In fact, this "anticline" tactic was not invented and applied to actual combat by Ushijima. Pen & Fun & Pavilion www.biquge.info

This tactic was invented by the Nationalist Army, which was despised by the Japanese army......

On the Chinese battlefield, compared with the Japanese artillery, tanks and aircraft, the national army is at an absolute disadvantage in equipment, and the Chinese battlefield is a very frequent war and a very long time span, so after a long time, the national officers and soldiers in order to better preserve their lives and try to block the Japanese attack as much as possible, they have studied this kind of tactics that can offset the superior firepower of the Japanese army to a certain extent.

The Japanese army usually dismisses this tactic, the reason is that this tactic is not so good in the hands of the national army...... the "anti-slope" tactic can indeed offset part of the Japanese army's advantage in firepower, but the Japanese army's close-quarters combat effectiveness is also much stronger than the national army, and sometimes the Japanese army even hopes to fight with the national army in close combat in order to save ammunition, so even if the national army uses the "anti-slope" tactic, it is easy to collapse under the attack of the Japanese army, and it is even easier to collapse...... The use of the "anti-slope" tactic requires the troops to have a high psychological quality, and requires the troops to dare to face the enemy head-on and dare to fight hand-to-hand combat, and the national army often lacks such courage and morale.

As a result, most Japanese generals did not take the "anti-slope" tactic seriously, and even considered it a failed tactic.

On the other hand, because the Japanese army has never taken the national army into account, it is natural to think that the "anticline" tactics of the national army are not very good.

But Ushijima is not an ordinary Japanese, he is ruthless, cruel enough, and calm enough...... So he knows to learn to take advantage of the enemy's things.

Ushijima believes that the Chinese are at an equipment disadvantage when fighting the Japanese, and the Japanese are also at an equipment disadvantage when fighting the Americans. Therefore, the actual combat of the Chinese against the Japanese for so many years is an excellent experience that Japan can learn from, just like tunnel warfare and guerrilla warfare. The most important of these is the "anti-slope" tactic.

As a result, Ushijima used a lot of tactics learned from the Chinese battlefield, combined with the Japanese army's examples in the Pacific theater, including defeat and relative success, and then combined all of these to create the defense of Okinawa.

In other words, the "anticline" is only one aspect of Okinawa's defense, and there are tunnels, underground fortifications, "guerrilla warfare," "infiltration warfare," and so on waiting for the US military in front.

Facts have also proved that Ushijima Man's approach is correct, because in this battle in history, the US army has fully occupied the sea and air superiority and invested 240,000 troops against the Japanese army of less than 100,000 people, but lost 80,000 people, and many of the 100,000 Japanese troops were "temporary workers" who had just been urgently recruited from the people of Okinawa.

At this time, it was the first time that the US military had seen the power of the "anti-slope" tactic......

Most of the firepower they organized was ineffective because it was blocked by the positive slope...... In fact, at first they thought it was a high ground without a Japanese garrison, because they were not hindered before they reached the top of the hill, and the outcome was basically decided by this time.

But soon the U.S. troops found that the tunnels on the anti-slope were full of Japanese troops, and they also used rocks and terrain to build fortifications, and the mortars were still set up early in the morning to aim at the positive slope where the U.S. troops were located, and when the U.S. troops approached the hilltop position, the Japanese troops were covered with grenades, grenadiers and mortars, and then a fierce charge would easily kill the U.S. troops.

The U.S. forces wanted to counterattack, only then did they realize that the tanks and artillery in their hands could not play a role, and even fighters and bombers could hardly pose a threat to the Japanese troops on the antislope...... Fighters and bombers can indeed blow up the anticline, but most of the Japanese troops are hidden in the tunnels and only come out of the holes to counterattack when the US troops come up, so the bombing and strafing of the US fighters will not have much effect.

On the other hand, because close-range combat is the strength of the Japanese army and the extreme weakness of the US military, the US military often finds it difficult to move an inch after paying a large number of casualties on the high ground.

However, objectively speaking, the Japanese army's "anti-slope" tactics at this time were still very rough, and it could even be said to be a kind of rudimentary form...... For example, the Japanese army did not make full use of the ridge line, nor did they build a complete defense system on the anticline, but simply built some fortifications and tunnels for protection.

It was the volunteers who really carried forward the "anti-slope" tactics a few years later on the battlefield to resist US aggression and aid Korea...... They not only built fortifications on the anti-slope plane, but also built tunnels that were all connected to the upper and lower sides, forming a complete defense system that combined the surface and the underground, and the upper, middle, and lower layers were interconnected.

It can even be said that if the Japanese had known from the beginning that they would have used such a perfect "anti-slope" tactic against the US military, it would not have been easy for the US military to win the Pacific War.

Of course, there is no what ifs in history, and the fact is that although the "anti-slope" tactic has long appeared on the Chinese battlefield, the Japanese army does not attach importance to it, and they still think that only the "bushido spirit" can fill the gap with the US army in equipment.

General Buckner was not reconciled to such a defeat for the American army, in fact...... This kind of failure gives people the feeling of punching out hard but hitting the cotton, and there is nowhere to use the force.

Buckner took it for granted that under the condition of having sea and air supremacy and overall superiority in equipment, the Japanese could only dare and could only shrink on the anti-slope plane, and the US military should quickly occupy the commanding heights and suppress the Japanese troops on the anti-slope from the commanding heights, and then they could use their geographical advantages and firepower to completely defeat the Japanese army.

It is normal to have this kind of thinking, because the characteristic of the "anti-slope" tactic is to give up the hilltop position, and the US military will of course seize the hilltop position and find a way to suppress the firepower......

It can even be said that Buckner's tactics were quite effective against the "anti-slope" tactics that were in their embryonic form, and the Japanese army was once suppressed by the firepower of the American army and could not come out, and the American army sent flames to burn down in pieces under the cover of firepower, and the two sides fought inseparably on the anti-slope battlefield......

This tactic of the US military is ineffective against the "anti-slope" tactics of the Volunteer Army, because the Volunteer Army is building a number of defense lines on the anti-slope plane, each of which is connected by underground tunnels, and the tunnels have waterproof, fireproof, and even anti-poison measures, which often means that the volunteers give up a line of defense to the enemy, and the enemy does not dare to easily occupy it.