|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 19, 2022 5:29:17 GMT
Q7. What if Pearl Harbor never happens? Since you're online (and because of your unique views) Gerd von Rundstedt , what do you think? The only possible way Pearl Harbor never happens is if Japan decides either that the Soviet Union is the number one enemy. If Japan declares war on Britain, then America (at least, under FDR) is sure to continue with their decidedly interventionist policies and eventually declare war on Japan. However, if this happens, the majority of the population (isolationists) are unwilling to go to war for Britain. Pearl Harbor in this scenario (not necessarily the same attack/place in OTL) creates outrage, but is less viewed as a sort of terrorist attack as it was in OTL. The more probable scenario is that Japan turns its imperialist eyes to the Soviet Union, as recommended by most of the military. This way, they maintain friendly relationships with the western powers (allowing for trade), as well as getting the coal and oil reserves of Siberia. In addition, they can have an easier war with China as the Soviet Union is not sending them ridiculous amounts of aid. Could that mean Japan winning the Pacific theater? |
|
|
|
Post by Captain on Jan 19, 2022 13:23:50 GMT
The only possible way Pearl Harbor never happens is if Japan decides either that the Soviet Union is the number one enemy. If Japan declares war on Britain, then America (at least, under FDR) is sure to continue with their decidedly interventionist policies and eventually declare war on Japan. However, if this happens, the majority of the population (isolationists) are unwilling to go to war for Britain. Pearl Harbor in this scenario (not necessarily the same attack/place in OTL) creates outrage, but is less viewed as a sort of terrorist attack as it was in OTL. The more probable scenario is that Japan turns its imperialist eyes to the Soviet Union, as recommended by most of the military. This way, they maintain friendly relationships with the western powers (allowing for trade), as well as getting the coal and oil reserves of Siberia. In addition, they can have an easier war with China as the Soviet Union is not sending them ridiculous amounts of aid. Could that mean Japan winning the Pacific theater? I don't think so, Japan's growing intention to capture more province must had made themselves to attack US provinces (that's what Easytech's WCQ4 predicted) They might be going to invade USA from east! Then what same result.... One more thing to state, this is the time when Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose's INDIAN NATIONAL ARMY was also rising in Asia. The result may vary further if they don't stop! |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 20, 2022 3:41:28 GMT
Could that mean Japan winning the Pacific theater? I don't think so, Japan's growing intention to capture more province must had made themselves to attack US provinces (that's what Easytech's WCQ4 predicted) They might be going to invade USA from east! Then what same result.... One more thing to state, this is the time when Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose's INDIAN NATIONAL ARMY was also rising in Asia. The result may vary further if they don't stop! That is true. But let's assume that the Japanese occupy China and defeat USSR first and then focus on the pacific islands and US. Now how would the situation change? |
|
|
|
Post by Captain on Jan 20, 2022 16:43:12 GMT
I don't think so, Japan's growing intention to capture more province must had made themselves to attack US provinces (that's what Easytech's WCQ4 predicted) They might be going to invade USA from east! Then what same result.... One more thing to state, this is the time when Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose's INDIAN NATIONAL ARMY was also rising in Asia. The result may vary further if they don't stop! That is true. But let's assume that the Japanese occupy China and defeat USSR first and then focus on the pacific islands and US. Now how would the situation change? Oh my god you said USSR's defeat over Japan that means Siberia under Japan and the rest of the USSR under Nazi rule😱 Probably England would suffer a second large wave attack by the Germans and this would be their last, after that Nazi flag will hail over London Growing AZAD HIND FAUJ will fully liberate India (still after the death of Subhas Chandra Bose) due to unstop economical aid from Japan Moreover three major countries had already been grown up as AXIS superpower! I don't know about Japan but Germany and India will be now well satisfied to stop ww2 |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Jan 20, 2022 16:50:19 GMT
I don't think so, Japan's growing intention to capture more province must had made themselves to attack US provinces (that's what Easytech's WCQ4 predicted) They might be going to invade USA from east! Then what same result.... One more thing to state, this is the time when Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose's INDIAN NATIONAL ARMY was also rising in Asia. The result may vary further if they don't stop! That is true. But let's assume that the Japanese occupy China and defeat USSR first and then focus on the pacific islands and US. Now how would the situation change? How would they defeat the USSR though. They would have both China and the USSR against them. If they didn't defeat the USSR fast, they would run out of oil and lose just faster with UK and USA also probably against them at some point. Without sufficient resources, China would be very hard to defeat, not to mention the USSR who humiliated the Japanese in the far east. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 21, 2022 3:43:08 GMT
That is true. But let's assume that the Japanese occupy China and defeat USSR first and then focus on the pacific islands and US. Now how would the situation change? How would they defeat the USSR though. They would have both China and the USSR against them. If they didn't defeat the USSR fast, they would run out of oil and lose just faster with UK and USA also probably against them at some point. Without sufficient resources, China would be very hard to defeat, not to mention the USSR who humiliated the Japanese in the far east. Well it involves US staying out and Japan focusing on USSR, basically no Pearl Harbor. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 21, 2022 3:49:57 GMT
That is true. But let's assume that the Japanese occupy China and defeat USSR first and then focus on the pacific islands and US. Now how would the situation change? Oh my god you said USSR's defeat over Japan that means Siberia under Japan and the rest of the USSR under Nazi rule😱 Probably England would suffer a second large wave attack by the Germans and this would be their last, after that Nazi flag will hail over London Growing AZAD HIND FAUJ will fully liberate India (still after the death of Subhas Chandra Bose) due to unstop economical aid from Japan Moreover three major countries had already been grown up as AXIS superpower! I don't know about Japan but Germany and India will be now well satisfied to stop ww2 I don't think Germany can conquer GB. The Royal Navy and Air force would still pose a challenge. Sure they were suffering from U boat blockage, but even if they land, they won't most probably defeat GB. I saw an excellent Quora answer on this. Coming to India, I think there would be no reason why the Japanese or Azad Hind Fauj would fake Subhas Chandra Bose's death. Well Italy will still be fragile, under heavy German influence as Germany did most of the heavy lifting and Japan wouldn't pose much of a challenge to Germany as would US. So the new cold war would be between US and GB vs Germany. |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 21, 2022 6:18:10 GMT
That is true. But let's assume that the Japanese occupy China and defeat USSR first and then focus on the pacific islands and US. Now how would the situation change? Oh my god you said USSR's defeat over Japan that means Siberia under Japan and the rest of the USSR under Nazi rule😱 Probably England would suffer a second large wave attack by the Germans and this would be their last, after that Nazi flag will hail over London Growing AZAD HIND FAUJ will fully liberate India (still after the death of Subhas Chandra Bose) due to unstop economical aid from Japan Moreover three major countries had already been grown up as AXIS superpower! I don't know about Japan but Germany and India will be now well satisfied to stop ww2 I doubt if Japan would have been able to invade India, they would have huge logistical problems if they tried to invade through forests and mountains of the Assam frontier. INA was not even a serious force, it had barely 40,000 men and there were no instances of defection among Indians. Axis powers would have overextended themselves, not became "superpowers" |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Jan 21, 2022 7:02:16 GMT
How would they defeat the USSR though. They would have both China and the USSR against them. If they didn't defeat the USSR fast, they would run out of oil and lose just faster with UK and USA also probably against them at some point. Without sufficient resources, China would be very hard to defeat, not to mention the USSR who humiliated the Japanese in the far east. Well it involves US staying out and Japan focusing on USSR, basically no Pearl Harbor. But how could they ever win against China and USSR? |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 22, 2022 3:44:56 GMT
Well it involves US staying out and Japan focusing on USSR, basically no Pearl Harbor. But how could they ever win against China and USSR? I'm generally an optimist.
They could have striked slowly and limitedly into Siberia. Remember that they could have used their Pacific army to attack USSR and the invasion of China could have gone as usual. China lasted because USSR and US were sending aid and the Japs had an extra theater in form of Pacific against an industrial giant US.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 4:26:39 GMT
But how could they ever win against China and USSR? I'm generally an optimist.
They could have striked slowly and limitedly into Siberia. Remember that they could have used their Pacific army to attack USSR and the invasion of China could have gone as usual. China lasted because USSR and US were sending aid and the Japs had an extra theater in form of Pacific against an industrial giant US.
Logistical issues played an instrumental role in the stalemate on Chinese front. Far East also did not had the infrastructure to support movement of such large armies at any meaningful speed. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 22, 2022 4:33:10 GMT
I'm generally an optimist.
They could have striked slowly and limitedly into Siberia. Remember that they could have used their Pacific army to attack USSR and the invasion of China could have gone as usual. China lasted because USSR and US were sending aid and the Japs had an extra theater in form of Pacific against an industrial giant US.
Logistical issues played an instrumental role in the stalemate on Chinese front. Far East also did not had the infrastructure to support movement of such large armies at any meaningful speed. In Far east, they didn't had to move fast anyways. Or else they will be too far from their supply lines. For China, the least they can do is defend their gains at least. |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 4:36:39 GMT
Logistical issues played an instrumental role in the stalemate on Chinese front. Far East also did not had the infrastructure to support movement of such large armies at any meaningful speed. In Far east, they didn't had to move fast anyways. Or else they will be too far from their supply lines. For China, the least they can do is defend their gains at least. Soviets would have repelled such small armies easily. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 22, 2022 4:39:22 GMT
In Far east, they didn't had to move fast anyways. Or else they will be too far from their supply lines. For China, the least they can do is defend their gains at least. Soviets would have repelled such small armies easily. Then why not take a larger army? Also, what was the Soviet army size in the far East? |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 22, 2022 4:46:06 GMT
|
|
