Did Japan have no choice but to attack the US in WWII? (biggest, invaded)
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.
We're gonna attack your shores and then head back home and wait for Invasion. What kind of stupid strategy was that.
Their strategy was on based on Germany defeating the USSR with German and northern Japanese forces released to assist Japan in the south. The Germans would keep the British occupied. German U-boats and Japanese subs would act against US and UK shipping. The Germans had the long term Mesopotamia plan to reach the Gulf and Indian Ocean. Indeed German tank production was geared for this plan explaining the high numbers of German tanks produced.
The Japanese did attack Malaya and the Philippines. Their progress was beyond their expectations. They were about to surrender at Singapore but the Brits beat them to the white flag by a day. The Japanese were fighting on a massive front in the south with horrendous logistics problems. A front they just could not sustain in the long term by herself.
Their strategy was on based on Germany defeating the USSR with German and northern Japanese forces released to assist Japan in the south. The Germans would keep the British occupied. German U-boats and Japanese subs would act against US and UK shipping. The Germans had the long term Mesopotamia plan to reach the Gulf and Indian Ocean. Indeed German tank production was geared for this plan explaining the high numbers of German tanks produced.
The Japanese did attack Malaya and the Philippines. Their progress was beyond their expectations. They were about to surrender at Singapore but the Brits beat them to the white flag by a day. The Japanese were fighting on a massive front in the south with horrendous logistics problems. A front they just could not sustain in the long term by herself.
To me, it was the equivalent of a boy bringing a knife to a gun fight. The biggest loser in WW2 was Japan. If you are going to attempt a surprise attack, you should conflict more damage. I know some USA ships were out at bay yadda yadda but it was a horrible miscalculation.
Why not help Germany defeat Russia and then sets your sights on the Pacific? I don't envision the USA coming to the defense of USSR.
To me, it was the equivalent of a boy bringing a knife to a gun fight. The biggest loser in WW2 was Japan. If you are going to attempt a surprise attack, you should conflict more damage. I know some USA ships were out at bay yadda yadda but it was a horrible miscalculation.
Why not help Germany defeat Russia and then sets your sights on the Pacific? I don't envision the USA coming to the defense of USSR.
You never got the point I put across. The Japanese were convinced the USSR was to collapse within weeks or months. Why should they attack the USSR in the east when the Soviets had greater armour which would have defeated the Japanese. In Sept 1939, few know of this, but the Soviets and Japanese had a battle in Manchuria which the Soviets won. The Japanese would not lock horns with the Soviets. Japanese mobile armour was dire.
The Japanese, in their eyes, could see the imminent collapse of the USSR as German forces scythed into the USSR destroying army after army, taking millions of men prisoner, so had no need to engage the Soviets as the Germans were doing that for them. They would be better going south to obtain oil, rubber and other valuable natural resources, which the Germans also needed, and disable the US Pacific fleet, which they did effectively. The Japanese had a large effective modern navy so could attack in the south. They knew they only had a six months window until the Germans got fully involved with them after defeating the USSR to engage the coming US and UK. One possibility was that the UK would make peace with Germany and Japan after the defeat of the USSR and then they both only had the USA to face.
To the Germans it was perfect. The Japanese had a large carrier based navy to take on the Royal Navy and US Navy, while they had none. The Germans had a large heavily armoured land based army while the Japanese did not. As we know the Japanese miscalculated massively. If they thought the Soviets would fight on they would never have attacked the UK and USA.
The Germans even a matter of weeks prior to Dec 1941 were attempting to get the Japanese to attack the UK in the Far East, but they would not. The thought of engaging the might of British or the might of the USA alone was daunting enough. Once they thought that the USSR would collapse they moved.
There is a lot of nonsense written about why the Japanese attacked the US and UK in Dec 1941. Few take into account the USSR.
You never got the point I put across. The Japanese were convinced the USSR was to collapse within weeks or months. Why should they attack the USSR in the east when the Soviets had greater armour which would have defeated the Japanese. In Sept 1939, few know of this, but the Soviets and Japanese had a battle in Manchuria which the Soviets won. The Japanese would not lock horns with the Soviets. Japanese mobile armour was dire.
The Japanese, in their eyes, could see the imminent collapse of the USSR as German forces scythed into the USSR destroying army after army, taking millions of men prisoner, so had no need to engage the Soviets as the Germans were doing that for them. They would be better going south to obtain oil, rubber and other valuable natural resources, which the Germans also needed, and disable the US Pacific fleet, which they did effectively. The Japanese had a large effective modern navy so could attack in the south. They knew they only had a six months window until the Germans got fully involved with them after defeating the USSR to engage the coming US and UK. One possibility was that the UK would make peace with Germany and Japan after the defeat of the USSR and then they both only had the USA to face.
To the Germans it was perfect. The Japanese had a large carrier based navy to take on the Royal Navy and US Navy, while they had none. The Germans had a large heavily armoured land based army while the Japanese did not. As we know the Japanese miscalculated massively. If they thought the Soviets would fight on they would never have attacked the UK and USA.
The Germans even a matter of weeks prior to Dec 1941 were attempting to get the Japanese to attack the UK in the Far East, but they would not. The thought of engaging the might of British or the might of the USA alone was daunting enough. Once they thought that the USSR would collapse they moved.
There is a lot of nonsense written about why the Japanese attacked the US and UK in Dec 1941. Few take into account the USSR.
Okay I see your argument but a lot stems on the assumption the USA comes to the defense of USSR. USA was perfectly fine sitting on the sidelines and profiting off the War. If Pearl Harbor doesn't happen, the USA might never get involved. Japan's stupidity forced the Americans hand.
I think it's easy in hindsight to say, well the Americans were always against the Nazis....they weren't. Most of Europe was either neutral or on their side. It wasn't until defeat was imminent that nations started to jump the pile. I don't see the USA sticking it's neck out against Germany & Japan if USSR is defeated and England is on it's knees.
One must think about how Japan had been "reading" US public opinion at the time. Isolationism had been huge here. Many Americans, inside politics and out, were convinced by WWI that Europeans were hard-wired to go to war with each other, thought that Americans were "above that" and were "determined to stay out of Europe's endless quarrels".
Japan thought that the people of the US so wanted to avoid war, that if they took out some US ships, that the people would rise against the US military and the military would forget about enforcing an embargo on Japan.
Of course, it did not happen that way. Losing 2,000 sons on a Sunday morning less than three weeks before Christmas created a population of people who were out for enemy blood. Japan was caught by surprise. They had executed the Pearl Harbor attack flawlessly, but the mission completely failed in its larger objective.
I see a parallel between Pearl and the 9/11 attacks. Al-Queda thought that by destroying the WTC and the Pentagon people-and-all, that the US would stop "meddling" in the affairs of the Islamic World. The attacks devastated the US people, but the US would become more involved in the affairs of the Islamic World than ever.
No, it did not. The US declared war on Japan on December 8, 1941, but not on Germany. It was Germany's declaration of war on the the US on December 11, 1941, that enabled FDR to immediately and openly expand and prosecute war against Hitler and the Nazis. Otherwise, he would not have had any more excuse to attack Germany on December 12, 1941 than he had on December 6, 1941, especially when going to war in Asia.
Eventually, the US probably would have joined the European war without the German declaration of war but I can't guess when that would have been or how the US staying out of Europe would have impacted the war.
FDR wanted to join the fight against Germany in Europe, but the American people were isolationist in mind set, so it wasn't happening barring an outright attack ... or a declaration of war on the part of Germany.
No way. They just did it. They were on some kind of power trip with the other two Satanists, Hitler and Mussolini, in a mission to take over the world. Japan invaded many countries.
Yes, this is a modern, revisionist view of the atomic bombing of Japan. One could also argue, the people of Tokyo did not deserve to be annihilated by the fire bombing months earlier (which killed more people than did the nuclear bombs).
The mood of ordinary Americans at the time (based on my conversations with parents and others) was, get the b*st*rds already, let's end this. Thousands of Marines died literally on the first day of the invasion of Okinawa and it was widely believed that casualties would be proportionately severe when the main islands were invaded, i.e. tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of Americans would have to give their lives.
Later, in the light of day, and with cool heads, we can look back and say, that was rash, we should have talked with them, we should have understood how sacred their emperor was, etc. But that's all 20-20 hindsight. They started it on their terms, and we ended it on our terms, period.
I'm truly sorry the nukes were used, and I feel they did not advance the war effort other than to possibly spur an unconditional surrender, which probably was in the pipeline anyway. But at the time, very few in the U.S. had any regrets. If you ask the average Chinese, they would undoubtedly tell you that the nukes were a tiny pin prick compared to the depredations visited on them by the Japanese over a 50 year period, during which time historians estimate variously something between 50 million and 100 million Chinese died from war, famine and dislocation.
Had the Japanese left China alone after the 1880s, quite possibly the Chinese would have had a fighting chance at establishing a lasting republic with nascent modern industry and commerce, and tens of millions of lives would have been spared. When regarded in the grand scheme of things, therefore, the nuclear and firebombing holocausts visited on Japan are somewhat less of a prominent issue and more the inevitable end result of Japanese militarism.
Another excellent post! All Americans in the summer of 1945 believed that an invasion of Japan was inevitable, and they dreaded it because they knew how it would be. My late father always felt somewhat guilty about his WW II experience because by of a quirk of fate, he spent the war on Hawaii chauffeuring officers while most of his friends in his original unit island hopped to their deaths in places like Iwo Jima and Okinawa. Invading Japan itself would have made those killing fields seem "easy".
One must think about how Japan had been "reading" US public opinion at the time. Isolationism had been huge here. Many Americans, inside politics and out, were convinced by WWI that Europeans were hard-wired to go to war with each other, thought that Americans were "above that" and were "determined to stay out of Europe's endless quarrels".
Japan thought that the people of the US so wanted to avoid war, that if they took out some US ships, that the people would rise against the US military and the military would forget about enforcing an embargo on Japan.
Of course, it did not happen that way. Losing 2,000 sons on a Sunday morning less than three weeks before Christmas created a population of people who were out for enemy blood. Japan was caught by surprise. They had executed the Pearl Harbor attack flawlessly, but the mission completely failed in its larger objective.
I see a parallel between Pearl and the 9/11 attacks. Al-Queda thought that by destroying the WTC and the Pentagon people-and-all, that the US would stop "meddling" in the affairs of the Islamic World. The attacks devastated the US people, but the US would become more involved in the affairs of the Islamic World than ever.
would agree except in the final result- pearl harbor was a move that completely destroyed japan in the end, with radical entities like Al Qaeda however, I think 911 played right into what they want- it caused us to engage in ongoing battles with diffuse enemies that can never be fully eliminated, or at least we have not been able to. Bin Ladin supposedly wanted us in Astan to drain us just like they did Russia, and it did, it added huge numbers to our debt.
We went to Astan, spent billions , and left without it any better, it's actually worse in many ways, iraq also an expensive mess. So although 911 galvanized us like pearl harbor, i think the end results are different.
No, it did not. The US declared war on Japan on December 8, 1941, but not on Germany. It was Germany's declaration of war on the the US on December 11, 1941, that enabled FDR to immediately and openly expand and prosecute war against Hitler and the Nazis. Otherwise, he would not have had any more excuse to attack Germany on December 12, 1941 than he had on December 6, 1941, especially when going to war in Asia.
Eventually, the US probably would have joined the European war without the German declaration of war but I can't guess when that would have been or how the US staying out of Europe would have impacted the war.
FDR wanted to join the fight against Germany in Europe, but the American people were isolationist in mind set, so it wasn't happening barring an outright attack ... or a declaration of war on the part of Germany.
Semantics. Japan's initiation of war against America meant the other axis powers would be getting involved. No Japanese attack = no Germany involvement.
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.