Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Speculative History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Speculative History Speculative History Forum - Alternate History, What If Questions, Pseudo History, and anything outside the boundaries of mainstream historical research


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 13th, 2017, 10:27 AM   #21

zincwarrior's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 5,102

Quote:
Originally Posted by Larrey View Post
If Japan is willing to throw its war China, i.e. its ambitions there, it might as well wind that war down at US insistence, and go for getting rich by peaceful industry and trade — like it did post-WWII anyway.

There is no reason for Japan to fight the US if it's not fighting a war in China. It could only lose like that, and at least the sharper knifes in the box of the IJN (like Yonai and Yamamoto) were perfectly aware of this.
Indeed, this is the only way Japan wins, and it's the easiest.
zincwarrior is online now  
Remove Ads
Old December 13th, 2017, 11:50 AM   #22
Historian
 
Joined: Aug 2015
From: Los Angeles
Posts: 1,068

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wenge View Post
Where did you find that Chiang Ching kuo was ever in the German army?
He was probably talking about Chiang Wei Kuo between 1937-1939.
mariusj is offline  
Old December 13th, 2017, 12:24 PM   #23
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2017
From: Connecticut
Posts: 1,168

Quote:
Originally Posted by ruthenium View Post
Invading unexpecting sparsely populated, practically undended (ridiculous armies and air forces) territory in Latin American is a world away from fighting millions experienced Chinese troops after 3 years of war.

The US army was a sad joke in July 1941. L-L had depleted the US army sources, arming Britain in North Africa. Patton had to use flour sacks to simulate hits on cars and trucks, playing the role of tanks. Patton was so far from modern, air supported warfare that he did not stand a chance.
American forces along the Pacific seabord were much weaker in July 1941 than they were in Luzon on Dec 8, 1941, where powerful aviation was promptly wiped out and infantry and marines were trounced and had to hole up in Corregidor and even there, with powerful artillery and bunkers were trounced.

America expected an attack in the PI and was trounced, did not expect it in Hawaii and was trounced, despite being strong, did not expect it at all in California or Washington State, where it was weak and would be trounced by experienced Japanese, Chinese and Indian forces.

You think the US was well equipped in July 1941, you are dead wrong. It had no tanks, lousy planes (the P-38 was not yet deployed and was having serious compressibiulity problems and the factory would soon fall in Japanese hands), even Wildcats and lousy Buffalo were scarce in vital Bellingham and San Diego.

Yamashita with only 3 divisions trounced 100,000 British, Homa trounced MacArthur's strong force. The experienced axis division would sweep through invalñuyable territory.

Even after PH, California was extremely weak for months. 5 months earlier, in July it was a sad joke. Specially since ATL the USN and army and at war with Germany and will think that Japan is even less likely to invade California than OTL in Dec 1941, because it has overextended itself by invading South Africa, Tasmania, New Caledonia, NZ and the USSR, so it has no need or capabilities to attack US territories (even the PI, much less California). So they concentrate on fighting U-boats along the eastern and wPacific seaboards.
Seeing the timeline of Pearl Harbor and the would be destruction of the Pacific Carriers that would need to happen before an invasion of the Pacific, any land invasion would probably be at the very earliest in the summer or fall of 1942, 1941 the US army was weak because the US army wasn't at war. Any invasion of the West Coast wouldn't be a huge surprise and the US would have time to anticipate and prepare as they'd have to lose their Pacific Fleet and Japan would have to work it's way across the Pacific. They'd also have the numbers/home advantage and supply line advantage regardless of quality.

I do think the Japanese main goal would be to secure their gains in the Pacific and an invasion of California or bombing of the west coasts goal should be to get the US to recognize those gains rather than to annex territory in the new world. Japan didn't have the people to beat the US in a eternal fight, only to secure decisive early enough victories where it wouldn't be worth it for the US to fight back. If you go into the new world and hit US proper, that equation changes and the Japanese fall into the German trap of invading a enourmous country with twice the population. Also if the Japanese take out the Pacific in a quick strike somehow(we're getting into really fringe scenarios) the geography of the USA separates most of the USA's population centres in the East and their industrial capacity from the Pacific with an endless terrain on underpopulated land again giving the Central US plenty of time to counterattack.

Also China was divided by decades of civil war and the USA had better technology than the Chinese. Sure the Chinese were more "experienced" but how much is this really worth? China was also really close to Japan and Japan could just mass troops in Manchu and invade, with the US they would have a logistical nightmare. Japan's endgame should have been to secure naval superiority and bomb the west coast to force surrender, planning anything else was commitment to Germany/USSR style total war and that was a battle the Japanese could not win. Getting to the Pacific coast despite being a fringe scenario that the Japs would need to be very lucky to get to and they'd have still barely touched the US populace and industrial capacity, the Japanese would be eaten alive. One of the advantages the Japanese had that the Germans didn't was in the Pacific and island hopping campaign, population(not industrial capacity, numbers) wasn't so relevant as much as how many carriers and ships you had, this favored the Japs as it allowed them to fight a larger nation for a while on an even playing field as long as they had a similar amount of capital ships which was something that for awhile was in their control, if you go into the USA, you're just outnumbered by a foe with better tech and massive industrial capacity.
EmperoroftheBavarians43 is offline  
Old December 14th, 2017, 11:18 AM   #24

sailorsam's Avatar
Lecturer
 
Joined: Oct 2016
From: Merryland
Posts: 413

no way ever Japan could build a coalition strong enough to invade the US mainland.
logistically impossible.

an imperial coalition to invade Australia, maybe.

intriguing thought of Japan prying India away from GB. an awful lot of them hated the brits and this would deprive England of many soldiers and other resources.

the best thing Japan could have done, was leave the US alone and hope they stay out of the war. no possible scenario for Japan beating the USA.
sailorsam is offline  
Old December 14th, 2017, 12:11 PM   #25

zincwarrior's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2012
From: Texas
Posts: 5,102

Quote:
Originally Posted by sailorsam View Post
no way ever Japan could build a coalition strong enough to invade the US mainland.
logistically impossible.

an imperial coalition to invade Australia, maybe.

intriguing thought of Japan prying India away from GB. an awful lot of them hated the brits and this would deprive England of many soldiers and other resources.

the best thing Japan could have done, was leave the US alone and hope they stay out of the war. no possible scenario for Japan beating the USA.
Any Japanese forces that actually landed on the US would be walking dead men. The US military had better heavy/medium bombers, fighters, transport, logistics, tanks, artillery, rifles, machine guns, EVERYTHING, and would have been able to field millions against them.
zincwarrior is online now  
Old December 14th, 2017, 12:23 PM   #26

Naomasa298's Avatar
Modpool
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 30,247

Quote:
Originally Posted by zincwarrior View Post
Any Japanese forces that actually landed on the US would be walking dead men. The US military had better heavy/medium bombers, fighters, transport, logistics, tanks, artillery, rifles, machine guns, EVERYTHING, and would have been able to field millions against them.
In this scenario, Japan would need a nuclear bomb of its own to save American lives.
Naomasa298 is offline  
Old December 14th, 2017, 03:35 PM   #27

Scaeva's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 5,028

Quote:
Originally Posted by zincwarrior View Post
Any Japanese forces that actually landed on the US would be walking dead men. The US military had better heavy/medium bombers, fighters, transport, logistics, tanks, artillery, rifles, machine guns, EVERYTHING, and would have been able to field millions against them.
Compared to the U.S. the Japanese were also poor at amphibious operations.

See Wake Island, where the first attempt at forcing a landing was decisively defeated before it even reached the beach. The second was so badly mauled that had Wake not been an island which the Admirals had decided to let fall rather than risk the US fleet in a relief, the second attempt would have been just as decisively defeated as the first. Even without any support at all a couple hundred Marine artillerymen and a handful of pilots with no hope of reinforcement very nearly repulsed the second invasion as well.

At Guadalaanal the Japanese don't come off much better. While they were able to get troops ashore in the wake of the defeat of the U.S. fleet at Savo Island, the Japanese rather foolishly thought they could see of the defenders off with bayonet charges, not yet having learned the lesson that U.S. Marines were much better equipped and trained than Chinese conscripts, and they were subsequently massacred on the Tenaru River. You then had months of the Japanese shipping reinforcements into Guadalcanal piecemeal for little result, in the end losing as many people to disease and malnutrition as bullets and shells because logistics was never one of their strongsuits.

An early war landing in the West Coast of the United States would have been decisively defeated. They'd be facing superior numbers of American troops with better weapons, artillery and armor, more air support, defending their own turf, while the Japanese invaders are likely plagued by the same logistical struggles they experienced on Guadalcanal and while using the same outdated massed bayonet charge tactics. A landing in South or Central America would fair no better because they'd almost certainly not just be facing local troops but also U.S. troops. The Monroe Doctrine was still in effect and there is no realistic scenario where the United States ignores a Japanese attempt at empire building in the Americas.

Last edited by Scaeva; December 14th, 2017 at 03:37 PM.
Scaeva is offline  
Old December 14th, 2017, 05:09 PM   #28

Karl XII's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Feb 2015
From: washington
Posts: 612

These ideas aren't even close to being plausible ruthenium
Karl XII is offline  
Old December 15th, 2017, 08:55 AM   #29
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: San Antonio, Tx
Posts: 8,381

Quote:
Originally Posted by zincwarrior View Post
In may, the Americans who have broken the Japanese codes, sortie their fleet and attack the Japanese navy in a surprise attack, obliterating it.
That’s not fair! That actually happened.
royal744 is offline  
Old December 15th, 2017, 09:14 AM   #30

Naomasa298's Avatar
Modpool
 
Joined: Apr 2010
From: T'Republic of Yorkshire
Posts: 30,247

Me, I'm wondering what parallel universe this is in where the Chinese forgive and forget Nanking and all the earlier events and go skipping hand-in-hand with the Japanese into a greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere, 3 years after the events.

It's been nearly 80 years, and they still haven't done so.
Naomasa298 is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Speculative History

Tags
ameri, china, insanity, japan, jogular, rich, stops, weak



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Which was more advanced, China or Japan? Joe Freeman Asian History 14 March 13th, 2017 08:56 PM
Why exactly didn't Russia demand more territory from China back when China was weak? Futurist Asian History 14 November 1st, 2014 12:01 PM
Why was China historically so militarily weak? red321red321 Asian History 555 January 8th, 2014 03:18 AM
Why was China historically so militarily weak? red321red321 War and Military History 2 December 9th, 2013 11:23 AM
Japan-China ww2 Shanks Asian History 41 September 15th, 2010 09:07 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.