0
Want this question answered?
Be notified when an answer is posted
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
Can you Give two examples of how the fighting in the Pacific Theater was different than the fighting in the European Theater?
2. In Europe, the U.S. was fighting more than one country and had more Allies that they could rely on.
What is the difference between the European theater of World War 2 and the pacific theater of World War 2?
European (or Western) Theater is the part of WWII that was fought in Europe with Nazis (Germans), some Italians, and some battles in Africa. Pacific Theater is the part of the WWII that was fought between USA and Japan. There were British, Aussies, Dutch, Indians and Chinese who also fought the Japanese. The Pacific was divided into the South Pacific and the North Pacific, another front was CBI (China Burma India).
Did any countries use specific strategies or resources to win World War 2?
The United States devoted ten percent of its resources to the pacific theater and 90 percent to the European theater. This was done in accordance with the Europe first plan which agreed to focus on defeating Germany which was thought to be the more dangerous of the two (Japan, Germany).
Who was the Supreme Commander of the Pacific Allied Forces?
There were three theaters in the war against Japan - the Central Pacific, the Southwest Pacific, and the China-Burma-India Theaters of Operations. The Pacific was divided largely to carve out a command for General Douglas MacArthur, who had enormous prestige and was a former Chief of Staff (commanding general) of the US Army. When MacArthur escaped from the Philippines the Southwest Pacific was created to make an appropriate command for him. He was based in Australia at first, and fought his way through New Guinea and neighboring island chains, and the Philippines. The Central Pacific Theater was under the command of US Admiral Chester Nimitz, who also commanded the US Pacific Fleet, and was based in Hawaii. Admiral Lord Louis Mountbatten commanded the CBI. He was an uncle of Prince Philip, the husband of Queen Elizabeth II. Mountbatten was murdered by the IRA in 1979. Though Eisenhower was the "Supreme Allied Commander" in the European Theater of Operations, there was also a Mediterranean Theater of Operations, which directed the fighting in Italy. Eisenhower commanded the MTO before moving to England to ready for the invasion of France, after which the MTO command passed to British General Harold Alexander. There was no single supreme commander of allied forces in the Pacific Theater. General MacArthur was the commander for the South West Pacific Area, while Admiral Nimitz was commander of the Pacific Ocean Area. See the related question for more information.
Where did most of World War 2 occur?
ETO (European Theater of Operations), PTO (Pacific Theater of Operations), and the CBI (China, Burma, India Theater of Operations). Territory wise: Most of Europe was engulfed in war for the ETO; South Central Asia was engulfed in war for the CBI; and the Pacific Ocean was engulfed in war for the PTO. Basically: ETO & CBI were land wars; PTO was a naval war.
Can you Give two examples of how the fighting in the Pacific Theater was different than the fighting in the European Theater?
2. In Europe, the U.S. was fighting more than one country and had more Allies that they could rely on.
Which was more critical the European theater or the Pacific theater?
it depends on which prespective you are looking at. America really kind of divided because most of the Navy and Marines were in the Pacific where most of the Air Force and Army were in the European for Britain, it was definitely Europe because it was right in their back yard and they were more directly affected.(Battle of Britain, The Blitz, etc.) where in the Pacific they only lost some territories. In Russia, it was the European because that's where they were invaded from and also they really didn't get involved with the Pacific. Germany was Europe because that was where they were. The same for the Japanese and the Pacific.
Of the more than three hundred thousand American military deaths in World War 2 how many were in the Pacific Theater and how many in the European Theater?
It is HARD to find comparisons. But I recall 90k in Pacific, 300k WWII so 210K Europe. Seems Battle of Bulge had more casualties than the entire Pacific War
Which theater did the US have more men fight in World War 2?
Pacific theater
What war has had the largest death totals?
World War 2 had the highes death count of seventy one million deaths. This includes the totals from both the Pacific Theater and the European Theater of the war. It is considered there may have been more because there were many unrecorded deaths of both civilian and military personnel.
What is the difference between the European theater of World War 2 and the pacific theater of World War 2?
European (or Western) Theater is the part of WWII that was fought in Europe with Nazis (Germans), some Italians, and some battles in Africa. Pacific Theater is the part of the WWII that was fought between USA and Japan. There were British, Aussies, Dutch, Indians and Chinese who also fought the Japanese. The Pacific was divided into the South Pacific and the North Pacific, another front was CBI (China Burma India).
What is the battle of the pacific theater?
The Pacific theater stopped the Japanes empire from ruling the whole Pacific Ocean. It also gave America a sort of controll of some captured Pacific areas that would lead to more war and bloodshed (Korea and Veitnam wars). Plus it put the United States as a world power in the new Atomic Age.
Did any countries use specific strategies or resources to win World War 2?
The United States devoted ten percent of its resources to the pacific theater and 90 percent to the European theater. This was done in accordance with the Europe first plan which agreed to focus on defeating Germany which was thought to be the more dangerous of the two (Japan, Germany).
Compare and contrast world war 1 and world war 2?
WWI was a static war (commonly referred to as a trench war) and was by far mostly a land war concentrated in Europe. WWII was by far a truly "world war" (global war) than WWI was. WWII was also far more mobile than the 1st World War was (originally called the Great War). WWII was so huge, it was divided into theaters; European, Pacific, Mediterranean, China-Burma-India, etc. The Pacific theater, like the name implies, was a naval war; the European theater was as the name implied in Europe.
Which American theater commander was best and which was worst In the period 1940-1951?
Nimitz was probably the best in the Pacific, he possibly saved more lives, by "island hopping" (avoiding heavily defended Japanese garrisons). MacArthur wanted to fight his way northward; which would have been far bloodier. Eisenhower was the perfect commander in Europe. A commander with a large amount of diplomacy. Between Nimitz and Eisenhower, whomever would have served as Commander in the Pacific would have had to have had a brutal touch to him, in order to succeed. There was no mercy shown in Pacific Battles.
What are the Effects on the European missionaries arrival to the pacific?
The missionaries naturally increased the catholics in the area and they also made European culture more well known and more people would then listen to more Europeans when they came , there is more of this at http://bussinessmouse.googlepages.com
Bloodiest European theater of the seven years wars where Frederick the greats?
Germany was the bloodiest European theater of the Seven Years War. France had to allocate more resources to fight Frederick the Great and as a result, were under manned and under funded in their North American encounters with Great Britain.
