The Battle of Iwo Jima: Peter Chen and Cyril O’Brien Points of View Research Paper

Exclusively available on IvyPanda Available only on IvyPanda

Introduction

Standing in the way of total Allied victory in Asia is a tiny speck in the Pacific, an island measuring 4.5 miles long at its broadest (Chen, par. 1). American casualties numbered 26,000, exceeding that of the Japanese which is 22,000 (O’Brien, par. 5). The goal was to take control of the airfields at Iwo Jima and American forces are well aware that by securing the island they can ensure the conquest of Japan and thereby winning the war in Asia. At first the American soldiers thought that it was going to be a very easy fight because the island was supposed to have been softened up by more than 70 days of aerial bombing and close to three days of naval shelling. But for the incoming U.S. servicemen, it will be a very tough test because the island was designed to be an underground fortress and the rugged determination of the Japanese soldiers strengthened their resolve to never give up and to never surrender.

We will write a custom essay on your topic a custom Research Paper on The Battle of Iwo Jima: Peter Chen and Cyril O’Brien Points of View
808 writers online

Battleground

Iwo Jima was used by the Japanese to harass Allied bombers on their way to their homeland. Aside from that, the island was used as an early warning station and thus Tokyo had two hours to prepare before the arrival of the bombers. By conquering Iwo Jima the United States could gain an additional airfield for future operations (Chen, par. 2). For the 70,000 American forces Iwo Jima was a step closer to the Japanese heartland while for the Japanese defenders the island was the very defense of their hearths and homes as it was part of the Tokyo Imperial Prefecture (O’Brien, par. 4). The Japanese soldiers were ready to die defending it while the American soldiers will use every available manpower and firepower to break their will.

The battle started at 0200 on February 19, 1945. It was the battleship guns that signaled the commencement of D-Day and it was followed by a bombing of 100 bombers, which was followed by another volley from naval guns (Chen, par. 6). When American soldiers finally landed on the beach they quickly realized that the eight square miles of barren land had no front lines, no rear and it was every inch a battleground (O’Brien, par. 7). Underneath Mount Suribachi there were at least 750 major defense installations to shelter guns, blockhouses, and hospitals that were connected by a total of 13,000 yards of tunnel (Chen, par. 3). It was not going to be an easy fight for the invading forces.

According to an eyewitness account it was like going through hell, “At great cost, you’d take a hill to find the same enemy suddenly on your flank or rear” (O’Brien, par. 7). According to Corporal Edward Mortimer, “The worst part is to see them blown to bits right in front of you … you’re talking to a friend and right in the middle of a sentence a bullet tears through his head” (O’Brien, par. 12). All in all 6,800 American servicemen were killed (O’Brien par. 5).

There were 30,000 U.S. Marines who landed on Iwo Jima and of that number there were a total 25,000 casualties and nearly 7,000 dead. It was estimated that the casualty rate was 30 percent among the landing forces, to no less than 75 percent in the infantry units of the Fourth and Fifth Marine divisions. Aside from the high number of dead U.S. servicemen there were 19,200 wounded American survivors (Chen, par. 21). The island was declared conquered by Chester Nimitz on March 14, 1945 but Japanese who were hidden underneath the island did not surrender and fighting continued days after Nimitz’ declaration (Chen, par. 20).

Different Points of View

Based on the preceding discussion there are three major differences in the accounts of the two authors and these are listed as follows:

  • Number of Soldiers Who Fought in Iwo Jima
  • How they saw the significance of the island
  • Casualties

In the recounting of the Battle of Iwo Jima authors Cyril O’ Brien and C. Peter Chen seemed to differ when it comes to the number of soldiers who fought in the island. According to O’Brien there were 70, 000 soldiers who participated in the said battle. Chen on the other hand said that there were 30,000 who were able to land on Iwo Jima. The difference could not be attributed to the use of estimates because the difference in numbers is highly significant. Thus, one has to determine how the authors exactly used the above-mentioned statistics.

1 hour!
The minimum time our certified writers need to deliver a 100% original paper

It is possible that Chen was referring to the number of U.S. Marines who participated in the battle while O’Brien was talking about the total number of U.S. servicemen who took part in the battle and this include members of the U.S. Navy as well as members of the U.S. Air Force. So while Chen may have focused on the number of U.S. Marines who were tasked to conquer Iwo Jima while O’Brien was wanted to show the extent of the U.S. Armed Forces commitment to capture the said island.

Another major difference in their narration of the Iwo Jima is in the way the two authors portrayed the island. For O’Brien the island should now be considered as hallowed ground and a place that veterans should visit to commemorate the sacrifice of valiant men. It is interesting to note that in O’Brien’s article he talked about how Japanese and American soldiers came to Iwo Jima decades after the fierce battle, not to relive the senseless violence of the battle but to honor the courage displayed by both camps.

O’Brien saw Iwo Jima as a war memorial while Chen saw Iwo Jima as an underground fortress that claimed the lives of thousands of U.S. servicemen. As a result Chen tried to emphasize the fact that the United States almost lost the battle of Iwo Jima. Chen provided more background information with regards to the tactical aspect of the battle and devoted much space to describing the complex structure of defenses hidden from plain sight. For Chen, Iwo Jima is part of the battle and defeating the island natural as well as technical obstacles is the key to winning the conflict.

For O’Brien the island is like one giant cemetery where many were left behind. O’Brien saw the island not only as a battleground but a place that can easily evoke emotions. O’Brien saw Iwo Jima as a symbol of courage while Chen on the other hand saw Iwo Jima as one giant chessboard and the only sure way to win the battle was to execute the perfect strategy. In this regard Chen lamented the fact that the U.S. Marines received faulty intelligence reports, days leading to D-Day. They were unaware of the massive underground fortress that awaited their arrival.

Finally, the third major difference in the recounting of the battle can be seen in the number of casualties reported in the two articles. For O’Brien there were a total of 26,000 casualties on the side of the U.S. Armed Forces while Chen reported that there were 25,000. Furthermore, O’Brien said that there were 6,800 U.S. American servicemen killed in the battle of Iwo Jima while Chen said that the death toll rose to 7000. It can be argued that the discrepancy can be attributed simply to the use of estimates. Most probably Chen rounded off the figures so that the final total for the number of soldiers killed reached 7000.

Conclusion

The major differences can be attributed to the difference in points of view. For O’Brien he wrote about Iwo Jima from a war memorial standpoint and looking at the battle from the perspective of war veterans who were so glad that the conflict was over and that they were able to survive and tell the stories of heroism and sacrifice. This is the reason why O’Brien can place former Japanese and American soldiers on equal footing and described them as if they were long lost friends. There was no longer no animosity between the two groups of enemy combatants, they just came to visit the island to honor their fallen comrades.

For Chen, he narrated the battle of Iwo Jima as if he was there. He described the action as if the outcome was not yet decided. In fact Chen devoted much space to explain the reason why the U.S. Armed Forces in Iwo Jima had to sacrifice a great number of American lives. Chen tried to make the readers re-experience the violence and the desperation in the said battle and he went to explain that it was due to the massive underground fortress hidden under Mount Suribachi that made it possible for the Japanese to last as long as they did.

Remember! This is just a sample
You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers

Thus, it can be argued that Chen is the better historian. He provided more detailed information regarding the battle and refrained from digging deeper into the emotional aspect of the conflict. Chen tried to deliver facts and nothing else. The research methodologies of both writers were not flawed and they did not use different sources. It is simply due to difference in points of view. In this regard O’Brien focused on the aftermath of the battle, several decades after one of the bloodiest conflict in World War II while Chen on the other hand tried to supply as much technical information to explain why it was one of the bloodiest conflict in the 20th century in relation to the size of land that was being contested.

Works Cited

  1. Chen, Peter. . Web.
  2. O’Brien, Cyril. “Iwo Jima Retrospective.”
Print
Need an custom research paper on The Battle of Iwo Jima: Peter Chen and Cyril O’Brien Points of ... written from scratch by a professional specifically for you?
808 writers online
Cite This paper
Select a referencing style:

Reference

IvyPanda. (2021, November 20). The Battle of Iwo Jima: Peter Chen and Cyril O’Brien Points of View. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-battle-of-iwo-jima-peter-chen-and-cyril-obrien-points-of-view/

Work Cited

"The Battle of Iwo Jima: Peter Chen and Cyril O’Brien Points of View." IvyPanda, 20 Nov. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/the-battle-of-iwo-jima-peter-chen-and-cyril-obrien-points-of-view/.

References

IvyPanda. (2021) 'The Battle of Iwo Jima: Peter Chen and Cyril O’Brien Points of View'. 20 November.

References

IvyPanda. 2021. "The Battle of Iwo Jima: Peter Chen and Cyril O’Brien Points of View." November 20, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-battle-of-iwo-jima-peter-chen-and-cyril-obrien-points-of-view/.

1. IvyPanda. "The Battle of Iwo Jima: Peter Chen and Cyril O’Brien Points of View." November 20, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-battle-of-iwo-jima-peter-chen-and-cyril-obrien-points-of-view/.


Bibliography


IvyPanda. "The Battle of Iwo Jima: Peter Chen and Cyril O’Brien Points of View." November 20, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-battle-of-iwo-jima-peter-chen-and-cyril-obrien-points-of-view/.

Powered by CiteTotal, automatic reference generator
If you are the copyright owner of this paper and no longer wish to have your work published on IvyPanda. Request the removal
More related papers
Cite
Print
1 / 1