Page 26 of 35 FirstFirst ... 17181920212223242526272829303132333435 LastLast
Results 376 to 390 of 519

Thread: Fall of France

  1. #376
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    Minneapolis
    Posts
    11,807
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    they tried to swallow up china in one big gulp, but had they continued their original Manchukuo strategy of grabbing one province and puppeting it at a time, they could have done it without alarming the US.
    They had tried to continue that strategy, but it failed in the Suiyuan Campaign, which in turn led to increased morale among the Chinese and saw the Chinese resolve themselves to active resistance against the Japanese in 1936. In the face of the failure of that strategy, combined with the Xi'an Incident and the Second United Front, Japan switched gears and decided to go all in. I think if Japan had seen success in inner Mongolia, and if Chiang hadn't switched his focus from internal unity/acquiescence to Japan toward active resistance against the Japanese, there wouldn't have been the impetus for Japan to engage in full scale war against China come July 1937.
    Last edited by Ironduke; 27 Jan 18, at 05:25.

  2. #377
    Regular
    Join Date
    17 Sep 08
    Posts
    68
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfella View Post
    A very good question. Given Japan's domination of northern China by 1937 it doesn't seem necessary to secure the Empire. Perhaps that wasn't how it seemed in Japan. I wonder what role internal politics & inter service rivalries played.
    An attempt to pacify chinese opposition and their determined attempts to undermine japanese interests in Manchuria through a tug of war involving persistent chinese boycotts of japanese goods,tariffs on railways, support for proxies. It escalated with unrelenting retributions. Like Target the transportation. Target the distribuition centre.

    The boycott was ruining japanese trade at a time of protectionism due to the depression and hence they turned to autarky.


    The big picture is ofcourse is a clash of nationalism and mutual hatred tinged with racism. Chinese contempt and defiance for japanese(who felt they have attained power status) never
    ceased referring to them as wokou(dwarf bandits) .

    The military leaders came up with operational solutions involving severe retributions and had little sense of a grand strategy.
    Last edited by YoungIndia; 27 Jan 18, at 22:40. Reason: edt

  3. #378
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    977
    Quote Originally Posted by tantalus View Post
    A link on the Japanese thought process on the southern and northern doctrines and a detailed layout of the proposed operational plan for an invasion of the soviet far east in 1941. Kantokuen - Wikipedia
    Oh For Freak Sakes! I can't believe the delusions of grandeur the Kwangtung Army had. First it was 45 IJA divisions against 60 Red Army divisions, learning nothing from 1939. Then they scaled it back to 22 divisons against 43 Red Army divisons. And finally 16 divisions to take Siberia should Hitler win his war against Stalin.

    This to take territory greater than BARBAROSSA, with nowhere near enough rail lines and barely 10% of vehicles (from their own calculations) needed inside of 6 months.

    Take a hint! You've just got your asses kicked!

  4. #379
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,922
    The use of bioweapons is kinda terrifying, its the gift that keeps on giving.

  5. #380
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    977
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    The use of bioweapons is kinda terrifying, its the gift that keeps on giving.
    Siberian winter is a good shield and if you read the accounts, the IJA needed weeks to deliver the weapons to have a noticeable effect. Incindaries would have had better results.

  6. #381
    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
    Siberian winter is a good shield and if you read the accounts, the IJA needed weeks to deliver the weapons to have a noticeable effect. Incindaries would have had better results.
    Winter would stop its spread through animal vectors, it would speed it up among infected human populations. Not saying its a war winner, but it kept killing in China for decades after WWII.

  7. #382
    Regular
    Join Date
    17 Sep 08
    Posts
    68
    If japanese doctrine and equipment was close to ww1, what would explain the initial success in SE Asia?

  8. #383
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    977
    SE Asian island terrain is ideal for entrenched warfare. WWII maneuver warfare requires corps and armies. Some islands you can barely fit a brigade.

  9. #384
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,446
    Quote Originally Posted by YoungIndia View Post
    If japanese doctrine and equipment was close to ww1, what would explain the initial success in SE Asia?
    A modern navy, below strength adversaries, favorable terrain, some quality officers, experienced troops/officers, a belief in the power of the offense and a highly motivated force.

    The IJN was able to insert & support forces across a wide area more or less simultaneously while keeping other navies away.

    For the most part it faced second rate forces or worse. There were exceptions, but they were often outnumbered, poorly equipped or poorly led. Japanese control of the air helped a good deal.

    They were also kept off balance by the relentless advance of Japanese forces, who were capable of considerable tactical flexibility at times. One of the few things Japanese forces did that would be unfamiliar to a WW1 general was para drops, something very much in keeping with the Japanese belief in attack.

    For the most part terrain worked for Japan. It allowed infantry forces with light armor to move quickly & outflank or their opponents or simply push them back with the force of their attacks. On the smaller islands it allowed them to dig in and reduce everything to infantry fights.

    Japan was able to fight a war where its flaws weren't fatal....at first. They would have struggled badly in more open country against the sort of armies that clashed in Europe in 1940-45 (excluding the Italians, to whom they would have done terrible things ).


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  10. #385
    Regular
    Join Date
    17 Sep 08
    Posts
    68
    Thanks for your replies, BF and OOE. Looks like the like button has gone away!

  11. #386
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,446
    Quote Originally Posted by YoungIndia View Post
    Thanks for your replies, BF and OOE. Looks like the like button has gone away!
    yes, I miss it too. :-)

    Someone will probably come along and pick apart all my points, but that is how we learn.

    I think the bottom line is that a highly motivated WW1 army was still dangerous provided it didn't hit a decent WW2 army. As discussed earlier, in big fight against the Red Army the IJA would have been in very deep trouble.
    Last edited by Bigfella; 29 Jan 18, at 05:38.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  12. #387
    Senior Contributor Triple C's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Apr 06
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan
    Posts
    2,397
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    I always find that comparison funny, especially given that Portugal at the time - with around one-seventh the population of the US - was still beefed up from their participation in the Spanish Civil War, had a rather extreme conscription system with 6 years of service (in infantry and artillery units near 90% were conscripts) - and maintained a defense budget that would have fit in the US budget about 50 times...
    In terms of size, the 1930s US Army ranked between 20 and 30 globally, IIRC. It had two full-strength divisions, in addition to garrison regiments. A senate hearing in 1933 [or 35?] concluded that the Pinkertons and the like had more rifle-armed agents than the regular army had soldiers.
    Last edited by Triple C; 29 Jan 18, at 13:35.
    All those who are merciful with the cruel will come to be cruel to the merciful.
    -Talmud Kohelet Rabbah, 7:16.

  13. #388
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,922
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfella View Post
    A modern navy, below strength adversaries, favorable terrain, some quality officers, experienced troops/officers, a belief in the power of the offense and a highly motivated force.

    The IJN was able to insert & support forces across a wide area more or less simultaneously while keeping other navies away.

    For the most part it faced second rate forces or worse. There were exceptions, but they were often outnumbered, poorly equipped or poorly led. Japanese control of the air helped a good deal.

    They were also kept off balance by the relentless advance of Japanese forces, who were capable of considerable tactical flexibility at times. One of the few things Japanese forces did that would be unfamiliar to a WW1 general was para drops, something very much in keeping with the Japanese belief in attack.

    For the most part terrain worked for Japan. It allowed infantry forces with light armor to move quickly & outflank or their opponents or simply push them back with the force of their attacks. On the smaller islands it allowed them to dig in and reduce everything to infantry fights.

    Japan was able to fight a war where its flaws weren't fatal....at first. They would have struggled badly in more open country against the sort of armies that clashed in Europe in 1940-45 (excluding the Italians, to whom they would have done terrible things ).
    Ludendorf would have salivated at the use of the infiltration tactics the IJA/IJN used in 41 to outflank and bypass British and Dutch strong points.

  14. #389
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    977
    Quote Originally Posted by zraver View Post
    Ludendorf would have salivated at the use of the infiltration tactics the IJA/IJN used in 41 to outflank and bypass British and Dutch strong points.
    Kinda hard to find monkeys in Europe.

    Explaination: Japanese soldiers and marines were living off the land. They learned what to eat by watching monkeys. If the monkeys eat something, then they could eat it as well ... and the monkeys.

  15. #390
    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
    Kinda hard to find monkeys in Europe.

    Explaination: Japanese soldiers and marines were living off the land. They learned what to eat by watching monkeys. If the monkeys eat something, then they could eat it as well ... and the monkeys.
    Not any different than German troops eating British rations.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 25 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 25 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
  •