Queer is the word, because the Japanese used it so much and were so good at it and because we used it so little and were so poor at it, anyway. The Americans totally ignored the whole problem of fooling the enemy observers. I never saw a sign of camouflage attempted anywhere on Leyte, or later, on Luzon.
Blackouts during air raids were the only precautions taken against attack.
Those islands of the Pacific rock and coral the best terrain for a military defense. Greatly enhanced by the use of camouflage.
Adar…true about defense. Iwo Jima was bombed for over seventy days preceeding the American assault and was more fortified at the end of the bombing campaign.
Had the Japanese had their act together, and presented more of a threat, the US forces might have worried more about camouflage. As it was, the work that would have gone into it was more than they were likely to lose from Japanese action, so no real camouflage measures were taken, by comparison.
Camouflage is something you really worry about when you’re losing your war, and your opponent is completely out of your weight class. Which applied to Japan.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that the Japanese were amazing warriors in WWII, but absolutely crappy soldiers. If I need to explain that distinction to you, then you’re probably a warrior yourself…
I worry more about everything when I’m losing than when I’m winning.
Camouflage is purely defensive, it seems to me. When you’re in trouble, that’s the time to pay extra attention to defense. When you’re not in trouble, pay moderate attention to defense.
The way I figure it, defense doesn’t directly win wars. Defense buys time for offense to win wars. Defense avoids losing wars. After that comes winning, which calls for a different skill set.