Bismarck Sea.

This is coolbert:

Bismarck Sea. An ALLIED ATROCITY??

Another controversial episode from the era of The Second World War [WW2].

The Battle of Bismarck Sea. Japanese troops being ferried by troops ships enroute to the battlefields of New Guinea, repeatedly attacked by allied aircraft, those troops ships sunk, the survivors in the water machine gunned and bombed, casualties catastrophic.

The killing of those shipwrecked a war crime reminiscent of the Wahoo Incident? Again, Japanese troops in the water "massacred" after their troop transport is sunk, those survivors of the sinking being killed with impunity - - gratuitous and unwarranted violence in violation of the Hague Convention alleged! AN ALLIED ATROCITY?

Battle of the Bismarck Sea.

"The Battle of the Bismarck Sea (2–4 March 1943) took place in the South West Pacific Area (SWPA) during World War II. During the course of the battle, aircraft of the U.S. 5th Air Force and the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) attacked a Japanese convoy that was carrying troops to Lae, New Guinea. Most of the task force was destroyed, and Japanese troop losses were heavy."

"A plan was devised to move some 6,900 troops from Rabaul directly to Lae . . . Although the operation was given only a 50% chance of success . . . On 28 February 1943, the convoy—comprising eight destroyers and eight troop transports with an escort of approximately 100 fighters—set out from Simpson Harbour in Rabaul."

The allied air forces, American and Australian, tipped off in advance, NOT ONLY able to sink those troop transports, but continuing to attack rescue vessels and men in the water for THREE DAYS AFTERWARDS!!

"Allied patrol boats and planes attacked Japanese rescue vessels, as well as the survivors from the sunken vessels on life rafts and swimming or floating in the sea. This was later justified on the grounds that rescued servicemen would have been rapidly landed at their military destination and promptly returned to active service"

"Out of 6,900 troops who were badly needed in New Guinea, only about 1,200 made it to Lae . . .  About 2,890 Japanese soldiers and sailors were killed." [the remainder of the ground troops returned to Rabaul]

At the time, the machine gunning and bombing, repeatedly, of survivors in the water was justified as retaliation for previous similar actions ON THE PART OF THE JAPANESE!

The reasoning of course can be made that those SOLDIERS in the water CONTINUED TO BE FAIR GAME! Sailors whose ship had been sunk are obviously hors de combat, no longer functioning hostiles, and are not valid targets under the Hague Convention. NOT SO for those ground troops enroute to Lae? The argument can be made that soldiers plucked from the water can later be delivered to the combat zone, be reconstituted as a unit and engage in combat?

Sailors in the water you cannot shoot, but soldiers [ground troops] in the water you can?

Some devoted reader to the blog has an answer to this?

coolbert.