• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.

Anatur

Lt. General
2 Badges
Sep 22, 2012
1.296
481
  • Europa Universalis IV
  • Hearts of Iron IV Sign-up
I came across this "operation" while reading up a bit on more obscure WW2 events.

Basically the American and Canadian troops made an amphibious assault on the island of Kiska.

In the "battle" the allies suffered 313 casualties.

Thing is,there wasnt a single Japanese soldier on the island,it was all down to friendly fire and some stray mines.

Here is the link for a more in depth description:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cottage

The battle is listed as a "Japanese Tactical Victory".

As a side note the Canadians suffered fewer losses than the Americans.

I dont know if this is a hint towards any inherent superiority in Canadian infantry tactics or not.

Im somewhat curious how this sort of mistake was even possible,surely the soldiers involved would realize the absence of any Japanese.
 
Any big conscription (and non-conscription too, come to think of it) army operations would involve lots of accidents. Just by virtue of big masses and lots of gear involved there will always be FF and other stupid stuff. Look at Austria anschluss, Germans lost dozens killed in road accidents, etc.
In this case situation was worsened by mines and expectation of active resistance. Intel services fail all the time, there is nothing strange in that.
 
Thing is,there wasnt a single Japanese soldier on the island,it was all down to friendly fire and some stray mines.
Im somewhat curious how this sort of mistake was even possible.....

I dont want to step on anybodys toe but from what I gather the american army is sadly famous for its FF rates.
Compared internationally and over time.
 
Looking at the casualties it would seem that the canadians where better shots.
 
I've always wondered this but does dying to booby traps and mines count as a soldier "KIA", died to attrition or died in accident?

I'd assume KIA, given that they have died on the frontline, from enemy action.
 
I've always wondered this but does dying to booby traps and mines count as a soldier "KIA", died to attrition or died in accident?

What would the families rather hear.
 
I dont want to step on anybodys toe but from what I gather the american army is sadly famous for its FF rates.
Compared internationally and over time.


I'd say that is a natural consequence of American military doctrine. The Americans are very reliant on heavy artillery barrages and air strikes, and with lots of firepower follows a higher degree of friendly fire as a natural consequence.