U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-13-2019, 07:19 PM
 
2,315 posts, read 550,180 times
Reputation: 2590

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by bus man View Post
Assume that the history of Japan up to mid-1941 had gone as it actually did. That is, they had already invaded China, and the U.S. had already put its embargo of raw materials on Japan, thus leading the Japanese leadership to prepare to conquer other places to obtain the needed materials. However, let's say they conclude beforehand that there is no way that Japan can defeat the United States. Therefore, they diverge from actual history by deciding that under no circumstances will they attack anything American unless in self defense.

Thus, on December 7th, Japan launches its war of conquest in the Southwest Pacific. British and Dutch territories are attacked and fall. But Hawaii, the Philippines, Guam, and anything else American are completely left alone. American merchant ships are allowed to continue sailing the Pacific without interference. America's naval forces and army bases are left untouched.

How does the war go from here? Does America come to the aid of its European allies and fight on behalf of their conquered territories, or do our isolationist tendencies continue to hold sway? Do we provide material support to China, but don't get militarily involved? Does Japan manage to keep its conquered territories, take their resources for themselves, and decide that they've satisfied their war aims and stop further fighting? Does the Japanese Empire (excuse me, the "Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere") become a long-term reality, like the British Empire was?

In other words, how would the Pacific War gone if America had not been attacked first?
I wonder how many people realize that Pearl Harbor occurred before Hawaii was a state.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-13-2019, 07:24 PM
 
7,214 posts, read 4,671,087 times
Reputation: 12637
There's a third possibility. Just as the Nazis were hoping for stasis on their Western front in 1941 (that is, England), so too, Japan would avoid confrontation with British or American interests in the Pacific. Instead, Japan would declare war on the USSR, invading it through China into Siberia. The USSR's divisions that were initially stationed in the Soviet far-east, precisely to counter such a Japanese invasion, were instead thrown into the defense of Moscow, in November 1941. Now suppose that Japan had 2-3 million men, supported by tanks, heavy artillery and air cover, moving across China, into Kazakhstan, wheeling around the Ural "mountains", through Orenburg and Saratov. Pressing on Moscow from the south-east, cutting off the retreat of Soviet industry, this swarm might have linked up with the Nazis from the south, perhaps taking Moscow.

The USSR still would not have been defeated - it would have fought on, across vast stretches of territory, in desperate ferocity. But the Nazis and Japanese would have gotten their hands on the Caucuses and the oilfields, not to mention foodstuffs.

The scenario isn't too preposterous, as Japan was able to defeat Imperial Russia in the naval war of 1905.

In the 1941-1942 scenario, a wounded USSR fights on, while America stands by. England also bides its time. Eventually (1945-1946?) the Western Allies counterattack with nuclear bombs on both Germany and Japan. The USSR, technically undefeated but humiliated and much diminished, emerges from the war as a second-rate power. Germany ceases to exist, and the land of former Germany becomes uninhabitable. The Communist Chinese take advantage of an over-extended Japan, whose home-island have been bombed, to turn the tables. The resulting Cold War is between the US and China, with England and the USSR as B-team bystanders.

Of course, the timetable is all wrong. It would take even a modern mechanized army many months to cross China and Kazakhstan, even across territory favorable to tanks, even with hardened troops equipped for cold-weather operations. By the time that Japan cross the USSR's frontier, the Battle of Moscow would have already been won, and the Nazis would have been in full retreat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 07:50 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
5,467 posts, read 1,823,611 times
Reputation: 8199
Quote:
Originally Posted by turkeydance View Post
"In other words, how would the Pacific War gone if America had not been attacked first?"
the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs would not have been used.
Not on those cities, anyway. The first target was Berlin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-13-2019, 08:25 PM
Status: "POTUS Trump promises - not hot air" (set 7 days ago)
 
Location: New York Area
14,277 posts, read 5,651,839 times
Reputation: 11380
At some point, Britain's wounds would have involved the U.S.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2019, 04:26 PM
 
Location: San Diego CA
4,252 posts, read 3,111,699 times
Reputation: 6739
I’m not clear in the absence of a Pearl Harbor the US would have declared war on Japan. That would have left America’s strongest overseas outpost untouched and standing firm as a barrier to any attack on the West Coast. The Japanese would have taken the Philippines to incorporate it into their new Empire.

Would the US go to war over a Japanese attack in the Philippines a place that had already been slated for Independence and was thousands of miles west of major reinforcement from our military who would to need to sail through areas of the Pacific where the Japanese dominated the sea lanes.

Europe was historically always the primary focus of America’s national security interests and just like WWI we would have gone to the defense of an embattled Great Britain. And without a Pacific War we would have twice the resources to aid in the defeat of Hitler. Europe would be saved less their colonial empires in Asia.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2019, 04:34 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
5,467 posts, read 1,823,611 times
Reputation: 8199
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgsing View Post
IWould the US go to war over a Japanese attack in the Philippines a place that had already been slated for Independence...
Good question, but remember there were still tens of thousands of living veterans of that bloody, useless war. I could see fairly misplaced patriotism overriding distance and subsequent events.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2019, 06:01 PM
 
Location: Elysium
6,131 posts, read 3,326,890 times
Reputation: 4229
Quote:
Originally Posted by msgsing View Post
I’m not clear in the absence of a Pearl Harbor the US would have declared war on Japan. That would have left America’s strongest overseas outpost untouched and standing firm as a barrier to any attack on the West Coast. The Japanese would have taken the Philippines to incorporate it into their new Empire.

Would the US go to war over a Japanese attack in the Philippines a place that had already been slated for Independence and was thousands of miles west of major reinforcement from our military who would to need to sail through areas of the Pacific where the Japanese dominated the sea lanes.

Europe was historically always the primary focus of America’s national security interests and just like WWI we would have gone to the defense of an embattled Great Britain. And without a Pacific War we would have twice the resources to aid in the defeat of Hitler. Europe would be saved less their colonial empires in Asia.
I think so. If somehow the Japanese attacked the islands with limited American casualties there were still potentially many more casualties than incidents used to politically support previous wars.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2019, 06:26 PM
Bo Bo won $500 in our forum's Most Engaging Poster Contest - Tenth Edition (Apr-May 2014). 

Over $104,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum and additional contests are planned
 
Location: Ohio
16,626 posts, read 32,680,771 times
Reputation: 13203
Germany might have attacked North Carolina to get us into the war.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...ina-180964292/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2019, 06:27 PM
 
8,497 posts, read 5,780,108 times
Reputation: 15810
The French and English would be speaking German
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-14-2019, 06:30 PM
 
Location: New Mexico
3,631 posts, read 1,529,636 times
Reputation: 3261
Default Excellent troops, poor strategic leadership

Quote:
Originally Posted by bus man View Post
Assume that the history of Japan up to mid-1941 had gone as it actually did. That is, they had already invaded China, and the U.S. had already put its embargo of raw materials on Japan, thus leading the Japanese leadership to prepare to conquer other places to obtain the needed materials. However, let's say they conclude beforehand that there is no way that Japan can defeat the United States. Therefore, they diverge from actual history by deciding that under no circumstances will they attack anything American unless in self defense.


You'd have to back up further, to the radicalization of the Imperial Japanese military, the military takeover of IJ government - probably back to the early 1930s. Once rapid industrialization & building a massive modern military took over, the IJ military was not going to back down ever, until their reach far outran their grasp. Therefore, the OP doesn't make sense; by 1941, the die was cast, & IJ military & de facto government had talked itself into taking on UK, France, US, Dutch, Australia & anybody else who got in the way (they were already in Korea & China).

The IJ military & government convinced themselves that Bushido spirit would make up for any material or manpower shortfalls. Too small a resource base, population, economic/industrial/scientific/technical base, poor logistics, failure to recognize their dependence on shipping & the need to protect those assets, & a love of overly complicated set-piece naval engagements, doomed their efforts to conquer the world.

Plus they couldn't afford to upgrade weapons systems & radar as they went, nor did they rotate veteran naval pilots & support staff home to train the next cohort. China soaked up massive numbers of the IJ Army, to no particular avail.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top