and became the third American General to be shot at Buna, Brigadier General Hanford MacNider having been shot earlier in the fighting. Of the three, none was more than 75 yards from Japanese lines when wounded. Eichelberger then assumed personal command of the division as he was the only general left in action. He wore his three silver stars while at the front throughout the campaign despite the risk of being targeted by Japanese snipers because he wanted his troops to know their commander was present.
32nd Infantry Division was in combat for 654 days, more than any other United States Army unit during World War II, with 7,268 casualties and eleven of its men were awarded the Medal of Honor. Both Waldron and Byers were awarded the Distinguished Service Cross after Buna, which, Eichelberger would later write, "obviously was a different kind of battle."
This channel is the ultimate proof that students at school love to learn about the history but schools don't know the right way to teach the kids. Literally it would be so cool if you were my history teacher 🙏🙏🙏
I saw the sanitized history textbooks and a vast supply of used historical texts and history books by unapproved authors and dropped history in high school. Never regretted it
as a career history teacher... this is NOT what is needed. It is difficult to follow movements of units spoken at high speed by a foreign voice. It is Just NOT classroom material. No personal engagement, Maps for obsessive compulsives.
I am going to be bold enough to suggest that you might rather have been in my class. Go to the meaning more ... some of these dox will go on about the diameter of lug nuts. I engaged students ability to empathize and not to watch little icons move on a map,
@@donofon101 You sound bitter
@@donofon101 While I agree with you students can't really keep up with units movements and it's unnecessary for them to do so to learn history. But you failed to recognize the main argument is that school teachings are too dry for students to have any interest in history. For foreign accent issue, school can fund some people to make their own documentaries with animation like this video but narrated with local voices and focus on more overview of the events instead of deep dives into battles (you can still repurpose them into special lessons to excite students). Maps can be changed to overview map with arrows for event directions. For personal engagement, it's to make students feels excited, emerged in the events to learn them; not boring lectures with repetitive questions just to make them fall asleep
I appreciate learning about all these various battles. In grade school, my teacher only talked about the battles of Iwa Jima, Tara, and Okinawa, when she covered WWII.
I feel like that is rather standard in terms of a grade school education. They can't teach every event of the war. Good on you for continuing to learn.
MacArthur and his direct subordinates: "It's a failure of the commanders in the field; they're just not aggressive enough!"
It amazes me that after getting his ass handed to him in the Philippines, MacArthur STILL refuses to consider that the root of the problem is that the Japanese are actually competent soldiers and enjoy defensive positions too strong for worn-out light infantry backed by occasional (but not properly coordinated) artillery or air support is just plain insufficient to take Buna/Gona by direct assault without heavy losses and the passing of time.
You're kidding bro. MacArthur was a god. That quote was attributed to MacArthur I think.
This was a problem all over the Pacific and old Doug was not the only one afflicted with this nor was the US the only country with this problem. The Japanese were always underestimated early in the war thankfully after time and a lot of casualties they learned their belated lesson. Thank god the navy did not suffer this affliction for very long they adapted much quicker and accepted that the Japanese were highly capable and won some battles that were on paper in Japans favor.
Dziękujemy.
Thanks!
I hope you know that I dropped eveything at work to watch this video the second I noticed it.
Hopefully you won't get into trouble :-)
You've done one fine job with this series. Please keep it up.
I studied the Buna / Gona campaigns including the Kokoda battles as an officer Cadet at OCS Portsea, Victoria, australia - would have loved to have had this resource - alas in 1972 twas a bit early...
Did you speak with the veterans?
Keep up the good work, K&G! I never miss a week without watching your content on various history topics, even the fringe ones that give my country a passing mention which are not usually mentioned in history classes. Thanks for giving these new perspectives!
It's a good day when kings and Generals posts
Brilliant movie as ever!
So impressive to me there was only one narrated Japanese individual who didn't get his unit shattered, and other forces were also reduced to dust to be smashed, cut down, or cleaned out. 2yrs and a little til cities'd be leveled.
Good stuff. Always happy to see a new Kings and Generals video.
My late father was an Air Corps Engineer in New Guinea during WWII . He contracted malaria and said everything was a wet , soggy mess there.
Respect.
These narratives make my week / day / moment. Thanks x 1000
Never before have I clicked faster to watch this series
I love this series ❤️
Really like the detailed coverage of these battles.
3:28 the universal carrier
Or more popular known as bren guns carriers
My great grandad was a driver for one in the north Africa, Sicily, Italy and Normandy campaigns
1 Year of Pacific War
Nice work
The 49th is still an active reserve unit I got to read the dispatches from that battle
This is an excellent series. Thanks so much for making it.
*Whew* Thought I missed you guys this week. Sorry that TH-cam is making life harder for you and your great documentary videos.
At this point - it's one year (for the U.S. and Pearl Harbor) and the start of the World War - and at this point it is still up in the air as to who will win.
Quality > Quantity. Yes, this applies to both videos *and* Pacific Fleet Aircraft Carriers.
My grandpa was 126th c company. While watching this, it makes me glad I was just in the desert for most of my stay in Afghanistan. Jungle Warfare sounds like hell!
Great work. I’m really enjoying this series.
new Kings and Generals video especially pacific war series are highlights of every week
We don't deserve Kings and Generals, y'all are too good to us.
This series completes my week 😄
Another good one! I alwyas wonder how you get all the details, especially pictures of commanders, this must take so much research....
Great series so far!
I love it so much World War 2 military history in details
wow, with so many terrible losses for so little, you wonder that the surround and starve tactic didn't start sooner.
"CocoNOT Groves" as a map tag made me chuckle
Great documentation
Australia used M3 Stuarts! It's super effective!
Thanks for the good video
"Oh no! Our fort! Itza Gona!" D: - Yapanese.
Thank you , K&G .
🐺
This was amazing
I would love to see you guys do a video on the Tuscarora war and it's aftermath.
You have an accent that implies English is not your first language (although it probably is), the beginning of each word is sharp and enunciated, almost like German and the rest of the word kind of spills out after. The scripts are masterfully written, sometimes I lose track of the battles and just listen to those sweet sentences. I love it, it makes for really good videos
This made my day.
This is a battle that truly deserves a new book written about it. What it deserves is someone who has read all the available material and put together what actually happened. The story told here is straight from the Australian perspective from around the time it happened--and never much changed thereafter. Never have I come across a book that puts the whole battle into context including an honest look at the American side of the events that transpired.
In order to understand the narrative of this documentary, and many recounted tales that have accompanied it, you must first go back to the bad blood that was generated between the US and Australians when Gen. MacArthur told Australian commander Blamey that he didn't think that the Australian militia forces (not the regular professional Australian soldiers) were up to the task of stopping the Japanese coming overland toward Port Morsby. Although he was probably right, in that they had repeatedly been outflanked by the Japanese forcing numerous retreats, the Australian command let word get out to the public that MacArthur had said this and from there on out, the Australians were out to paint the US forces as being as inept as possible. The end of this story makes for a nice little tale of the Australians proving their fighting man's fortitude, bravery and acumen and leaves the US forces as inept, unmotivated and even cowardly.
I've read many, many books and official military reports on this battle on both the allied's sides and what I can tell you is that the information you get from this mainstream perspective is selective at best. There are so many mitigating circumstances never told, so much of the narative based on official Australian battle histories, which today read more like propaganda, that what actually happened and the course of the battle itself has never been honestly and thoroughly told. It's obvious when reading the official Australian military's history of the battle that the purpose was not for learning but as a means to idealize the Australian fighting man. The US versions look at the hard facts of the battle--including the mistakes made in order to make sure they didn't happen again.
Some--but far from all--of the mitigating conditions of the US forces in this battle:
An honest appraisal would take into account that the US forces had very little training prior to the battle in that they were forced to do nothing but build forwarding camps right up to the eve of their deployment into the battle. Not just was there very little training but there was zero jungle training.
The soldiers who had the best chance of making an impact on the front lines were wasted by jungle disease practically from the moment the attack began due to unexpected delays and having to move long distances through the jungle to arrive at the scene. One third of the force that was supposed to be fighting in Buna ended up being sent into the Australian zone in order to help there. Another ninth were sent on a hell-trip over the mountains that devastated their battalion. Even though barely alive when they finally reached the battle front, this battalion of barely walking survivors were fed right into the battle because there was no one left fit to fight.
One could claim that the Australians were fighting under the same conditions, but they weren't. The Americans were forced to live and attack through waterlogged swamps in order to engage extremely well positioned and prepared defenses that happened to be on high, dry ground. Imagine doing that while running a fever upwards of 104 degrees, which most of the US forces left standing were suffering from due to malaria. And, yes, the Australians did get sick like the Americans but what's never mentioned is that they were regularly being replaced with fresh troops while the US soldiers had none available.
The Americans were fighting and subject to the depravations of the jungle from the very beginning of the fight. If I recall correctly, it was estimated during the battle that three weeks of just living in these disease-ridden swamps was enough to reduce a fighting force by half. The American forces were so reduced that any idea of measuring the actual number of troops attacking in a battalion, company or platoon ended up being a tiny fraction of those who actually engaged.
The bulk of Japanese reinforcements happened to arrive on scene at extremely inopportune times with the vast bulk of these fresh forces fed into the American sector.
The US forces were up against fighting positions that rivaled anything during World War One, but had none of the equipment that even those armies had. The artillery they had was of too low calibre and of insufficient quantity to have any effect on the dug-in Japanese and aircraft did more harm than good due to a tree canopy that kept the air force nullified. The technology that was counted on to end trench warfare--tanks especially--was only available at the very end of the battle when it was deployed by the Australians, who then ended up taking credit for the win. Without any of the tools needed to defeat trenches, the US forces had to approach them in ways that not even those who fought in WWI would even consider.
I better stop here or I'll end up writing the book myself. But I hope you get the idea.
Since the concurrent Guadalcanal campaign was so much at the forefront of the national consciousness at the time and the Buna-Gona battle sidelined by the US media, Americans have rarely studied this battle and the views and those US soldiers who actually fought there are rarely read in the few books that cover the American perspective. Whether or not a book is ever written from this wholistic point of view is perhaps doubtful since If someone were to write the US perspective, I would expect it to reach a very small market, whereas the battle of Buna-Gona I assume will always have a strong market in Australia due to the accepted nationalistic tied-with-a-bow narrative.
You make some valid points.
However, the 39th and 53rd Australian militia that were the first troops sent up the Kokoda Track to engage the enemy were untrained, like the US 32nd. They had spent months in Port Moresby unloading ships and building roads. They were given no training, they had no adequate protection so most were suffering from malaria, average age 18 or 19 city kids, some of the 53rd were even shanghaied from the streets of Sydney so they were very reluctant and disgruntled. Most had to "walk" the Track, 10 days of exhausting climbling, scrambling, while carrying a 60lb pack and rifle. They had one WW1 Lewis Gun, no entrenching tools, no mortars, no jungle clothing so their desert uniforms stood out against the green jungle. The 39th did have good leadership, ex WW1 veterans, so too the 53rd, but many of them were unfortunatly killed. Rifles and Brens , Thompsons, bayonets and grenades was all they had. The Japs had light and heavy machine guns, wore jungle greens, and had portable mountain artillery, plus experienced troops who had been fighting in China.
So the Australians, initially, were as untrained as their equivalent US 32nd. Division. They delayed the Japanese advance to Port Moresby by 3 weeks, the Japs had given themselves 14 days to get to Moresby. When they were joined by the AIF they were on the verge of being wiped out where they had planned to make their final stand at Isurava, about half way to Morseby. They continued to fight even when they were ordered to go to the rear. Yet they were called cowards by Blamey and Macarthur who had no idea of the conditions facing the troops in New Guinea.
In 1974 I met a US veteran who was at Buna he told me, in front of his nephew who then was serving in the US Army;
"We did not know how to use our weapons, the Aussies had to show us," and,
"We were too scared to go into the jungle and swamps, the Australians had to go in before us."
@@blueycarlton The fact that the Australian militia were untrained, or at least under-trained to fight professional, experienced Japanese soldiers is uncontested. That's why in my comment I pointed out that these were militia forces, not professional Australian soldiers. Any unfair accusations that they performed inadequately were silenced decades ago. I don't know when Blamey's "Running Rabbits" speech began to be contested, maybe you do, but possibly during the war itself. What I'm referring to here--80 years later--is the misconceptions that continue concerning the US Army's performance during the battle and which are not even recognized today as evidenced by this very video. (BTW I don't recall MacArthur ever saying the the militia were cowards--that was implied by Blamey. MacArthur just asserted that they weren't--as I recall in his words--"up to the job" of stopping the Japanese advance.)
How much the Australian militia was able to hold back the Japanese advance above and beyond what would reasonably be expected of them cannot be judged by the Japanese perception of how long it would take them to get over the Owen Stanleys in that their intelligence on the condition of the track was next to nothing when they started out. Assuming you've read about the battle, you know from the Australians themselves just how difficult that path over the mountains was. The Japanese were quickly forced to ditch anything motorized they counted on to get them through and shortly thereafter, even the bicycles they had effectively used before were unceremoniously tossed off the track. They ended up having to coerce the local population into manually porting the material over the mountains, a strategy that never made up for their expectations for supplies.
You might want to check even Australian military history that doesn't claim the militia force along with reinforcements were able to stop the Japanese "half way to Port Moresby." The Japanese had already crossed the Owen Stanley mountains proper and were about to push into the foothills leading away from them. At night, they could even see the lights of Port Moresby in the distance. It was at this point that the Japanese commander was ordered to disengage the enemy and return all the way back over the mountains. I suppose you know the answer to why this was in that I assume Australian histories acknowledge that it was because the Japanese high command decided their inability to retake Guadalcanal was the most threatening to their plans and had cost them so dearly up to that point thereby requiring the Port Moresby expedition as reinforcements and so as not to dilute their supply capabilities.
A balanced view of things--and in defense of the Australian narrative--was that the Japanese forces were indeed nearing exhaustion at the time the retreat was ordered. But that certainly never convinced their commander, who was devastated by the order, and who thought another victory would bring them the captured supplies necessary to continue the drive as it had in the past. How that battle would have played out we''ll never know.
The fifty years that have past may have served to alter your recollections of the conversation you had with that US soldier who had fought at Buna, in that the Australians were never at Buna until the final days of the months-long battle. It may have been at Sanananda when US forces passed through the Australian forces to relieve them. But that was momentary, and I don't recall any time spent for much chit-chat let alone a retraining session for the entire US division. Other than that I can't recall a time when Australians were fighting alongside any American troops up until the last drive on Buna. And by "alongside" I don't mean shoulder-to-shoulder, just that they shared different ends of the same field of battle.
A particularly irksome point of all of this, coming from an American's point of view, is that the Australian histories never seem to connect why it was the US troops found themselves in such an unready, precarious position to begin with. It was in an attempt to end a heated argument between the British--who wanted the professional Australian divisions to remain in North Africa--and the Australians--who wanted all their divisions home to defend against what they and others thought was an impending attack by the Japanese on their homeland. The US stepped in and offered to rush a division to Australia in order to smooth over the incident. This being a particularly harsh period for British and Australian relations post Singapore. But, of course, first and foremost to all of this was to keep Australia from what was thought by all at the time to be at threat of falling to the Japanese. In effect, these green, under-trained US troops were rushed there in order to protect Australia, ending up enduring a battle that was certainly amongst the worst--if not the very worst--in terms of general human suffering of the Pacific War. And yet even now they are still being misrepresented as cowardly (as in your own questionable anecdote) after 80 years as a consequence of doing so by the very people they were sent to help.
With all this said, it shouldn't be my responsibility nor that of any of my fellow citizens to make right any history so long misrepresented. It should be the responsibility of any modern, open country with its cultural connections spanning back to the Enlightenment to correct their own histories for themselves.
Notice that in none of what I have said have I ever slighted the
Australian fighting man, who I have the greatest respect for. The US and Australians today--and especially recently--have become about as closely aligned as two countries can be. The Anglosphere is finally coming together at levels never thought possible before, due to a shared language and shared threats, but mostly due to our unique cultures and shared ideals. And if any of our enemies wanted to attempt to separate us it would be by inflaming long ago passed grievances. So I have pointedly not focused on any cheap attacks on Australia or Australians in any of my comments. I merely ask that you relook your history and perhaps make some long overdue revisions that might make any fellow ally bristle.
Isurava was not where they stopped the Japanese. It was where their commander Ralph Honner said that they have to dig in, knowing full well that the AIF were coming to their aid. If they had got through Isurava then the troops coming up the track would be in grave danger of being defeated. Their stand at Isurava deprived the Japanese of what they didn't have and that was time. Even when the AIF arrived they too were forced into fighting retreats because of the overwhelming strength of the enemy.
Imita Ridge is where the final stand for the Track was to be made where the engineers had winched 25 pounder guns to the ridge top. By the time the Japs got near Imita they were a spent force, starved, diseased, with many wounded. They got the order to withdraw back to the northern beaches, and they got back as fast as they could, chased all the way by the Australians.
What that US veteran said to me, is fact.
I always thought he was joking until I read about Buna.
Macarthur got into the ear of Prime Minister Curtin who believed him, and urged Blamey to go to New Guinea and give the troops a dressing down.
Macarthur always belittled the Australians, never giving them credit. Any Australian victory was press released as an Allied victory, whereas a US victory was just that.
Now he was going to show the Aussies how a "real army" fights.
After the US debacle at Buna, Blamey told Macarthur that he (Blamey) would prefer the Australian Militia, because, at least, he knew they would fight.
If all you want is to hear how the Americans won the war, just pick up any American publication on NG campaigns, they are virtually all based on Macarthur's reports. They will tell you how the Americans captured Buna and how the Australians were not much good and the reason for the American victory was his genius 😂
@@robertheuston8378 You've been away from the conversation for awhile. The opinions on MacArthur today are brutally critical of almost everything he did during WWII. And if you take MacArthur's own accounts of his role in Papau New Guinea that would be a very small amount of documentation without many specifics. And I'm not here to defend MacArthur, although at times he is overly criticized.
I read a recent book called MacArthur's Coalition by Peter J. Dean, an Australian author. The book only had critical things to say about the man with no quarter given. When after several chapters he started making the claim that a long-planned island assault that was slated for the US Marines ended up being given to the US Marines, he cried foul that it was unjustly stolen from the Australians, I started to wonder about his objectivity. Without objective accounts, how can we know whether someone's view on history is accurate or not? We're forced to guess by weighing them against the things we do know.
The problem as I stated was that due to the US distraction of Guadalcanal, little was ever written about the battles in Papau and that the story line was therefore taken over by the Australians who used Australian after action reports to write their history when any objective person could see that those reports were made for propaganda purposes, unlike American after action reports perhaps whose primary task was to fix systems and strategies that did not work.
Because Americans who are interested in such subjects have only Australian popular writings to form their own judgements and few go to the American source material, such as after-action reports or official military accounts, the Australian narrative goes undisputed. The problem is that Australia never bothered--and as far as I'm aware, still hasn't--to look critically at their own source material nor delved into American source material.
The only place where this theater of battle is addressed in popular American written titles is vis a vis MacArthur, which results in sweeping strategic overviews of the war as he reported them but with no attempt to get into anywhere near the details of any given battle. So my argument was never one where I claimed MacArthur was right, but that our one source of deep historical reporting on the battles in Papau, the Austrailians, has been negligent in its acceptance of the old narrative story line.
The American literary storyline never delved into the details of the battles nor by focusing on MacArthur's life claimed they did. It's the Australians who are claiming to be deep-diving into the subject but are coming up short of their goal. And so whenever an attempt to write history--such as in encyclopedias or wikipedia--decides to broach the subject, they invariably end up reciting the Australian mythology concerning the war. So what little was said by MacArthur on the subject can easily be attributed to the statements of a blowhard, the Australian accounts have far deeper implications on how history will be written--and so it is incumbent on them to maintain a higher standard of reporting.
Because one man, who has already been discredited, made a cursory sweep of the battles, does not give carte blanche to Australian writers and academics to be just as biased in their far more serious, in depth accounts on which we all rely on to report history accurately.
Amazing series.
Cheers
Great Content.
Great series
another good video from Kings and Generals Pacific War also the battle and siege of Buna Gona was nothing more than a test, because later in the war the battles and sieges are going to longer and much blooder. also, can you a video about the battle of Bismark sea when it gets closer
🙏
Knew a digger that fought in PNG, he said the dysentery was so bad, they just stopped wearing pants.
this series is so good
Great video Thank you
Incredible!
Damn man. Your content is so good. Why would you need to do that. Even if the money was great. You know that we know that you know what those titles imply.
The Japanese were seasoned veterans fighting the Chinese and Russians for years. Early in the war us army soldiers were rookies. Army leadership had to be the most incompetent outta the American services.
True. US looked pretty bad in North Africa at first too. There is practice and then there is game day. They needed to get up to speed and weed out the unfit.
@@jamessnee7171 even in Vietnam those poor kids they drafted and tossed in the jungle to fight the V..C .that was criminal. It's was after that debacle we decided to have a full time highly trained, professional military.
I believe the reason that Honner's troops went in and fought for 2 minutes through their own artillery fire is because Honner had noticed in North Africa that when troops accidentally attacked too early and attacked through their own artillery that casualties were actually lighter so he decided to keep the artillery going for an extra minute. However, the officer leading the charge in came to the same conclusion and so attacked a minute early.
"Heaven is Java, Hell is Burma; but no one returns alive from New Guinea."
Bottcher was a fascinating man. An immigrant from Germany, he was involved in labor activities and attending college before joining the Republican army in the Spanish Civil War, where he amassed a distinguished record. He enlisted. He entered the Army in January 1942. Awarded a battlefield commission and the Medal of Honor, he was killed in action in the Philippines in 1944. Bottcher is buried in the Manila American Cemetery,.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Bottcher
OK so no wonder there is not a lot about New Guinea in American documentaries.
Combat commanders relieved, sick starving men stumbling around the jungle.
Details best left unsaid. I figured as much.
Honestly it needs to be. It was the hard lessons learned that would lead to victory in 1944-45, unfortunately it took hundreds of Badgers and Wolverines to learn it. John C McManus has made some important in roads in that regard with his ongoing book series on the US Army in the Pacific.
Love these vids. Maybe the week-by-week stuff is getting a little slow compared to the lightning Japanese advances near the beginning of this part of the war.
I like how this episode'sevents almost synched up to today's date (Dec 10)
The Australian and American air support made all the difference, not that the Japanese were ever going to defeat the Australians, but having supply by air was a huge advantage.
Little do I know about the fall of gona thanks for the information
@Kings and Generals, I have a question for you. Have you ever done or will you ever do a video on what exactly the rectangles and circles are marking? maybe its a silly question but I've been curious, I understand the circles are detachments where there are men present and fighting, but what about all the other symbols behind them? like in this video for example at 10:10 what does that 32nd division rectangle really mean? is that a reserve force of that division? are there units there? is it a temporary camp?
I feel like understanding what exactly you mean when you have these symbols could be helpful sometimes, because if the size of the rectangle indicates how many troops there are, then it seems that they are hardly using all the troops present in a very desperate situation. But I assume that would make sense because you want to rotate out units so no one gets too exhausted.
To put it simply, do the rectangles actually mark the location of a group of people belonging to that division or regiment. Or do they just tell you that there are regiments or companies in the area connected to it. maybe just one video explaining how these rectangles might look if you were able to zoom in on the people present there? (operations room style)
Love your content
Pls, do a video about Thomas Blake Glover, known as the Scottish Samurai. He is a Scottish merchant who made some progress in the Bakumatsu and Meiji periods in Japan (fun fact: there is a statue of Glover in the Glover Garden, Nagasaki)
Aussies fighting a war in shorts is awesome
Imagine history teachers happiness when they see this
Don't hate me fellas, but maybe part of the reason why the Japanese enjoyed such good tactical success for so long was because their officers seem to lead from the front, not observing the battle way behind the lines.
Say what you want, but very few of those Japanese officers were damned for lack of fighting spirit.
The Japanese(at least in the first half of the war) put their officers and men through a very detailed and rigorous training regimen that encluded lots of study. Low level US observers in China repeatedly stayed how well lead and trained(and extremely violently brutal towards civilians)the Japanese forces were. US Fleet and Air commanders took this information to heart but MacArthur never seemed to get the memo.
@@adamjaquay4279 It took a lot of casualties for everyone to get the memo and the US was not the only country afflicted with that issue.
Nice video
Great video
Yes more of these
Solomon Campaign=blindfolded knife fight in a phone booth.
Can anyone tell me what the tool is to make war-game-liked(e.g at 2:55 or 7:00) graph in the video？
The Aussie sentiment of the US Army troops was a common issue. As the USMC advanced across the islands they too were assigned Army units. In many cases, Tarawa, the Marshall Islands and Saipan, the Army units performed poorly, with no desire to fight and poor leadership. In Korea in 1950 the same problems were present, and those Army units suffered heavy losses. Astonishingly, many of the generals and most of the colonels in 1950 had NO Battlefield COMMAND EXPERIENCE!! Gen. Ridgeway would relieve them all, causing the "Army Staff" many nervous days.
I find that to be a misleading conclusion. For instance, on Saipan, the Army's 27th Infantry Division was assigned the toughest part of the island to attack in: the mountainous center, where Japanese defenses were the strongest. Not only that, but when the Japanese decided to conduct their banzai charge on Saipan, the largest of the war, it hit the 105th Infantry Regiment's sector of the line. Two battalions were nearly destroyed in heavy fighting, and only those remnants plus artillery laid in direct fire and the regimental Headquarters Company held them back. And in Korea, it was the actions of an Army regiment, the 23rd RCT of the 2nd Infantry Division, with an attached French battalion, that finally checked the Chinese advances in February 1951, despite being outnumbered 15 to 1. So I think to say as a generality that Army units performed poorly and would not fight is dishonest. I'd recommend Fire and Fortitude by John C. McManus if you want to get the Army's perspective of the Pacific War, and a really good book by T.R. Fehrenbach, This Kind of War, describes the Korean War in general.
@@SirCheezersIII Your comments have some validity, but on Saipan the USMC warned the 27 that the attack was coming and they did not prepare. After the Japs ran through them it was Marine service and support troops who routed the Japs. In Korea the 2nd Div was slaughtered during the great "Bugout" in Dec 1950. (Which is the timeline I listed in my comment.) Their was no leadership in that unit at all, and no one took command of the high ground over the pass they had to traverse. (River and the Gauntlet by SLA Marshall.) After Ridgeway took over he straightened out the Army units by bringing in leaders from WWII. This Kind of War is one of my most cherished books, and a big part of the inspiration for my works, Fatal Flaws 1-3. Those works trace 9/11 back to WWI. Fahrenbach hits hard the failuers of the Army units and commands in his book. Goodbye Darkness by Manchester is another great read.
Richard Meo Even with the participation of those elements of the 10th Marine Regiment that doesn't detract from the fact that the majority of the fighting and dying in that particular engagement was done by men of the 105th Infantry, and they certainly didn't cower in that regard. Three men alone in the 105th were given Medals of Honor posthumously that day, including the 1st Battalion Commander, LTC William O'Brien. With the fierceness of that attack, the largest banzai charge of the war, I don't think a Marine unit would have fared significantly better. And in the context of Korea, every UN unit on the line in December, 1950 suffered immense loss, the ROK, the other Allied battalions, and the Army and Marines in equal measure. While the 1st Marine Division's stand at the Chosin Reservoir rightly stands as one of the greatest American feats of arms (which also included elements of the 31st RCT of the 7th Infantry Division), it ultimately failed to stop the Chinese advance. The 2nd Infantry Division, though mauled at the outset, was the outfit that would claim that distinction as I've said at Chipyong-ni and turned the tide of the rout, arguably benefiting of course from Ridgeway's reordering of the 8th Army.
Look, it's hard enough for the American servicemen of those to get the recognition they deserve when their conduct is placed under intense scrutiny by foreign armchair observers, it does nobody much good when Soldiers and Marines resort to this tit for tat struggle of one uppance on top of that. In the end, they all gave some, though some still would give all, regardless of the patches on their shoulders.
@@SirCheezersIII While that one unit did well in the Banzai attack on Saipan, their commander was relieved because they were not keeping pace with the Marine units on each side. That resulted in a U shaped advance causing increasing casualties. When Fehrenbach , (Lt in Army in Korea), wrote his fine book he was direct in his complaints of the Army Command, but also of the Doolittle Board which took disipline from the unit commanders. SLA Marshall did the same. It is not a matter of chest-thumping, but in recognizing the problems and their causes. My work Fatal Flaws Book 1 1914-1945 hit Ike, USAAF and the Navy for their many failuers which cost thousands of unnecessary casualties to the poor grunts. (D-Day being one of the worst.) Stay well R
@@SirCheezersIIIwhile it is a reasonable point that respect is warranted, by the same measure, it is not in any way a fair assessment to call Australian officers "foreign Armchair soldiers", especially considering that this was deemed to be a war of survival for their country.
Japan in WW2 be like send 350K army to New Guinea get nearly 60 percent death rate because of starvation and disease.
Would love to see a Vietnam war series
Ooh, I see a Lancelot video in the future...
So you could say that their hold on Gona
Is Gona
Every time he says "Gona area", I hear something else
i was here in 22 seconds
I really enjoy your hard work to teach me the gaps I don't know. I wish I could toss money around like, um someone with money. but Like and comment will do it's job. I hope. Arigatou gozaimasu sensei Kings Nd Generals. I love history. 💖🦊🌹