What if the U.S., in response to Pearl Harbor, had only gone to war with Japan? (influences, Asians)

[TKramar]

Talk to someone who was THERE, Kooble, and you'll have your prooof.

[TKramar]

Funny, I don't seem like I had anything handed to me, but ol' George was pretty free with the information. He'd tell anyone about his role at Pearl Harbor.

I'm sorry that you didn't have the advantage of hearing about World War II from people who were there, through a common bond of military service to this country.

[TKramar]

He talked to a LOT of people. Just because none of them published his story, doesn't mean he didn't talk to anyone. He had a lot of problems in his military career after the event--because of the event. Because he wouldn't shut up about it, he said.

[Nighteyes]

If the US had limited its military campaign to Imperial Japan:

1. Hitler would probably have taken England circa 1942-43

2. Hitler would probably have beaten Russia circa 1943-44

3. The United States would eventually have had to defend itself from an infinitely more powerful Nazi Germany circa 1948-50 -- a Nazi Germany that (a) had the entire resources of Western Europe at its disposal, (b) had both atomic bombs and the means to launch them across the Atlantic.

(With tongue firmly planted in cheek) That's my opinion; oughta be yours!

-- Nighteyes

[KoobleKar]

Those are all possibilities of course, but that would all have depended on Hitler not making blundering mistakes such as he did in deciding to take Stalingrad instead of focusing on the oil fields.

England was going to be a tough nut to crack..... but eventually, provided he didn't punch himself out in the East, they'd have fallen from attrition.

He certainly wanted war with the USA. In fact, he didn't really like fighting the British. He felt the Brits were too much like Germans and only fought them because they declared war on Germany.

[jtur88]

The difficulty of defeating Hitler has been greatly exaggerated by the historical perspective centering mainly on the heroic glory of the US effort. Within 18 months of the US entry into the war, Italy ceased to exist as a Germany's only ally, and became a mere war zone. The French, Dutch and Norwegian Resistance illustrated how difficult it would be for Germany to continue to occupy conquered territory. German manpower was spread too thin to be an enduring occupation force, and they couldn't continue to expand indefinitely while at the same time watching their back.

Hitler was a monomaniacal idiot, who lacked the executive and administrative talent of even Castro or Saddam, and he wandered thoughtlessly from one blunder to another. Sooner, rather than later, he was doomed to march off the cliff of his own making.

[lifelongMOgal]

Originally Posted by HypnoToad

I am wondering, what does everyone think would have happened had the U.S., in response to being attacked at Pearl Harbor, had gone to war with Japan exclusively?

Western Europe would be speaking German today.

[Nighteyes]

Originally Posted by jtur88

Circumstantial evidence is not valid in criminal court...

Actually, it is. Circumstantial evidence is admitted and used all the time, and in practically every case.

Circumstantial evidence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

People have been convicted, and even executed, solely on the basis of circumstantial evidence. Example:

1. The deceased was shot to death with this specific handgun.

2. This specific handgun was purchased by the defendant.

3. The defendant's fingerprints are all over the handgun.

4. Paraffin tests conducted on the defendant's hands showed that he had recently fired a gun.

5. Three witnesses saw the defendant leaving the area where the murder took place just about the time the deceased was shot.

6. The defendant and the deceased were often heard to be arguing loudly.

7. On the day the deceased was killed two witnesses overheard the defendant shout to the deceased, "Somebody oughta take you out!"

FWIW,

-- Nighteyes

[Mathguy]

You guys have wandered so far off topic you may need a team of sherpas with jet packs to get back.

I had to go back several pages just to get an idea of what you are even arguing about.

<shrug> In a strict military sense there weren't really good guys or bad guys....it was just good old fashioned nationalistic spheres of control, entanglements and in the case of Europe a couple thousand years of kicking each others butt back and forth over and over and over again.

A big reason that Germany and Japan come out of the war so villified is attributable to the holocaust and in Japan's case the treatment of civilians etc. in occupied territories which to this day makes them a pac-rim regional pariah.

Europe would be back at killing each other off if it weren't for Nukes. Heck, the whole Bosnian situation was going on in thier backyard and they were hesitant to get involved.

Oh well.

[Escort Rider]

Originally Posted by Mathguy

You guys have wandered so far off topic you may need a team of sherpas with jet packs to get back.

I had to go back several pages just to get an idea of what you are even arguing about.

<shrug> In a strict military sense there weren't really good guys or bad guys....it was just good old fashioned nationalistic spheres of control, entanglements and in the case of Europe a couple thousand years of kicking each others butt back and forth over and over and over again.

A big reason that Germany and Japan come out of the war so villified is attributable to the holocaust and in Japan's case the treatment of civilians etc. in occupied territories which to this day makes them a pac-rim regional pariah.

Europe would be back at killing each other off if it weren't for Nukes. Heck, the whole Bosnian situation was going on in thier backyard and they were hesitant to get involved.

Excellent post, so true.