Wednesday, June 28, 2017

Women Shooters

     Because firearms (guns) are mostly seen as weapons of war or tools for hunting, which has been in the male domain, women are usually not thought of as being capable shooters, users of guns.  In the last two decades, there has been a dramatic increase in the number of women who have taken up hunting, and even more women buying guns not just for recreation, but for self protection.  In fact, handgun sales for self defense have become a huge business, and a great percentage of these guns are now being sold to women.
     Just to set the record straight, for those who are unfamiliar, guns are not used only for warfare or hunting.  Generally speaking, more guns are used for recreational purposes than most people realize.  But, today self defense has become a huge factor in gun ownership in America.  There is no doubt that America is the largest user of firearms in the world, especially when it comes to recreational use such as hunting and target shooting.  There are more forms of target shooting than shooting at paper bull's-eye.  There are clay targets, there are steel targets....all sorts of targets for all forms of shooting for rifles, shotguns, and handguns.  Americans love shooting sports, and most own guns for this purpose more than any other.  But with increasing crime, more and more people today, women in particular, acquire guns for self protection.
     Perhaps the best known American female shooter was the great Annie Oakley of the 19th and early 20th Century.  Annie Oakley was a phenomenal shot with either rifle, shotgun, or pistol.  She performed for the Buffalo Bill's Wild West Show and was known to beat men in shooting matches.  However, in America, someone like Annie Oakley was considered an exception.  Women as a rule were not considered to be suited for shooting, something that everyone thought was a "manly" skill or ability!  We seemed to have developed a somewhat skewed view of shooting and women, despite people like Annie Oakley who proved otherwise!  But, I believe that attitude and view is changing. 
     In the last Summer Olympics (2016), Kim Rhodes, an American woman shooter set the Olympic record by winning her sixth medal in six consecutive Olympics!  She won her first Olympic medal, a gold medal in Skeet in the 1996 Olympics.  Since 1996, she has  won a medal in each subsequent Olympics for a total of six, three golds, one silver, and two bronze!  No one has been able to accomplish such a feat, not in any sport or any country!  Yet, how many Americans have heard of Kim Rhodes?  A pity!  Anti-gun sentiment can sometimes go too far!
     Russia, during World War Two, trained and deployed 2000 female snipers.  Some of them were as good, if not better than their male counterparts.  The Russian trainers said that women were easier to train and had the right temperament for shooting!  Men tend to rush things and show less patience! 
     With the increase in women buying guns for self defense in America, the business of teaching shooting handguns for self defense has become a big business.  My brother Jim, who retired here in Arizona after more than 30 years with law enforcement in California, teaches CCW (Concealed Carry Weapons) classes at one of the local gun shops.  The business is booming and more than 50% of his students are women!  He tells me that women are a lot easier to teach!  Men tend to think they know everything already and don't take instructions as well as women!  He has been doing this for more than 15 years now and is convinced that women are not only better students, but make better shots!
     I don't have the experience that my brother has, teaching shooting to men or women!  My first experience teaching a woman to shoot took place in 1967.  About a year after Jo and I got married on Okinawa, I took up hunting again, which I had not done for more than 5 years.  Jo wanted to go hunting with me so I decided to teach her to shoot.  It was a fairly straight forward and easy process, so I thought nothing of it.  I basically showed her how to hold a shotgun properly, how to point it at a target and swing the gun with the moving target.  I stressed the safety factor and she seemed to grasp it readily.  We shot skeet at Keystone Gun Club which was located in Mercy area.  Jo shot skeet decently, no Annie Oakley, but good enough.  We went hunting and to my surprise she was able to hit flying birds.  Since that time we hunted together on and off, in the states as well as overseas.
     My next teaching opportunity came with our children.  I taught our son Tony gun safety and shooting at an early age, when he was about 5.  Tony listened to my instructions and followed them as much as he could.  But as boys will, he did go off on his own "style" now and then and developed his own shooting technique.  When his sister turned 5, I started her with the same small BB gun that I had originally gotten for Tony.  Natalie picked up shooting quickly and was outshooting neighborhood boys her age!  We lived in a rural area at that time and all the neighborhood kids had access to BB guns etc.  So Natalie was often involved with boys shooting.  She was the only girl in that area!  When they got older, I started them on shotguns and clay targets.  I noticed immediately that Natalie was a better shot than Tony.  She followed my instructions faithfully, while Tony tended to go off on his own and would get frustrated when he started missing while his sister was breaking targets!  I didn't think much of it at the time.  I wasn't trying to make champion shooters out of my kids, just wanted them to be familiar with guns.
     Many years later, I started my grand kids with shooting.  Again, it wasn't to make them avid shooters or hunters.  I just felt that as with their mother when she was little, they should become familiar with firearms.  I started them with the same BB gun that I used to start Tony and Natalie.  At the time, there was a physical difference in size that was considerable.  My oldest grand child, Claudia, was bigger than her brother David and the youngest, Liam.  She was able to handle the BB gun easier.  But once again I noted that like her mother, she followed my instruction more carefully while the boys sort of "winged it."  As they grew older, I switched them to .22s and finally to shotguns.  I took Claudia and her two brothers who were now much bigger, and Natalie, their mother, to shoot clay targets.  Natalie didn't forget her instructions from the past and shot fairly well.  Claudia, who was shooting a shotgun for the first time followed my instructions carefully and was soon busting those clay pigeons as well as her mom.  The boys did not fare as well.  I believe the boys would have done much better if:  1.  They were not shooting with their mom and sister.  2.  If they were instructed by someone who was more authoritarian, like a Drill Instructor!
     Whatever the case may be, I found my somewhat limited experience in teaching women to shoot very interesting.

Sunday, June 25, 2017

The "Han River Miracle"

     The "Han River Miracle" is what brought South Korea into the modern world and has propelled it even beyond some of the developed countries that were ahead of it before.  Supposedly the "Han River Miracle" began in the 1980s when the South Korean government went all out to help its struggling businesses and industry to develop.  It seems that almost overnight South Korea developed an automotive and electronics industry that has now become a serious rival to Japanese companies that have dominated the world market.  Prior to "Han River Miracle," South Korea, having been devastated during the Korean War, was one of the struggling, poor countries in the world, far behind many developed nations.  Japan was literally light years ahead in development.  All that has changed in a remarkably short time.  By the 1990s South Korea was seriously beginning to compete with Japan for its automotive and electronic share of the world market, especially in Asia.  South Korea also emerged as the leading shipbuilder in the world!
     As the economic miracle began to raise South Korea's GNP and the earning power of average South Korean, the city of Seoul naturally began to spread, increase in its size.  Prior to the start of the so-called "Han River Miracle," the city limits of Seoul ended just short of Han River, which in Korean is called Hangang ("gang" in Korean is river, like "gawa" in Japanese).  It seems that the popular form of referring to Han River is Hangang River, which is wrong.  That is like saying Han River River!  But be that as it may, whether it is called Han River or Hangang River in English, it is a river that has always been an important part of Korean history in one form or another.  The capital city of Seoul was build close to its shores because of the importance of Han River as a transportation route, and the industrial miracle of South Korea began on its shores.
     Through the 1970s, the city of Seoul ended its limit at the Han River shore.  But with the sudden birth of industries, new factories and office buildings, more space was needed so the city of Seoul began to spread outward in every direction, except north.  Going north would have put the city even closer than it is now, to the DMZ and North Korea!  Within a decade, the city of Seoul spread across the river and in every direction.  So now, the city occupies both banks of the river, stretching southwest almost to the city of Suwon, while former towns such as Yongdonpo, Kimpo, and Yijongbu, just to name a few that used be towns on the outskirts, have become part of the city of Seoul.  The city of Seoul has grown rapidly, both in size and population!  A friend of mine who was in Seoul in the early 1970s used to go duck hunting on the shores of Han River where now high rise buildings stand!
     I last visited Seoul, South Korea in April of 1993, some 25 years ago.  I was astounded at how modern the city had become with high rise buildings, glitzy electronic signs, and heavy traffic.  A friend who was transferred to Seoul from Tokyo in 1980 told me that Seoul seemed like a small town compared to Tokyo at that time!  By 1993 when I visited, Seoul was close to catching up with Tokyo, it no longer was like a small town!  I can well imagine what it must be like today, 25 years later!
     Back in March, I did a blog called "SNAFU, BUBAR - Still Taking Place!"  In that blog I talked about the screw-ups that our military seems to continue to do throughout the years, no doubt dating back to the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War!  I ended that blog by recounting my personal experience of having flown from very hot, tropical Philippines in the month of February and making a parachute jump with my unit over semi frozen shores of Han River.  Well, that particular shore area where we made the jump was a regular drop zone for the military use in those days.  South Korean troops as well as U.S. troops used that particular shore area as a drop zone for military training.  It was one of the areas along Han River that had the widest expanse of sandy beach along all of the shoreline.  Despite the frigid conditions, I did note that it was indeed a beautiful area with very unusual expanse of sandy shore.  Well, you guessed it.  Today it is part of the Han River Park, much of it paved over and turned into a vast area for people to use for various activities.  How time changes, or is it that I am so damn old?  After all, I made that jump in February of 1964, that is some 53 years ago, more than a half a century!  I guess time does change things, nothing is the same.

Monday, June 19, 2017

Double Standard

     As readers of my blog may have noted, I have refrained from writing about the current political situation in America.  Earlier, after Trump was elected and anti-Trump factions launched their campaign to discredit and smear Trump, on anything and everything, I said that we should wait and see how his tenure pans out before criticizing his decisions and his administration.  However, the anti-Trump campaign has gone on unabated.  There is, of course, room for criticism of any administration, and Trump's administration is no exception.  There have been many cases and instances where I felt Trump and his administration deserved criticism.  But what has been going on so far is unprecedented, vicious attacks that definitely show a strong double standard.  For the very same gaffs or missteps, Obama and Clinton were never criticized.
     Always, in the past, if a President had committed some major gaff, after some initial criticism, it was more or less quietly swept aside with the explanation that it was for the good of the nation, that it would not be good for America to create a big mess, etc.  The one exception was Nixon who was forced to resign after the Watergate incident.  Still, Gerald Ford pardoned him, saying it was best for the nation to start healing!  But such is not the case with Trump.  The media in particular has been especially vicious in attacking Trump, taking their "gloves off," so to speak, and piling-on.  It was always taboo for the media or anyone else to pick on the President's family, the children in particular.  Yet, there have been some vicious attacks aimed at Trump's youngest child, and everyone seems to just accept it.  Do you recall such attacks aimed at Obama's daughters?  At Chelsea Clinton?  Why is there a double standard?  Why is it OK to pick on Trump's boy but it was taboo to do so against Obama's or Clinton's kids?
     The Russian attempt to mess with our elections is a serious thing, and had they succeeded in anyway to interfere with our process, it would have been a very grave situation.  But it is apparent that they did not succeed and the whole thing is over at this point.  Yet, we are continuing on with the investigation, taking a different route, and have brought in a special prosecutor, former FBI Director, Robert Mueller.  Mueller is charged with trying to uncover any possible ties that Trump and some of his administration members may have with Russia.  This, in my opinion, is "Joe McCarthyism, the Commie Hunt of 1950s" all over again!  That exercise proved to be not only wasteful, but McCarthy was proven to be a self promoting phony who looked for commies under every bed!  I am not suggesting that Mueller is a phony, but I believe that the whole investigation could have been conducted with much less fanfare and money!  Mueller so far has hired more than a dozen high powered lawyers.  Do you think they are working for free?  Who do you think is paying for all those lawyers and their very expensive fees?
     Ironically, I believe it is the liberal left that is looking for Trump and some of his staff's "ties with Russia" in this very expensive and time consuming investigation.  I do not believe that Trump or anyone else has any so-called "ties" with Russia.  There may have been meetings and discussions, such as what happened to the short-lived National Security Advisor.  But actual ties, I don't think so.  I would be very surprised if there were ties.  However, why doesn't anyone look into Clinton Foundations financial records?  Russian money is definitely involved.  But of course no one is even suggesting looking into the financial records of possibly the most corrupt political couple in our history Bill and Hillary Clinton!
     I am truly puzzled as to why the people who elected Trump are keeping quiet while those who supported Hillary and Bernie are lashing out in every way possible to discredit Trump.  Why isn't there a move to discredit Hillary or some of the others who are now involved in this hatred and revenge campaign?  It seems that those who are bound and determined to bring down Trump are really not concerned about this nation.  Much of this hatred that is directed at Trump is of personal nature.  Just look at the political cartoons that constantly appear with insulting caricatures of Trump.  Had such caricatures appeared on Obama, there would have been such an outcry of "racism" that the offending publication and the artist would have had to offer a public apology.  It has become a very personal vendetta, and it has even trickled down to affect other areas of our society.  Just look at what has been going on about the removal of Confederate monuments!  Those statues of Confederate soldiers is a reminder of our past, our history.  Removing them is exactly the same as what the Taliban was doing with those ancient statues and structures when they were destroying them!
     It is one thing to bring down the statue of a hated dictator like Stalin or Saddam Hussein, but a statue of Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson?  If removing these statues is for the purpose of removing reminders of a painful past, then we should simply remove anything to do with the Civil War and the slave era in the South.  We should burn all books and material that remind us of that "painful past"! What has happened in our society is that the few now dictate what they want and the majority is just keeping mum.  I realize that the world has changed, that people have changed with time.  But that doesn't mean that the change is for better.  Just because it is new and now "acceptable", it doesn't mean it is better. 
     Europe, including UK, is now paying for its liberalism, for allowing minorities to become the majority!  I won't go into details, but I think most people know what I am talking about.  America, it seems, is not far behind, and we are doing it now to our own detriment.  This Russian "witch hunt" and the hatred campaign against Trump isn't just going to harm Trump and his administration, it is going to harm our entire country.  Trump and some of his administration members may indeed be guilty of "ties with Russia."  But these aren't "ties" that will bring down this country.  Throughout history there were always "ties" among members of opposing governments involved in an ideological, economic, or actual war.  But that was never what caused the downfall of that particular state.  If majority of Americans continue to just sit by and watch the minority continue to make demands and changes, America as we know it will no longer exist.

Sunday, June 11, 2017

A Double or Triple Agent?

     Spy novels and Hollywood movies are full of stories about so-called "double agents,"  those spies that are supposedly working for one side, but in fact are working for the other side.  This was an especially popular vehicle for spy novels during the cold war era.  Someone who was working for the "West" was in fact a "plant" or a "mole" for one of the communist bloc country's intelligence agencies.  Usually this played out in the form of a "mole" in the CIA who was leaking information to the Soviets and causing all sorts of problems.  As far fetched as some of these stories were, there were in fact many double agents during the cold war era and no doubt are still many such cases in existence, although the cold war is supposedly no more.  However, they were not "double agents" in a strict sense.  They were simply Soviet moles or Soviet spies.
     Some of the more infamous cases of Soviet agents involved the British MI6 in the 1950s and 60s when a bunch of MI6 officers, known as the "Cambridge Five" were discovered to be actually working for the Soviet Union's KGB or the GRU.  The worst case was that of Kim Philby (part of that Cambridge Five), who rose to a very high position within MI6 and worked as the head of the liaison between MI6 and CIA in Washington for counterintelligence.  He, like most of his compatriots in similar position, managed to escape capture and ended up living out their lives in Moscow after escaping from the West.  These British spies did tremendous damage to Western intelligence and are often referred to as "double agents."  They were not "double agents"!  They were officers of the MI6 but agents of the Soviet Union.  For us, the Aldrich Ames case was a bad one, possibly the worst case involving a CIA Officer.  But, like the infamous Brits, he was not double agents, he was simply an agent for the Soviet Union.  Unlike the Brits, who were communists, Ames did his spying for money!
     A true double agent would be someone who is supposedly spying for one side, but is in fact spying for the other side.  In other words, if someone is hired by country A to spy on country B, but is in fact spying for country B, then that individual is a double agent.  A CIA officer or an FBI Special Agent who is paid by a foreign country to provide information to them is a foreign spy, not a double agent.  But, if that same CIA officer or FBI Special Agent is in fact still loyal to the U.S. and is only pretending to be working for the foreign interest, then he or she is a double agent.  So, although the cases of true double agents are not that common, they do exist.  Far more complicated and more rare are cases involving "triple agents."  Those are the extremely rare cases involving individuals who are hired by country A to spy on country B but are in fact providing information to country B, but are still actually working for country A.  This all sounds very confusing and complicated, and it is to some extent.  The individual involved has to be extremely crafty and good at providing selective information to one side while gathering and providing more important information to the other side.  True cases of triple agents are very rare and very few survive for very long doing this extremely dangerous work.
     In my lifetime, I knew of only one person who was a double, possibly a triple agent and survived performing this extremely dangerous work mainly because of his very high intelligence and exceptional ability to "read" other people.  It all started for this man in a very unusual, almost adventure novel style of beginning.  He was a son of a wealthy Russian family who had to flee Vladivostok after the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917.  He was but a mere babe at the time when his large family fled Russia and settled in what is now North Korea.  His family consisted of his father and mother and three brothers and sisters as well as some aunts, uncles and cousins. 
     Korea was a Japanese colony at the time, so naturally the family had to learn to get along with the Japanese.  Since they had money, they were able to settle comfortably in a large estate and ran a very successful resort for wealthy people.  Japanese nannies were hired to take care of the small children, so all the children grew up speaking Japanese as well as Korean fluently.  But, their good life came to an end when the Soviets entered and occupied North Korea in 1945.  Immediately, all of the men, his father and his two brothers were arrested, and even though the younger men had no political affiliations, they were all considered enemies of the State.  However, the Soviets saw the possibility of using the younger men to their advantage. 
     Initially, they were all hired to work for Soviet intelligence to interrogate Japanese and Korean prisoners.  But as soon as the occupation era was over, roughly after one year, the father and the oldest and youngest brother were sent off to Siberia along with uncles and cousins and even some women.  The middle brother was kept in Korea for a short while.  He was the only one of the three brothers who had gone to school in Shanghai and was fluent in English.  So, the Soviets offered him a deal.  If he went to South Korea which was under U.S. occupation, and went to work for the U.S., he could spy for the Soviets.  In return, his father and brothers as well as other relatives will be spared.  It wasn't much of choice, so he took it.
     As soon as he ended up in the south, he went directly to the U.S. military intelligence (G2) and told them that he had been instructed by the Soviets to gain employment and spy for them.  After a lengthy interrogation session, he was given a clearance by the U.S. intelligence and hired to work for G2.  As he was instructed by the Soviet GRU (military intelligence), he made contact with his Soviet handler (case officer) and duly reported intelligence that he gathered.  A year after his employment, in 1947 a new intelligence organization, the CIA was formed and he became an employee of the CIA.
The GRU was no doubt very happy that they had a man in CIA, but what they didn't know was that he was giving CIA intelligence that he gathered through his Soviet handler.  He provided the Soviets with juicy bits of intelligence, just enough to keep them interested.  In the meantime, he was able to give CIA detailed information on Soviet network in Korea, contacts, etc.
     Within a year after his arrival in the south, he learned that his father and younger brother had been executed.  Only his older brother was still in the Gulag.  Yet, his Soviet handler kept telling him that everyone was alive and well.  He continued to pretend to believe his Soviet handler and continued to give him bits of information.  In the meantime, he also provided the CIA with all the information that he could gather through his handler.  During the Korean War his contact with his handler was broken and he, after working in Korea for a while, was moved to Tokyo.  In Tokyo he reestablished contact with the Soviets and continued on with the very dangerous game.  Eventually he left the employment of CIA and went to work for a private company and had a very successful career.  What was fascinating about his work with GRU-CIA, was that apparently the Soviets never suspected in all those years that he was feeding them information that was carefully selected and provided by CIA.  There was just enough "real stuff" in the information to keep the Soviet interest, and at the same time there was "misinformation" that would delay and sometime sabotage Soviet efforts.
     Was he a double or a triple agent?  Its hard to say.  Obviously the information that he provided to both sides satisfied each side.  One thing is for certain, he was an ultimate survivor!  Interestingly, when he finally left CIA and went to work for a private company, the company, a U.S. electronics firm, ended up making him one of the top executives in their Tokyo office, which was understandable because of his native level fluency in Japanese.  What was interesting was that this company was a DOD contractor (still is!) and was heavily involved in our Space Program at the time.  I wonder if he still had contact with intelligence communities?
    





Wednesday, June 7, 2017

Fading Memory of World War Two

     As time marches on, it is only natural that memory would become fainter.  It is, therefore, not surprising that the memory of World War Two begins to fade, especially since survivors of that war, both veterans and those who stayed at home, are fast disappearing with the passage of time.  Each year, it seems, that the 6th of June, the date of the great D-Day Invasion, becomes less and less prominent in the newspaper headlines and TV coverage.  To be sure there are still bits and pieces in newspaper about D-Day and its veterans, and TV does still provide its usual fare of Hollywood movies about World War Two and D-Day to commemorate this day.  For all practical purposes, in the minds of most Americans, D-Day the 6th of June, represents the Second World War, most especially in the European Theater of Operation!
     There is no denying that the D-Day invasion was a tremendous effort with the largest assembled invasion fleet in the history of world's warfare.  It was indeed a monumental effort and a gigantic scale military operation.  Many brave men and women lost their lives in this giant, never before attempted military operation in history.  But not to take anything away from those who participated in the D-Day operation or paid with their lives during the invasion, but D-Day was not the biggest nor the bloodiest invasion of World War Two.  That credit has to go to the very last land battle that was fought by American troops in the Pacific, the Battle of Okinawa.
     For comparison purposes, let's just look at the numbers, the troop strengths and casualties of both battles.  The D-Day Invasion took place on June 6th 1944 and did not end until the last objective of the invasion was attained on July 21st 1944, so it lasted a little over a month and a half.  There were 156,000 U.S. troops and 83,115 allied troops (mostly British) faced approximately 50,300 German forces.  There were 10,000 casualties with 4,414 dead for the allies.  German figures ran higher, somewhere between 20,000 to 30,000 dead and wounded, no accurate figure is available. 
    The Battle of Okinawa began on April 1, 1945 and lasted until June 22, 1945, a month longer than the D-Day Invasion.  U.S. Forces consisted of 500,000 Army and Marine ground troops, plus Navy (US and British), more than twice the number of D-Day Invasion, that suffered more deaths than total number of casualties for D-Day!  There were 12,520 combat deaths with 55,000 wounded for a total of 67,520 casualties on Okinawa!  Japanese forces consisted of 86,000 men and they suffered 77,166 dead!  But the worst part was the civilian (Okinawan) casualties.  There were approximately 150,000 Okinawan civilians killed out of a total population of 300,000.  In other words, half of the civilian population on Okinawa was killed in the bombings and other war related activities!  The figure of 150,000 dead is disputed by some who claim it is much higher, more like 200,000!  So, as you can see, the last land battle in the Pacific was much costlier in terms of human lives for both sides, but especially for Okinawan population!
     Then there is still the actual very last land battle in Asia during World War Two that was the Soviet Invasion of Manchuria.  Now, I know that some of our historians derisively refer to Soviet Invasion as simply an opportunistic move by Stalin to grab some territory, since the invasion took place after we dropped the bomb in Hiroshima, but before Nagasaki.  However, the Invasion of Manchuria by the Soviets was agreed upon by Stalin, Roosevelt, and Churchill much earlier.  The date of the invasion was chosen by all parties, and the 9th of August was selected.  We dropped the bomb on Hiroshima without informing the Soviets!  The Soviets had planned the invasion of Manchuria for months.  It was important to neutralize or destroy the Japanese Kwantung Army, the Manchurian Army, which was arguably the largest and the best in the Japanese Imperial Army.  The Japanese kept the Kwantung Army in reserve to protect the homeland, and although troops were pulled from the Kwantung Army periodically to replenish the units in other places in the Pacific, for the most part the Japanese tried to keep the Kwantung Army intact.
     The Soviet Union invaded Manchuria on August 9, 1945 in a multi-pronged attack with 1,577,725 troops.  The Japanese Kwantung Army was at the time just shy of one million at 927,729 men, just below its normal strength of around 1.2 million troops.  Still, it was obviously a sizable and a potent force.  It would have been very costly for the U.S. had we made a Japanese homeland invasion as it was planned.  Combined with troops stationed in Korea and in Japanese homeland, we would have faced about a 2 million man army!
     The vicious fighting in Manchuria lasted until September 25, 1945, well after Japan had surrendered.  Although it became obvious that the Soviets were steamrolling through Manchuria, many Kwantung Army units refused to surrender!  Soviet Union lost 11,033 men in that period while the Japanese lost 21,389 men.  The rest, including the commanding officer of the Kwantung Army, were taken as POW and put in Soviet slave labor camps in Siberia!  Combined with the destruction of the Kwantung Army and the second atomic bomb on Nagasaki, it became very clear to the Japanese leaders that the war was completely lost. 
     For years, our historians refused to give Soviets any credit for contributing to the Japanese surrender.  Japanese, however, have always maintained that the destruction of the Kwantung Army was a major factor in their decision to surrender.  The Kwantung Army was their last hope!
     So, as you can see, the D-Day was a major event that started the ending of the war in Europe, and it was a huge endeavor by the allied troops.  But, it wasn't the only "invasion" that helped to end the war completely, i.e., the war in the Pacific.  For us, the Battle of Okinawa was the bloodiest of all in World War Two, and the Soviet Invasion of Manchuria did play a part in ending the war in the Pacific.