MHM 139 Letters – March

This article is from Military History Matters issue 139

Subscribe now for full access and no adverts

THE REAL TIPPING POINT?

An article in a recent issue of the magazine declared the ‘universally acknowledged truth’ that atomic bombs ‘brought an end to World War II’. While they were obviously a major factor, there were others. One, of course, was the intense bombing campaign against the Japanese Home Islands, supplemented by naval bombardments by the American and Royal Navies.

The second was the blockade, which was, literally, starving the Japanese into submission. The Allies were succeeding in doing to the Japanese what the Germans had earlier in the war hoped to do to the British. In addition to restricting food supplies, the blockade prevented importation of raw materials for their war economy.

The third, and most important factor, was the entry of the USSR into the war. The Japanese hierarchy was well aware of what occurred in eastern Germany and Hungary when the Red Army arrived, and they did not want their citizens (or themselves) to have to endure that.

Although the Japanese were aware that the Red Army was preparing to attack Manchuria, they were not ready for the speed with which Soviet troops moved across desert, through forests, and across mountains and rivers. The Japanese quickly decided that it was much better to surrender to the Americans than to ‘endure the unendurable’ of Soviet occupation.

I have always thought that the third factor was the tipping point.

Peter Ayers Wimbrow III, Ocean City, Maryland

FLAWED FILM

I suspect that by now the vast majority of MHM readers will have seen Ridley Scott’s new blockbuster film Napoleon and will have read Taylor Downing’s excellent review of it (MHM February/March 2024).

I have to admit to much sympathy with French outrage that an Englishman should produce such a flawed exposé of their national hero. How would we like it if they produced a similarly controversial film about Lord Nelson? In my own view, Napoleon was too long, irritatingly inaccurate, and in many places disjointed. For example, MHM readers will know why the action suddenly turns to the Pyramids and Egypt, but the film doesn’t sufficiently explain this to a general audience.

The one scene that was spot on was Napoleon’s coronation as emperor. There would have been no excuse otherwise, as Ridley Scott had Jacques-Louis David’s superb 1807 painting of the event (pictured below) as the blueprint.

I contend that the best, most accurate depiction of Napoleon was the outstanding performance of Rod Steiger in Waterloo (1970), with which readers will also be familiar.

Roger Laing, Iver, Buckinghamshire 

BOOTS ON THE GROUND

I enjoyed the special feature on ‘Wellington at war’ (MHM October/November 2023). It was illuminating to read of the many setbacks his troops encountered during their landing at Lisbon in November 1807, which I previously assumed had been straightforward.

Napoleon’s behaviour at the time also strikes the reader as erratic: to leave such an open wound in Spain and march off to invade Russia instead. He would have been wiser to concentrate his forces in Iberia and drive Wellington back into the sea.

Michelle McIntyre, via email

PRISONER EXCHANGE

I enjoyed most of Edmund West’s article on Nathan Bedford Forrest (pictured), the renowned cavalry officer during the American Civil War (MHM December 2023/January2024), but the piece does put all the blame on Confederate leaders for the breakdown of the prison exchange programme.

In fact, many Union leaders in both politics and the military, including no less than General Grant himself, played a role in bringing this programme to an end.

The article is right to say, however, that its ending contributed to the outcome of the war, as the exchanges aided the manpower-starved Confederacy much more than they did the Union.

James N Kocur, Linden, New Jersey

VENGEANCE BOMBERS

I very much enjoyed Graham Goodlad’s special feature on General Slim, ‘the unforgotten commander’, and the Burma campaign of 1944 (MHM February/March 2024).

My father flew Hurricanes and P-47s in the campaign and my godfather, Dennis Gibbs, flew Vultee Vengeances. The Vengeance was in fact a dive-bomber, and not a fighter as asserted in the article. A small error in an otherwise very enjoyable piece.

Neil Cameron, via email

Please note: letters may be edited for length; views expressed here are those of our readers, and do not necessarily reflect those of the magazine.