Japanese Balloon Battle

mw2040 writes "Slate reports on a little-known method used by the Japanese during WWII - hydrogen-filled paper balloons with deadly payloads floated without a guidance-system across the Pacific. Both amazing low-tech warfare and a cautionary tale about censorship during wartime. More links (even one for our neighbors to the North) (shamelessly stolen from the article)."

Comments

Balloon

[Anonymous Coward]

The BBC (or it may have been Channel 4 in the UK) did a programme about these balloons, explaining how the Japanese used the Jet Stream, and a clockwork mechanism to drop sandbags allowing the balloon to drop out of the stream once over the States - I believe many ended up in Canada.

Not exactly .....

[liamo]

... the pinnacle of the science of precision bombing. Can't really see it catching on.

The need for censorship

[Anonymous Coward]

The news was squelched in America in order to make then Japanese enemy believe that their efforts had completely failed. Similarly, in Great Britain during the buzz bomb attacks, news reports often gave false information as to where the bombs had landed so that the enemy would mis-adjust their targeting when they re-calibrated based on the false reports.

Nothing wrong with censorship during a war for survival. First order of the day is always to survive.

Speaking of censorship....

[Anonymous Coward]

One thing you will not find in Japanese schoolbooks is an historical account of the massacre at Nanking. In 1937, the Japanese attacked China and killed thousands of innocents in Nanking. Today, it's as if it never happened. In fact, I have never learned of this myself until very recently.

This kind of censorship is what we need to be aware of today. Historical records must not be skewed so that they may not tell all sides of the story - always make sure you know where your sources are coming from. This is one of the many reasons why history repeats itself.

Re:Speaking of censorship....

[The_Mr_Flibble]

One Bit of censorship I think is funny is the number of times the Canadians burned down the Whitehouse.

Is this the slowest slashdot post ever?

[areve]

Is this news not 60 years old?

Re:Hadn't heard about casualties

[nyekulturniy]

As one who has contributed significantly to the Wikipedia article on the War of 1812, I need to clarify this. It was the British forces, not Canadian militia, who landed in Maryland, defeated the DC militia at Bladensburg, burned the public buildings, and then moved to take Baltimore. At Baltimore the landing force was soundly defeated at North Point, and the ship force could not crack Ft. McHenry, so they withdrew.

The Canadian militia performed very well, but they, like the American militia, faced problems when dealting with regular soldiers. General Winfield Scott and Jacob Brown led a regular US column into Ontario in 1814, mauling both Canadian and British forces at Chippewa. The British victory at Lundy's Lane in July 1814 was due more to Scott and Brown's wounding and the horrific casualty rate on both sides. The American forces actually took the Canadian and British guns, but were too weak to stay. They then mauled the Canadian militia at Fort Erie, Ontario, and moved back over the Niagara, guaranteeing a stalemate in the Northern campaign.

The War of 1812 was one of those rare wars where both sides accomplished much of their war goals. The US did not annex Canada, but the gateway to the Southwest opened up, enabling us to move westward into Spanish/Mexican territory. The British began to give American positions more respect internationally, including a preference to negotiate agreements rather than fight. Canada became a nation, though Quebec and the Red River settlements were both problematic. There are reasons why both nations celebrate it as a victory, though technically it was a draw.