Jump to content


Japanese Anti-Tank Assaults


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
91 replies to this topic

Daigensui #81 Posted Apr 29 2013 - 02:10

    Major

  • Players
  • 29085 battles
  • 29,972
  • [KANCO] KANCO
  • Member since:
    11-09-2012
Sorry, forgot to add "by the person citing the document" at the end of that sentence.

Dominatus #82 Posted Apr 29 2013 - 02:10

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 10311 battles
  • 13,793
  • [CMFRT] CMFRT
  • Member since:
    12-21-2010

View Postlocoace1, on Apr 29 2013 - 01:50, said:

that sounds a little impractical, no hand held weapons?
Hand-held AT weapons for all nations in WWII were inferior to towed pieces anyways though, with the exception of the Panzerfausts.

NutrientibusMeaGallus #83 Posted Apr 29 2013 - 02:30

    Major

  • Players
  • 20292 battles
  • 4,968
  • [FILOX] FILOX
  • Member since:
    10-26-2012

View PostSparkykun, on Apr 28 2013 - 23:39, said:

What do you mean by Jewish American Princess?

What do YOU mean by Jewish American Princess? :P  Being raised Jewish, least in my area almost all Jewish women referred to themselves as Jewish American Princesses.... What else would Jap mean? :P

Edited by NutrientibusMeaGallus, Apr 29 2013 - 02:33.


Shatara422 #84 Posted Apr 29 2013 - 02:40

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 9724 battles
  • 537
  • Member since:
    07-18-2011

View Postlocoace1, on Apr 29 2013 - 01:50, said:

that sounds a little impractical, no hand held weapons?
I don't think they had a Bazooka/PIAT equivalent, though they did have a 20mm anti-tank rifle, for whatever good it did...

starkwolf #85 Posted Apr 29 2013 - 03:06

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 1720 battles
  • 12
  • Member since:
    09-27-2012

View Postgrimzod, on Apr 28 2013 - 23:13, said:

I find it ironic that the use of the term 'Japs', which is disallowed in in-game chat (for whatever reason), is acceptible for this article.  Whether YOU think its racist or whatever is irrelevant, articles in the forum and in-game chat should not include the term is paying or non-payign customers aren't even allowed to use it in in-game chat.  My two cents.

This was more what I meant in my earlier post. However, considering that these were the words of the document, not those of the Chieftan, that's a different matter entirely.

View PostKankou, on Apr 29 2013 - 01:58, said:

So, are you saying we should make historical documents "friendly" for the sake of being friendly?

The reason why Jap is not allowed for in-game chat is because the term itself has the potential to be racist. When cited as part of a historical context, we know the word is not meant to represent a racial slur by the person citing the document.

Jeez, what is it with such stupidity?

One thing that I would add, is that when quoting a historical document, to censor racist language would be to ignore the problem, and to lose valuable (if sometimes repulsive) insight as to the mindset of the times. You can't learn from the mistakes of history if you don't recognize their existence. I would just like to reiterate that I offer this as an elaboration to your post.

Edited by starkwolf, Apr 29 2013 - 03:06.


SoukouDragon #86 Posted Apr 29 2013 - 04:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 13943 battles
  • 3,482
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View Postlocoace1, on Apr 29 2013 - 01:50, said:

that sounds a little impractical, no hand held weapons?

They developed an infantry 70mm anti tank rocket and a 45mm recoilless rifle. In what quantity? Probably just a little. And mostly only in the Japanese home islands. Not nearly as powerful as a panzerfaust but probably would be sufficient against Shermans.

CrazyFPSEric #87 Posted Apr 29 2013 - 17:00

    Major

  • Players
  • 6055 battles
  • 3,284
  • Member since:
    10-04-2011
This article reminded me of this:
Posted Image
The Japanese soldier in the middle...he's holding a "Anti tank bamboo". lol
Okay seriously, What's the name of that bamboo with explosive

The_Chieftain #88 Posted Apr 29 2013 - 17:24

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 11322 battles
  • 9,805
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011
I have normally seen it referred to as a 'lunge mine'

lostwingman #89 Posted Apr 29 2013 - 17:28

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 22380 battles
  • 24,281
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    01-11-2011

View PostSolono, on Apr 28 2013 - 15:33, said:

The original form of 'Jap' was actually a term of near-affection during that period, it didn't transform into a slur until post-Pearl Harbor when the American propaganda machine demonized it. Its a word that should be examined in context, because it can simply be a contracted form, as opposed to the term 'Nip', which is universally a slur with no such grey area.
Ah see, that's how I had always interpreted those two contractions....

View PostSparkykun, on Apr 28 2013 - 23:39, said:

What do you mean by Jewish American Princess?
:trollface:

View Postlocoace1, on Apr 29 2013 - 01:50, said:

that sounds a little impractical, no hand held weapons?
Impractical?
Artillery was a tried and true method of knocking out tanks since WW1.
Plus those "charges" happened on island defenses, would be safer ambushing and firing from hard cover than prancing around the island with a bazooka-type weapon.

Edited by lostwingman, Apr 29 2013 - 17:29.


SoukouDragon #90 Posted Apr 30 2013 - 08:54

    Major

  • Players
  • 13943 battles
  • 3,482
  • Member since:
    03-19-2011

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Apr 29 2013 - 17:24, said:

I have normally seen it referred to as a 'lunge mine'

"Lunge mine" can be a decent translation of the Japanese word for it, 刺突爆雷, "shitotsu bakurai."

刺突, "shitotsu" means pierce or stab, stick into. The lunge part.
爆雷, "bakurai" means mine or depth charge. It should be noted that the word for land mine, 地雷 "chirai" is not use.

Vollketten #91 Posted Apr 30 2013 - 14:10

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 31389 battles
  • 8,671
  • [----] ----
  • Member since:
    12-26-2011
The Japanese also had a very effective magnetic anti-tank mine.
Posted Image
The wooden planks, and wire mesh over the hatches is clearly intended to space off these magnetic charges.

locoace1 #92 Posted May 03 2013 - 00:12

    Major

  • Players
  • 7418 battles
  • 2,030
  • Member since:
    02-24-2011

View Postlostwingman, on Apr 29 2013 - 17:28, said:

Ah see, that's how I had always interpreted those two contractions....


:trollface:


Impractical?
Artillery was a tried and true method of knocking out tanks since WW1.
Plus those "charges" happened on island defenses, would be safer ambushing and firing from hard cover than prancing around the island with a bazooka-type weapon.


it's safer to charge a tank with a mine on a stick, or satchel charges at your waist?




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users