Why does it seem the European Theater gets more attention than the Pacific one?

[SteyrAUG]

The Pacific theater was largely a Navy thing (not to diminish contributions of Marines, Army, etc.) and was harder to relate to for the average American.

Ship gunners fighting off swarms of Japanese planes, hidden enemies in tunnel networks shooting our guys from behind, godawful jungle environments where as many men are lost to disease and fatigue as enemy action. It was just easier to relate to the more traditional war in Europe.

[SteyrAUG]

This.

While the Japs were some brutal sons of bitches, especially towards POW's, they weren't rounding people up and putting them in ovens and gas chambers because of their race or religion.

Google Unit 731

[SteyrAUG]

Fixed.

France fought on both sides. Although so did Italy, Rumania, and Finland.

Finland didn't change sides so much as Russia changed sides while attacking Finland.

[ABNAK]

I suspect that we all simply care less about Asia.

This is what my guess would be, given the ethnic makeup of the United States (especially in the 1940's, where European immigration in the previous decades was fresh in everyone's minds AND families).

[ABNAK]

I actually just had this conversation with a girl last night. She thought "D-Day" was June 6th, 1944. She didn't understand that there were literally dozens of other D-Days, like February 19, 1945.

As a Marine myself, the attention spent on the Western European theater's ground war is quite confounding. It wasn't the deadliest, (Eastern front, Pacific Theater, and the US Army Air Corps all had much higher casualties) it wasn't the longest, (It literally lasted 11 months and 2 days out of a 6 year war) and it wasn't even that important. (Hitler would have eventually lost had the Allies went north from Italy, kept bombing Europe, and let Russia take over.)

Maybe it is indeed the holocaust coupled with battles in places that are "familiar" to westerners. Not many people can relate to hunkering down on volcanic sand on Iwo Jima, but nearly everyone can be amazed at a warzone on their city streets.

I've looked at the numbers some years ago and the ETO's U.S. casualties outnumbered the Pacific's by quite a bit. I guess I should say we lost more fighting the Germans than the Japanese. At first blush, when you think of killing fields like Iwo and Okinawa you'd think it must be the Pacific. But in fact, even with all services casualties added in, the ETO had more. The sheer number of divisions committed to Europe was like 2:1 over the Pacific. IIRC at the "Bulge" the U.S. lost something like 19,000 KIA.

Had we invaded Japan, it would have swung violently the other way: estimates were that U.S. casualties for the ENTIRE war up to that point would have been doubled.

[TehLlama]

Never underestimate proximity to populated areas as one of the reasons. The few population centers that WW2 was near in southeast asia were overdue for violent revolution anyway, so no massive change from what was going to be experienced by the local populace anyway.

In the pacific, application of naval aviation proved to be the deciding factor, and that wasn't something brass could just throw GI's at as they did in the European theatre, so the number of stories coming back was still different. This also explains the numerical discrepancy in casualties, the only pacific campaign the US had the partial opportunity to throw Army troops at en masse was Okinawa, and that was extremely bloody in its own right.

[MountainRaven]

Finland didn't change sides so much as Russia changed sides while attacking Finland.

Mannerheim's armistice with the Soviets required that Finland immediately declare war against Germany. Now, I grant you that the only Western Ally to declare war against Finland was the United Kingdom but still.

I'm sure that you knew that, so I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. Finland was not especially fond of either the Nazis or the Soviets.

[Moose-Knuckle]

The Nazis are everyone's favorite bad guys.

[Moose-Knuckle]

This.

While the Japs were some brutal sons of bitches, especially towards POW's, they weren't rounding people up and putting them in ovens and gas chambers because of their race or religion.

After looking up what Steyr suggestd on Unit 731, read up on the Rape of Nanking during the Second Sino-Japanese War. They also invented the concept of "comfort wives". They were sadistic ****s and we didn't nuke enough of them.

[SteyrAUG]

Mannerheim's armistice with the Soviets required that Finland immediately declare war against Germany. Now, I grant you that the only Western Ally to declare war against Finland was the United Kingdom but still.

I'm sure that you knew that, so I'm not quite sure what you're getting at. Finland was not especially fond of either the Nazis or the Soviets.

When Russia attacked Finland the Russians were allied with the Germans. When Russia got invaded and decided to be "our buddy" Finland was suddenly seen as an enemy of the allies. We have to remember they fought Russia twice.