Page 30 of 35 FirstFirst ... 212223242526272829303132333435 LastLast
Results 436 to 450 of 521

Thread: Fall of France

  1. #436
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,713
    basically if Japan was smart, she would have left the US and the USSR the hell alone, stayed out of mainland China with the exception of Manchukuo, and seized the islands (HK, Hainan). Maybe seize Singapore/Malaya/Dutch East Indies.

    she would have gotten all the resources she wanted, and then slowly play divide-and-conquer with China without fear of a US embargo. which is essentially what she was doing in the 1920s-early 30s before the militarists started to believe their own propaganda.
    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

  2. #437
    Senior Contributor Monash's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Mar 10
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,636
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    I can see one major problem. CKS saying no. There is no way that any Chinese territory would be under Japanese control.

    With what? By this time, the IJN is a shadow of itself. There are still 45 Soviet divisions in Siberia and the Kwantung Army was 31 divisions and 12 brigades. It was the middle of August and by the time they get into place, it would be October and mud season against a fortified foe.

    Then, you have the Chinese NRA who would gladly join with the Soviets to drown any Japanese landing back into the sea.

    And never mind Deep Battle and an Operational Level HQ which would doom any Japanese incursion.
    To clarify use of the term 'Japanese cooperation' in this sense doesn't imply the contribution of any significant war fighting capability by the Japanese. Instead it simply means clearing chosen lines of approach, open access to any ports and rail lines etc deemed essential to Allied planning (if required for example in Korea and Manchuria) and the confining of most military forces to their bases. In other words 'stay out of our way' not 'all is forgiven, lets play'. Keeping territory seized from China post 37 wouldn't be on the table as an option.
    Last edited by Monash; 04 Mar 18, at 00:37.

  3. #438
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Monash View Post
    To clarify use of the term 'Japanese cooperation' in this sense doesn't imply the contribution of any significant war fighting capability by the Japanese. Instead it simply means clearing chosen lines of approach, open access to any ports and rail lines etc deemed essential to Allied planning (if required for example in Korea and Manchuria) and the confining of most military forces to their bases. In other words 'stay out of our way' not 'all is forgiven, lets play'. Keeping territory seized from China post 37 wouldn't be on the table as an option.
    Again, I see no plausible way for this to happen. The Chinese NRA would not tolerate any Japanese military presence on the Asian mainland. As far as Chiang is concerned, Manchuria was Chinese territory and after how the Chinese sufferred, they would have love to pay back Nanking on Tokyo if they could.

    About the only thing the Allies would be able to offer is Japan gets to keep your Emperor. Everything else is gone and Japan will be forced to pay war enemities. Chiang would not accept anything less. If he could not get it from FDR, he would get it from Stalin and that just shut down the entire Pacific Front for the Western Allies.

  4. #439
    Senior Contributor Monash's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Mar 10
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,636
    Probably, although I think we discussed this in an earlier thread and I stated the opinion that given Chiang Kai-shek's well known affinity for the 'main chance' given a good enough deal that saw him placed in charge of all of the pre-war Chinese mainland without having to fire a shot he might have taken the deal. For the rest, by May 45 the Japanese would have to take whatever the Allies decided to offer regardless, which would almost certainly have included keeping the Emperor. All the other major war criminals in the Japanese government of the time would still end up with their heads on a stick.

    The only issue would be what if, any territory outside of the Home Islands Japan gets to keep plus the terms/length of the Allied occupation (as per real world events sans Stalin deciding to attack the Allies and trying to conquer Western Europe). Given that scenario however the Allies suddenly have a reason to be much more 'generous' than they would otherwise. They don't need Japanese support for an counter invasion of the Russian Far East, they just need them to stay out of the way.

    However if (and its a big if) they decided a second front in Russia was essential IMO they have to offer the Japanese a bone of some sort - both to stop any potential interference in their invasion plans and free up resources otherwise diverted to then ongoing war with Japan.

    FYI - I regard the scenario under discussion has highly unlikely in any case because in May 1945 the Allies had the A-bomb and Stalin didn't. He may have been confident that he would have it in short order (it actually took 4 years) but in the mean time the Allies had the option of neucing Soviet forces in Europe on a regular basis as production picked up. Stalin wasn't that suicidal. I'm sure he would have been prepared to see millions of his countrymen die in the service of the 'State' but his own ass was too precious to risk.
    Last edited by Monash; 04 Mar 18, at 11:43.

  5. #440
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Monash View Post
    Probably, although I think we discussed this in an earlier thread and I stated the opinion that given Chiang Kai-shek's well known affinity for the 'main chance' given a good enough deal that saw him placed in charge of all of the pre-war Chinese mainland without having to fire a shot he might have taken the deal.
    And give Mao a chance to secure Manchuria and Korea as actually happened when the Soviets left? There was another reason why the NRA took such heavy offensives at the end of the war, to deny the Chinese Red Army any new ground.

    Aside from that, let's say the Japanese did accept American terms, the only forces capable of accepting the surrender in Korea and Manchuria were Chinese. Let's also say Operation DOWNFALL shift its forces to prepare to open a 2nd Front? How long would that take? 60 days at least to build up the forces to actually drive north. Mud season.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 04 Mar 18, at 16:50.

  6. #441
    Senior Contributor Monash's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Mar 10
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,636
    All true Sir. If the offensive starts with landings in Korea and then moves on to start positions in Manchuria. Personally I would simply stage sea borne landings on the Russian East coast at and north of Vladivostok with the intention of pushing inland only until I had annexed all of the territory West of the Amur River.

    I would also land in Korea but only with a view to securing the peninsula. IMO Manchuria is simply abridge to far - for the reasons you have indicated.

    Annexing Korea then moving north to deploy significant forces into Manchuria would simply take to long, even with the full co-operation for the Japanese. I would want Stalin focused on a potential threat to the far east. If he sees sense and calls of his Western offensive well then job done and the Allies can withdraw once Russia disengages in Europe.

    Personally I think the scenario in question makes more sense in 46 or 47 than in 45 i.e. after the Russians have had time to consolidate their hold over Eastern Europe and bring forward the supplies they would need for any offensive. You also have to assume the A-bomb hasn't made an appearance yet for the reasons previously stated.

  7. #442
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Monash View Post
    All true Sir. If the offensive starts with landings in Korea and then moves on to start positions in Manchuria. Personally I would simply stage sea borne landings on the Russian East coast at and north of Vladivostok with the intention of pushing inland only until I had annexed all of the territory West of the Amur River.
    Can't be done. DOWNFALL was scheduled for 1 Nov, way too late in the year. They won't be ready in time to help in Europe.

    As far as the A-bomb goes, both the Soviets and the Americans knew about it because of captured German scientists. While I agree that there wouldn't be a rush to finish the Soviet A-bomb if the Americans kept their secret, it would be fool hardy to assume Stalin would be ignorant of an American program.
    Last edited by WABs_OOE; 05 Mar 18, at 19:52.

  8. #443
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    11,822
    Quote Originally Posted by WABs_OOE View Post
    While I agree that there wouldn't be a rush to finish the Soviet A-bomb if the Americans kept their secret, it would be fool hardy to assume Stalin would be ignorant of an American program.
    Yeah, Stalin was aware of the Trinity test, the US a-bomb program was riddled with scientists working as Soviet agents.

  9. #444
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,979
    Quote Originally Posted by Albany Rifles View Post
    Also, to this thread.

    The Luftwaffe never posed a high altitude threat to Soviet air defenses. Could the B-29s & B-24s have survived large raids into the Soviet Union? The Western Allies certainly had the fighters to throw into the mix. And nothing says that a lot of USN aircraft couldn't be land based.
    Militaries are organisms much as organizations in that they adapt to the environment. The PVO did not have much in the way of high altitude artillery or interceptors. It had developed to counter smaller numbers of medium bombers of the Luftwaffe, not the massive trains of high flying heavy bombers. The most common big gun in Soviet service was the M1939 85mm. It was comparable to the German 88mm but produced in smaller numbers and not part of the robust ADA network including radar and known bomber stream flight paths that the Germans had developed.

    As for the USN/USMC, if Stalin goes West, once Japan is done, we can go east into the Russian Far East and there is jack all he can do about it within 200 miles of the coast. Not a grand threat to the USSR, but a serious blow to his prestige, especially if a reconstituted 31st Infantry landed in Vladivostok.

  10. #445
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    11,822
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    basically if Japan was smart, she would have left the US and the USSR the hell alone, stayed out of mainland China with the exception of Manchukuo, and seized the islands (HK, Hainan). Maybe seize Singapore/Malaya/Dutch East Indies.

    she would have gotten all the resources she wanted, and then slowly play divide-and-conquer with China without fear of a US embargo. which is essentially what she was doing in the 1920s-early 30s before the militarists started to believe their own propaganda.
    This isn't anything that's the product of new/original thought, but that being said, this is precisely the problem with a national leadership that thinks it's divinely inspired or some kind of Nietzchean Ubermensch. Instead of taking measured, practical steps and stopping to consolidate their conquests, they are utterly convinced they are an unstoppable force, then find themselves where they are besieged by enemies and it all comes apart. A cliche, but Rome wasn't built in a day.

  11. #446
    Administrator
    Lei Feng Protege
    Defense Professional
    Join Date
    23 Aug 05
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    13,713
    it's pretty clear that the Japanese had a case of Germany-envy. Germany on the other hand has had a long history of gambling double-or-nothing, and Hitler raised that to a completely new level. Japan and also Italy was trying to imitate this, only with an even poorer hand.
    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

  12. #447
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,979
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    it's pretty clear that the Japanese had a case of Germany-envy. Germany on the other hand has had a long history of gambling double-or-nothing, and Hitler raised that to a completely new level. Japan and also Italy was trying to imitate this, only with an even poorer hand.
    Japan had a history of winning against bloated nations. They had beaten China several times and beaten Russia. The IJA and IJN still had generals and admirals who got their combat debut in 1904. They were overconfident, but I don't think it was envy of Hitler.

  13. #448
    Former Staff Senior Contributor Ironduke's Avatar
    Join Date
    02 Aug 03
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    11,822
    I agree with you z. Japan was already in the aggression game, years before Hitler was. It was simply attacking the US, GB, AUS, and NL that proved to be a bridge too far. China may or may not have been a bridge too far to begin with, I happen to think that Japan would have been able to continue to do what they were doing in China if there were no foreign intervention, albeit though indefinitely stuck in a forever war morass. Any alternate foreign intervention though would have similarly put Japan on the backfoot.

    edit: just noticed astralis's bit about pre-Hitlerite conquests. Yes, IJA emulated the Heer specifically and the Germans more broadly on land warfare matters, while the IJN emulated the RN.
    Last edited by Ironduke; 30 Mar 18, at 22:11.

  14. #449
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    03 Sep 17
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by astralis View Post
    she would have gotten all the resources she wanted, and then slowly play divide-and-conquer with China without fear of a US embargo. which is essentially what she was doing in the 1920s-early 30s before the militarists started to believe their own propaganda.
    Matt's post just reminded me of the age old adict that China conquers her conquerors.

    I don't think Japan felt she had time to divide and conquer China. There was some sense of urgency that if they don't knock out China soon that she would come back with a knock out punch and indeed if one looks at the major battles in China, none of them were walkovers.

  15. #450
    Staff Emeritus
    Military Professional
    Contrary by Nature.
    zraver's Avatar
    Join Date
    22 Oct 06
    Location
    Arkansas
    Posts
    14,979
    Quote Originally Posted by Ironduke View Post
    I agree with you z. Japan was already in the aggression game, years before Hitler was. It was simply attacking the US, GB, AUS, and NL that proved to be a bridge too far. China may or may not have been a bridge too far to begin with, I happen to think that Japan would have been able to continue to do what they were doing in China if there were no foreign intervention, albeit though indefinitely stuck in a forever war morass. Any alternate foreign intervention though would have similarly put Japan on the backfoot.

    edit: just noticed astralis's bit about pre-Hitlerite conquests. Yes, IJA emulated the Heer specifically and the Germans more broadly on land warfare matters, while the IJN emulated the RN.
    AU and NZ were non-players in 41. The bulk of thier combat power was land troops in Egypt. The bulk of the RN was locked into the Atlantic and Med. That left the US as the only credible foe. The IJN may have modeled itself after the RN, but its doctrine was pure US Mahanian grand battle. They thought they could knock out our (pacific) fleet in one fell swoop and the German threat would prevent us from doing what Russia did in 1904 and sailing our other fleet half way around the world. They either did not know, or did not believe that we already had enough warships building or funded to beat them without a single ship sailing from the Atlantic. We already had 3 Essex class carriers building and 8 more funded before Pearl Harbor.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. The Fall of Pelosi?
    By Ironduke in forum American Politics & Economy
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 15 May 09,, 23:15
  2. The Fall Of Rome?
    By Ironside in forum Ancient, Medieval & Early Modern Ages
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 26 May 06,, 03:47
  3. The Fall of Communism
    By Leader in forum Multimedia & Jukebox room
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 26 Jul 05,, 11:40
  4. The fall of France
    By tarek in forum International Politics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 28 Sep 04,, 00:26

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
  •