"War in the Pacific" Topic

16 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please use the Complaint button (!) to report problems on the forums.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.

Back to the WWII Discussion Message Board

Action Log

26 May 2018 3:06 p.m. PST
by Editor in Chief Bill

Removed from TMP Poll Suggestions board

Areas of Interest

World War Two on the Land

Featured Hobby News Article

Free Download: 9th Panzer Division Roster for Combat HQ

Paul Reed's Battlefields of WW2

Featured Ruleset

One-Hour Skirmish Wargames

Rating:

Featured Showcase Article

1:72 Italeri Russian Infantry, Part V

Soviet women were tough!

Featured Workbench Article

Painting Flames of War Crusader Tanks

Minidragon been building and painting his own army for Flames of War for a while now.

Featured Profile Article

Gen Con So Cal 2006 Day 2 Report

Report from Day Two!

Current Poll

Best Rules for WWII in the Pacific (Round 1)

The Membership System will be closing for maintenance in 10 minutes. Please finish anything that will involve the membership system, including membership changes or posting of messages.

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.

Editor in Chief Bill	04 Nov 2017 9:14 a.m. PST
In Bringing Mulligan Home – which I recently reviewed – TMP link – author Dale Maharidge writes: The 1940's war boiled down to one imperial power, in the wrong for occupying and killing other peoples, attacking another that was in the wrong for occupying and killing other peoples. Do you agree?
x42brown	04 Nov 2017 9:42 a.m. PST
Yes but one sides doing this was further in the past than the others. x42
Ed Mohrmann	04 Nov 2017 10:38 a.m. PST
Sigh…(tosses yellow flag): 20-post penalty, no loss of on-line time…
Joes Shop	04 Nov 2017 10:58 a.m. PST
No.
randy51	04 Nov 2017 11:04 a.m. PST
I guess ultimately it comes down to comparing the two different "imperialist powers" and the scope, nature and numbers of atrocities inflicted on their victims by each. Just go to the Philippines as a typical example and you'll have an easy answer of who was feared and who was welcomed (back).
rmaker	04 Nov 2017 11:12 a.m. PST
No.
Kevin C	04 Nov 2017 11:16 a.m. PST
Great topic for discussion --- on the Blue Fez.
andysyk	04 Nov 2017 12:07 p.m. PST
No.
Editor in Chief Bill	04 Nov 2017 12:18 p.m. PST
Great topic for discussion --- on the Blue Fez. It's outside the 10-year 'no politics' rule.
mjkerner	04 Nov 2017 12:29 p.m. PST
No.
warwell	04 Nov 2017 3:16 p.m. PST
No
nsolomon99	04 Nov 2017 5:52 p.m. PST
The original author is clearly under-researched!! The 1940's war was known as the Second World War and involved a lot more than just 2 Imperial powers. Assuming he is referring to just the Pacific Theatre of World War II then even so this was a conflict between Imperial Japan, the British Empire, the Dutch Colonies of the East Indies, the French Colonies of Indo-China and the South Pacific, The Soviet Far East, Nationalist China, the Portuguese Colonies of Macau and East Timor and the United States of America and its colony in The Philippines. Quite a lot of Imperial powers in that list! Don't know where he thinks it was just a 1v1 Campaign?
Dances with Clydesdales	04 Nov 2017 9:09 p.m. PST
NO
Bellbottom	05 Nov 2017 3:07 a.m. PST
No
deephorse	05 Nov 2017 4:50 a.m. PST
No. What absolute garbage.
Legion 4	05 Nov 2017 6:50 a.m. PST
Recommend "War Without Mercy" … a good book about the PTO …