Page 23 of 35 FirstFirst ... 14151617181920212223242526272829303132 ... LastLast
Results 331 to 345 of 519

Thread: Fall of France

  1. #331
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,922
    Quote 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.

  2. #332
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    977
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    39 was a border war.
    With the aim of including Mongolian territories into Manchuria and thus, Japanese rule.

    Quote 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.

    Quote 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?

    Quote 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 WABs_OOE; 24 Jan 18, at 02:30.

  3. #333
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    977
    Quote 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.

  4. #334
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,922
    Quote 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"

  5. #335
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    977
    Quote 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.

  6. #336
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,576
    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

  7. #337
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,922
    Quote 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.

  8. #338
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    977
    Quote 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?

  9. #339
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,922
    Quote 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.

  10. #340
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    977
    Quote 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.

    Quote 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.

  11. #341
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,446
    Quote 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.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  12. #342
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    11,808
    A table illustrating Japanese artillery capabilities vs. those of the Soviets.

    Last edited by Ironduke; 25 Jan 18, at 04:49.

  13. #343
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,576
    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

  14. #344
    Banned Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,501
    Quote 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

  15. #345
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    11,808
    Toby, do you have any substantive arguments to make?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 15 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 15 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Fall of Pelosi?
    By Ironduke in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 15 May 09,, 22:15
  2. The Fall Of Rome?
    By Ironside in forum Ancient, Medieval & Early Modern Ages
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 26 May 06,, 02:47
  3. The Fall of Communism
    By Leader in forum Multimedia & Jukebox room
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 26 Jul 05,, 10:40
  4. The fall of France
    By tarek in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 27 Sep 04,, 23:26

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
  •