How was Europe and the Pacific different in World War 2?

Answer 1

You mean for the US forces? Well for starters I will concentrate on the land fighting and (sorry) on the Western Allies. (leave the air and naval components to someone else) and I will answer questions about the Chinese, Russians, etc if you still want them. (I'm no expert, just a guy who likes military history) Pacific: Opponent: Japan Nature of combat: Sea and air battles with intense close-range firefights Small patrols going around in a jungle environment On land, the fighting was dominated by infantry and artillery. What few tanks the Japanese possesed were soon outclassed. The Americans found that the terrain in the Pacific was also not conductive to large armoured formations: therefore they depended mostly on the Marines to do the brunt of the fighting The fighting was of a close-range nature, often hand-to-hand as Americans and Japanese may run into each other in the Jungle paths without warning. In the Pacific Theater, no quarter was asked and none given. An important aspect to remember was that, though there was certainly tension and rivalry between the US Army/Marines and Navy, there was almost downright hostility between the Japanese Army and Navy, and they often refused to cooperate with each other. This had major consequences on the outcome of the Pacific Campaign. The Americans often used the "grease" smg in the jungle due to its small size and compactness. Also, the American M1 rifle was clearly superior to the Japanese Arisaka rifle, giving American soldiers an advantage in firefights. The Japanese usually had to depend on their wits and battle fervour (Banzai charges) to counter the American's superior weapons. Oftentimes the Japanese launched night attacks which unnerved the Allies at first but later became accepted as a matter of course. Throughout the Pacific Campaign Japanese troops adopted a stance of fighting to the last man, bullet and bayonet, and would almost never surrender. Marines and GIs later used flamethrowers to disable Japanese pillboxes. Japan fought on tenaciously until the Atomic bombs bought the war to an abrupt end in 1945, putting an end to fears of massive Allied casualties in the case of a step-by-step conventional invasion of Japan itself. The bulk of Japan's land forces were tied up in the inconclusive and brutal China campaign. Finally, the climate in the Pacific was relatively warm, but it was also humid and swarming with insects and tropical diseases. More Japanese troops died from tropical diseases than American bullets in the Guadalcanal campaign, for example. US Marines assigned to the Pacific theater wore a noticeably lighter and airier uniform than their European theater counterparts. The Jungle damp rotted many things, and both sides often had to abandon weapons when they got too rusty. European theater Opponent: Nazi Germany, Italy (sometimes, but usually just Germany) Style of warfare: With a whole continent to work with, all sides were able to field massive formations with thousands of tanks and armoured vehicles, which often dominated the fighting, with infantry often relegated to a support role. While never an "easy" opponent, the Western Allies probably felt it was just a tad easier dealing with the Germans than with the Japanese as the Germans were also a Western culture and can be "read' easier than the "Asiatic" Japanese. However, on the whole it seemed that German generals were better than Japanese ones and understood modern warfare more than anyone else, making Germany an extremely tough opponent. Nonetheless, when things got really rough many German soldiers on the Western front were willing to drop their arms and surrender to the Allies, which meant that not every German was killed, while regiment after regiment of Japanese troops were annihilated. The problem was getting the Germans to surrender in the first place, as Germany probalby had the best weaponry of anyone in the war. A lot of fighting took place in towns and cities, (very rare in the Pacific) where infantry were used to root out resistance street-by-street, with inevitable heavy losses for both sides. A lot of heavy firefights took place in and around buildings. A lot of the strategy hinged on who could unleash his tanks first and set them loose on the enemy. The European theater featured much heavier weaponry than the Pacific theater, as Germany unlike Japan kept inventing new weapons which the Allies and Russians had to counter. The bulk of German divisions were actually facing Russia, who did the bulk of the fighting against Nazi Germany and took the bulk of the casualties. The largest tank battle of all time happened in Kursk (modern Ukraine) July 1943. As a soldier at the front, an infantryman here was often assigned to supporting the tanks, and soldiers in Europe had an assortment of anti-vehicle weapons not usually found in the Pacific, such as Bazookas, Panzerfausts, etc. The Germans were known for launching nasty counterattacks so troops in the European theater had to dig in.... a lot. The Germans usually had the advantage in a straight-up firefight with their MP40s and MG42s (though the German Kar98 rifle still took too long to load despite its accuracy.) so the Allied troops had to be resourceful (or depend on their massive, and I mean massive logistical superiority by 1944) to beat them. Moreover, the German soldiers were usually more experienced than their opponents. The allied advantage lay in the fact that: a) they had a lot more of everything than Germany, and b) Hitler was not in charge of THEIR army. By 1944 Hitler was becoming ever more erratic and made many dubious military decisions which hastened his own demise. Soldiers in Europe usually had to wear a heavier uniform than his Pacific counterpart because the weather in Northwest Europe was often windy, cold and miserable. Snow featured prominently in Russia and in the Battle of the Bulge involving the Americans. Keeping warm was a problem in Europe. Wow I hope that wasn't too long haha hope I answered your question.

Answer 2

Difference between war in Pacific and war in Europe.The war in Europe was a fight against National Socialism (the Nazi's), and the Pacific war was a fight for countries such as Australia and the US to defend land from being taken over by Japan. They are commonly thought of as the same war because they happened in the same era, and that Japan and Germany were allies. It is however true that the war in the Pacific was more likely to happen with WWII, than if it did not happen.

The war in the Pacific between Japan and USA were being fought over sea and with suicidle pilots, kamikaze pilots, the war in Europe was fought on land or over land, it was much more brutal in the Pacific as the Japanese took the Americans as prisoners and treated them very badly, the war in the Pacific ended very brutal when the Americans could not face the Japanese troops and attacked two areas by thowing one atomic bomb on each area, thousands died, mostly civilians, the war in Europe was mostly troops against troops and the end of war was not as brutal.

Another View:

I think it is fair to say there were many atrocities in all theatres of WW2. Yes, it was an example of 2 wars being fought concurrently, but the war in the east of Europe, between Germany & the Soviet Union was an immense struggle. The resistance of the Japanese soldier was a tough one for the US to deal with, in many instances the death toll percentage of fatality was in the high 90% +.

Answer 3

They were like two different wars happening at the same time. Europe was the war with Hitler, and Germany trying to take over Europe and eventually Russia also.

The Pacific is the war between US and Japan. It all started with PEARL HARBOR. Japan was trying to take control of all the islands in the pacific including Hawaii and Australia. The US would "Island Jump" as in, take back one island, then move to the next, pushing the Japanese back to their original home. (This is the where the famous picture of US soldiers tilting up our flag on a hill comes from) --Iwo Jima Eventually the U.S thought the only way to stop the war for good was to bomb Japan. Once on Aug. 6 and second on Aug. 9, 1945. They surrendered Aug. 14

Answer 4

The Pacific Islands did not provide suitable terrain for tank warfare. The Japanese had a strong tradition forbidding surrender.