Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst 12345678910111213 LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 191

Thread: What if - Spain joined the Axis in 1939.

  1. #91
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    For Japan to be a victor in WWII they need to leave the US alone and concentrate on the Dutch East Indies and Sino-British possesions in and around Asia.
    You're forgetting China. Pearl Harbour marks the 10 year mark that the IJA had been conducting combat operations in China (I know the war officially started in 37 but the number of skirmishes dates back to to 34) and they still have not managed to knock China out.

    As I stated previously, the problem with China is not the resources, weapons, nor men. It's the leadership. CKS and MTT were the biggest hinderance to a united Chinese force. But Chinese Generals were emerging. I will pit the Korean War Chinese Generals against the best of Japan's Generals anyday.

    For Japan to win, China must surrender ... and China was never going to surrender.

    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Well following the defeat of Japan and the USSR, Germany is in trouble. Unless Germany can execute a major offensive laterally against its previous allies and roll up the anglo armies Hiter's Reich starts WWIII already occupied in part.

    However, with Brits to the North and Yanks to the South so to speak, there is going to be a lot more Yiddish, Russian and Polish laughter around the local bar at night. Imagine Hitler on a train to visit Moscow, on his way he has to pass through the city of Kiev and Babi Yar, past snyogouges and nascent Ukrainian political party headquarters, past black American truck drivers, while riding in an American supplied rail car, on American supplied rails and guarded by American produced Luftwaffe P-51D's fueled by American supplied Av-gas...... as part of a stop to pick up the guy who wrote and will conduct the allied victory song as the troops parade through Moscow- Irving Berlin. Hitler forever denied- no suicidal grand exit, just junior to Churchill partner status in the middle of all dem joos.... JUSTICE
    So, essentially a shorter Cold War with Hitler instead of Stalin.

  2. #92
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    15,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post

    For Japan to win, China must surrender ... and China was never going to surrender.
    China doesn't have to surrender, Japan has to stop advancing. China in 1941 had some limited US support but none of the previous Soviet and German largess was around. The KMT's best divisions were dead the CCP was , China vis a vis the KMT can't advance. A Japan that stops advancing and starts patrolling is a big threat to the CCP.

  3. #93
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    China doesn't have to surrender, Japan has to stop advancing. China in 1941 had some limited US support but none of the previous Soviet and German largess was around. The KMT's best divisions were dead the CCP was , China vis a vis the KMT can't advance. A Japan that stops advancing and starts patrolling is a big threat to the CCP.
    But then, you're playing straight into Mao Tse-Tung's playground. All you're doing is replacing the KMT with the IJA in a war against Mao and we all knew who won that one.

  4. #94
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    I will even go further.The Burma Road campaigns proved that the Chinese soldier is no less lacking against the Japanese soldier. The entire Chinese problem vis-s-vi the IJA has always been leadership. I cannot think of one battle where the Japanese outmanned or outgunned the Chinese but they did out-general the Chinese.

    Stillwell proved that he can send Chinese Armies to kill Japanese Armies.

    For the IJA to stop advancing means death to the Imperial Japanese Empire. It gives time for China to mount a real offensive force and for a real general to emerge from all their warlords ... as it did for the Chinese Red Army.

  5. #95
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    2,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    That is one hell of a what-if (and Japan still is on the losing end - is there a plausible scenario that they can actually end up winning).

    I can see where you're going but my head is exploding thinking about the permutations.
    The only plausible one that I can think of came from Stuart Slade, who speculated that if the Halifax note had somehow neutralized Churchill via a 'parliamentary coup' and resolved the Western Front in Hitler's favor, that when war did come, the US would give Japan something of a free hand in China and French IndoChina in return for not being bothered while America and the USSR fought a massive Eastern Front campaign. And that required a lot of things going Japan's way as well, and Tokyo not trying to angle for more.

  6. #96
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Japan got as far as she could. Free hand or not, she could not knock out China. That leaves the rest of China to mount a response. The real history states that China did not get the chance. But the real history also states that real good Chinese Generals got their start in the 2nd Sino-Japanese War. A mere 6 years later, they were taking on a superpower.

  7. #97
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,274
    z,

    For Japan to be a victor in WWII they need to leave the US alone and concentrate on the Dutch East Indies and Sino-British possesions in and around Asia. No pearl Harbor means a delayed American entry into the war which is bad for the Uk and USSR and very very good for the Axis.
    always wondered about a no Pearl Harbor scenario. the japanese were convinced the US declaration of war was coming either way, and wanted to get a heavy blow in to shock the americans out of it...exactly the wrong thing to do.

    so what happens if they sit back, fortify the islands they grabbed like mad, and concentrate on a defensive strategy? US industry would be overwhelming but without pearl harbor, the first few attrition battles might very well have made the americans consider the cost of an island campaign.

    i suspect re: europe, FDR was going to push the envelope until the germans had no choice but to respond.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  8. #98
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,274
    col,

    Japan got as far as she could. Free hand or not, she could not knock out China. That leaves the rest of China to mount a response. The real history states that China did not get the chance. But the real history also states that real good Chinese Generals got their start in the 2nd Sino-Japanese War. A mere 6 years later, they were taking on a superpower.
    that required a lot of logistics and industry, though. and a lot of american help, experience, and training. and stilwell providing the leadership.

    assuming the Pacific War went on indefinitely (and by this I mean the Pacific theater without the Americans or the USSR), and China is going to be on the ropes. heck, in our timeline, in summer 1944 the japanese inflicted a very serious defeat on the Chinese armies (Operation Ichi-go) to the point where the Chinese became seriously desperate.

    what japan needed was time and space to consolidate her empire. the US effectively denied this to her.

    i just can't see china winning 1 on 1 against japan, not when japan takes south china. the fall of shanghai was a remarkable blow against chiang as that was a big source of funds and industry-- south china would have just about sealed the coffin.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  9. #99
    Colonist Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    02 Mar 08
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    2,096
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    For Japan to be a victor in WWII they need to leave the US alone and concentrate on the Dutch East Indies and Sino-British possesions in and around Asia. No pearl Harbor means a delayed American entry into the war which is bad for the Uk and USSR and very very good for the Axis.
    England relinquishes it's control of Singapore. I'm not too sure but it couldn't get much worse for British positions in the region than what existed.
    Ego Numquam

  10. #100
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,172
    They were heavily overestimating their capabilities as it turned out.But,with a bit more effort,real capabilities in Malaya could approach perceived ones.Send 2-300 modern fighters and the whole Japanese invasion gets in trouble.IIRC,Churchill sent 600 fighters in USSR by the time Singapore fell .The Brits had resources to properly defend Malaya,even if they were stretched,but they weren't used properly.

    But,since they thought they were good,why give up before the fight?Where's the incentive?
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  11. #101
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    i just can't see china winning 1 on 1 against japan, not when japan takes south china. the fall of shanghai was a remarkable blow against chiang as that was a big source of funds and industry-- south china would have just about sealed the coffin.
    But the IJA could not take and did not take South China.

  12. #102
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    14,274
    But the IJA could not take and did not take South China.
    largely because of the US entering the war. if japanese industry wasn't bombed to smithereens, if they had the manpower/aircraft that went into the pacific islands, if the chinese don't get the enormous amount of aid/training/leadership, i don't see why the japanese could not effectively nibble the chinese to death.

    although i suspect if the US did not get involved/dropped out of the war early, it would be the soviets that would seek to deal with the japanese. no way they could tolerate a japanese empire encompassing the bulk of china.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  13. #103
    In Memoriam/Battleship Enthusiast Defense Professional USSWisconsin's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Dec 08
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    5,434
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    z,



    always wondered about a no Pearl Harbor scenario. the Japanese were convinced the US declaration of war was coming either way, and wanted to get a heavy blow in to shock the Americans out of it...exactly the wrong thing to do.

    so what happens if they sit back, fortify the islands they grabbed like mad, and concentrate on a defensive strategy? US industry would be overwhelming but without pearl harbor, the first few attrition battles might very well have made the Americans consider the cost of an island campaign.

    i suspect re: Europe, FDR was going to push the envelope until the Germans had no choice but to respond.
    I wonder what would have happened if the Japanese had stayed in their own hemisphere - taking the Philippines (and Singapore) - but staying west of Midway... Perhaps waiting another year - to permit more capital ships to be completed? If they had dealt a "clean" military defeat (declaring war first) in the far east and stopped short of attacking anything seen as a threat to the continental US. Perhaps the US would have reacted differently? Would the Allied emphasis on Germany first then have given the Japanese time to consolidate their holdings and permit them to negotiate a peace with more territory in their control?
    "If your plan is for one year, plant rice. If your plan is for ten years, plant trees.
    If your plan is for one hundred years, educate children."

  14. #104
    Officer of Engineers
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    largely because of the US entering the war. if japanese industry wasn't bombed to smithereens, if they had the manpower/aircraft that went into the pacific islands, if the chinese don't get the enormous amount of aid/training/leadership, i don't see why the japanese could not effectively nibble the chinese to death.
    The war started in 1937 and they could not have deliver the knock out blow right up until Pearl Harbour. In very fact, the reason why Japan took on the US was that they were denied the resources to take China. Except if the US was Japan's ally, there was no way in hell for Japan to get the oil she needed to take China. Even if the US did not enter the war or exit early, American material support would still have reached China and in the end, Chinese military leadership incompetence cannot last forever and it did not last forever.

    Even if Japan had taken Southern China, the CCP in the north was becoming more and more powerful and do recall it was the CCP who swept down from the north to drive the KMT out from the south.

    In no way ever can I see Japan ever conquering China. She did not have the manpower and she certainly did not have staying power.

  15. #105
    Senior Contributor clackers's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Nov 07
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    810
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    In no way ever can I see Japan ever conquering China. She did not have the manpower and she certainly did not have staying power.
    Agreed, and in 1941 the new Japanese leadership was looking at ways of getting out of that quagmire ... it was on the table in the failed negotiations with Cordell Hull.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The King George V Class battleship (1939)
    By USSWisconsin in forum Battleships Board
    Replies: 165
    Last Post: 21 Mar 14,, 03:34
  2. Great Britain and France Declare War on USSR in 1939
    By Danowest in forum The World Wars
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08 Mar 08,, 20:53
  3. Replies: 21
    Last Post: 09 Oct 04,, 08:33

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •