Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fall of France

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    1939 was a war of conquest, not to help Hitler win his war.
    39 was a border war.

    But this goes back to the other point, that the Axis could not co-ordinate worth squat.
    Very true, I think this is an outgrowth of an alliance of fiercely nationalistic powers. Finnland wanted its aims, Italy; hers. Germany and Japan each had their own aims. However, I don't think this is the only way it could have gone down. Germany for example bought off the Soviets with promises of polish territory.

    Everybody was doing his own thing without co-ordination with anyone else. For what you suggest to happen, Hirehitto would have to kneel before Hitler and Japanese ego would not allow that to happen.
    Nah, just a bribe of big enough size in Siberia, that an some source of non-American oil. Had for example, the German's captured the Dutch Royal family and set up a vassal dutch state like Vichy France, Denmark or Norway this may have existed and we might well have seen a northern strategy. Such a bribe would have played directly into the desires of the army and a supply of oil would ahve undercut the navy.

    The Royal Artillery was versed in the creeping barrage. The IJA was not.
    True enough, but I don't recall individual guns being aimed all that well.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by zraver View Post
      39 was a border war.
      With the aim of including Mongolian territories into Manchuria and thus, Japanese rule.

      Originally posted by zraver View Post
      Very true, I think this is an outgrowth of an alliance of fiercely nationalistic powers. Finnland wanted its aims, Italy; hers. Germany and Japan each had their own aims. However, I don't think this is the only way it could have gone down. Germany for example bought off the Soviets with promises of polish territory.
      It would be too little, too late and ironically, the M-R Pact was what killed the IJA's plans into Siberia and began negotiations for the Soviet-Japan Neutral Pact.

      Originally posted by zraver View Post
      Nah, just a bribe of big enough size in Siberia, that an some source of non-American oil. Had for example, the German's captured the Dutch Royal family and set up a vassal dutch state like Vichy France, Denmark or Norway this may have existed and we might well have seen a northern strategy. Such a bribe would have played directly into the desires of the army and a supply of oil would ahve undercut the navy.
      And this is where the OTL raises its ugly head. 1939 was also a Japanese defeat at Changsha. The KMT was still a viable and undefeated foe in the field. The build up that was going to the Kwantung Army was reversed for a 2nd try at Changsha.

      Also, Hitler did not include Tojo in BARBAROSSA planning and thus did not offer Japan even a chance to co-ordinate. Hell, Hitler didn't believe he needed Tojo. Why would he offer Japan anything if he was going to take Moscow inside of 6 months. Why would he offer Japan anything for an alliance he didn't think he needed?

      Originally posted by zraver View Post
      True enough, but I don't recall individual guns being aimed all that well.
      To quote the GS, artillery is an area weapon.
      Last edited by Officer of Engineers; 24 Jan 18,, 03:30.
      Chimo

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Dazed View Post
        Wouldn't you have to follow the same supply route and encounter the same Japanese Naval Forces? Guadalcanal requires less men and supplies to secure than say Borneo, and will no longer be within reach of land base aircraft. Looking at the map. http://www.fasttrackteaching.com/fta...6Japanese.html to get to China or India you have to transit the heart of the Japanese empire.
        Look at that map. A lot of that is ocean. It is by no accident that naval battles happenned near islands and other land marks, because that is where you have a chance to find the enemy.

        A military convoy would have a big chance of making it to India. Hell, the RN transported troops in and out of India.
        Chimo

        Comment


        • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
          With the aim of including Mongolian territories into Manchuria and thus, Japanese rule.

          It would be too little, too late and ironically, the M-R Pact was what killed the IJA's plans into Siberia and began negotiations for the Soviet-Japan Neutral Pact.

          And this is where the OTL raises its ugly head. 1939 was also a Japanese defeat at Changsha. The KMT was still a viable and undefeated foe in the field. The build up that was going to the Kwantung Army was reversed for a 2nd try at Changsha.

          Also, Hitler did not include Tojo in BARBAROSSA planning and thus did not offer Japan even a chance to co-ordinate. Hell, Hitler didn't believe he needed Tojo. Why would he offer Japan anything if he was going to take Moscow inside of 6 months. Why would he offer Japan anything for an alliance he didn't think he needed?
          Yup, but this is a what if discussion.

          To quote the GS, artillery is an area weapon.
          Until America landed in Europe during WWII. German quote on American artillery.

          "highly effective artillery which was accurate and blessed with excellent communications, long range and the use of observation planes"

          Comment


          • Originally posted by zraver View Post
            Yup, but this is a what if discussion.
            Well, how do you square Changsha requirements? Do recall, the IJA did 4 tries, only succeeding in Aug of 44 when it was too late.
            Chimo

            Comment


            • Dazed,

              Wouldn't you have to follow the same supply route and encounter the same Japanese Naval Forces? Guadalcanal requires less men and supplies to secure than say Borneo, and will no longer be within reach of land base aircraft. Looking at the map. http://www.fasttrackteaching.com/fta...6Japanese.html to get to China or India you have to transit the heart of the Japanese empire.
              you can transit the other way around, via Egypt into India. or from Australia to India, although probably not as efficient/riskier.

              essentially ramp up the same supply route that we used for the Burma Road/Hump.

              the US did a dual island-hopping campaign SOLELY BECAUSE of intra-service rivalries. we invaded the Philippines -almost- solely because of MacArthur's ego. we created an insanely huge fleet all out of proportion to the threat. so resources was definitely not a limiting factor in the Pacific.
              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

              Comment


              • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
                Well, how do you square Changsha requirements? Do recall, the IJA did 4 tries, only succeeding in Aug of 44 when it was too late.
                Yup, China stopped Japanese expansion, but the battles never drew in the bulk of the IJA in China at any one time, generally less than 1/6th which is significant but not a majority. In fact, the fact that Japan had 6 divisions to use in 42 after the expeditions against Burma and garrisons to the captured islands shows just how little offensive power China had.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                  Yup, China stopped Japanese expansion, but the battles never drew in the bulk of the IJA in China at any one time, generally less than 1/6th which is significant but not a majority. In fact, the fact that Japan had 6 divisions to use in 42 after the expeditions against Burma and garrisons to the captured islands shows just how little offensive power China had.
                  That's because of CKS, not the weakness of the KMT. The fact that the IJA tried 4 times at Changsha meant China was far more important than Siberia. So, how do you square the military requirements of taking Changsha while committing to Siberia?
                  Chimo

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by WABs_OOE View Post
                    That's because of CKS, not the weakness of the KMT. The fact that the IJA tried 4 times at Changsha meant China was far more important than Siberia. So, how do you square the military requirements of taking Changsha while committing to Siberia?
                    First, I reject the premise. Japan tried for Mongolia first. They did not double down on Changsha until they had a non-agression pact with the Soviets that closed off that avenue.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by zraver View Post
                      First, I reject the premise. Japan tried for Mongolia first.
                      That is false. The 2nd Sino-Japanese War began 7 July 1937. Changsha represented a Chinese stronghold that was denying Japan victory in China.

                      Originally posted by zraver View Post
                      They did not double down on Changsha until they had a non-agression pact with the Soviets that closed off that avenue.
                      Again, the real history stated that the Japanese rather attack Changsha than to attack north even when Japan was swamped with victory disease.
                      Chimo

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Toby View Post
                        Apart the Outclassed bit I agree. But the context was pre 41.
                        And in that context, and keeping in mind we are talking about a land war here, Japan is still outclassed.

                        As mentioned below, Japan produced 4800 tanks during WW2, adding to about 2500 in its inventory when the war began. So that is a bit over 7000 tanks before and after 1941. The USSR had 25,000 armored vehicles in June 1941.

                        Here are some production figures for 1940 & 41, 6 months of which included the German invasion.

                        T-26: 1800
                        BT-7: 780
                        T-40: 700
                        T-50 - 50
                        T-60: 1350
                        T-43: 3100
                        KV-1: 1250
                        KV-2: 330


                        In 1940 & 41 Japan produced 10,000 aircraft of all types. Russia produced 13,000 fighters, 1500 ground attack and 7000 bombers.

                        Japan produced 13,350 artillery pieces and 29,000 mortars during the whole war. Russia produced 57,000 artillery pieces alone in 1940-41. Not sure on mortars, but I've seen figures between 200,000 & 400,000 for the entire war.

                        The only area where Japan can claim a lead is ship building, which isn't going to help at all.

                        Japan is outclassed in every way. The best that can be said is that some of its aircraft were better than their Russian equivalents and some of their tanks could compete with the older or lighter Russian ones. Of course, the Japanese didn't have enough tanks or any understanding of armoured warfare, so those few Japanese tanks would have had minimal opportunity to impact the outcome. They also had very brave soldiers, but that isn't much use against massed artillery and massed armour. They would give the Russian infantry a good fight.

                        I get that the whole 'Russian were crude barbarians' thing is some sort of article of faith with you that appears to have survived repeated attempts at education. You have to realize that every time you push that barrow you just look foolish.
                        sigpic

                        Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                        Comment


                        • A table illustrating Japanese artillery capabilities vs. those of the Soviets.

                          Last edited by Ironduke; 25 Jan 18,, 05:49.
                          "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                          Comment


                          • of course even if Japan had material parity with the Soviets, they'd still get their butts handed to them-- it would effectively be like the initial Barbarossa battles.
                            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

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Bigfella View Post

                              I get that the whole 'Russian were crude barbarians' thing is some sort of article of faith with you that appears to have survived repeated attempts at education. You have to realize that every time you push that barrow you just look foolish.
                              Same could be said of you for replying .....Your pint is on the bar pal

                              Comment


                              • Toby, do you have any substantive arguments to make?
                                "Every man has his weakness. Mine was always just cigarettes."

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X