|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 4:53:41 GMT
That's a quite large army, I would say it's atleast 200,000 men. |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 4:57:27 GMT
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? They didn't had the logistical capability to do that. Also, Chinese Front was already consuming huge chunk of the front. |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 22, 2022 4:58:37 GMT
Then why not take a larger army? Also, what was the Soviet army size in the far East? They didn't had the logistical capability to do that. Also, Chinese Front was already consuming huge chunk of the front. Wouldn't the Soviets too have logistics issues? |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 5:03:01 GMT
They didn't had the logistical capability to do that. Also, Chinese Front was already consuming huge chunk of the front. Wouldn't the Soviets too have logistics issues? Trans Siberian Railway! |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 22, 2022 5:08:29 GMT
Wouldn't the Soviets too have logistics issues? Trans Siberian Railway! Japanese could have just bombed it or sabotaged it. Taking big cities on the eastern front - Khabarovsk and Vladivostok would've been enough. The Soviets would have two choices there - moving their army to defend key cities in the west or attack the Japanese. If they chose option 1, the Japanese could have controlled entire far east, at least it's key centers. If the Soviets chose option 2, then the Japanese could have just bles them dry until they run out of supplies |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 5:13:02 GMT
Japanese could have just bombed it or sabotaged it. Taking big cities on the eastern front - Khabarovsk and Vladivostok would've been enough. The Soviets would have two choices there - moving their army to defend key cities in the west or attack the Japanese. If they chose option 1, the Japanese could have controlled entire far east, at least it's key centers. If the Soviets chose option 2, then the Japanese could have just bles them dry until they run out of supplies To take, those cities they would have to defeat Soviets which they can't. Do you really think, Japanese Air Force would have been able to defeat Soviet Air Force? |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 22, 2022 5:16:46 GMT
Japanese could have just bombed it or sabotaged it. Taking big cities on the eastern front - Khabarovsk and Vladivostok would've been enough. The Soviets would have two choices there - moving their army to defend key cities in the west or attack the Japanese. If they chose option 1, the Japanese could have controlled entire far east, at least it's key centers. If the Soviets chose option 2, then the Japanese could have just bles them dry until they run out of supplies To take, those cities they would have to defeat Soviets which they can't. Do you really think, Japanese Air Force would have been able to defeat Soviet Air Force? Why couldn't the Japanese defeat the Soviets? If even they can't, you can always starve them out by blocking supplies. And if they can't bomb the railway, they can sabotage it. |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 5:19:15 GMT
To take, those cities they would have to defeat Soviets which they can't. Do you really think, Japanese Air Force would have been able to defeat Soviet Air Force? Why couldn't the Japanese defeat the Soviets? If even they can't, you can always starve them out by blocking supplies. And if they can't bomb the railway, they can sabotage it. Because they were far outnumbered and also outequipped, especially in aircrafts and tanks. How can they sabotage it? |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 22, 2022 5:24:04 GMT
Why couldn't the Japanese defeat the Soviets? If even they can't, you can always starve them out by blocking supplies. And if they can't bomb the railway, they can sabotage it. Because they were far outnumbered and also outequipped, especially in aircrafts and tanks. How can they sabotage it? By sending their agents to sabotage. Am I underestimating the Soviets here? |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 5:29:04 GMT
Because they were far outnumbered and also outequipped, especially in aircrafts and tanks. How can they sabotage it? By sending their agents to sabotage. Am I underestimating the Soviets here? That would be a drop in the ocean. Human saboteurs can never hope to deal any significant damage to it. Also, it would be really difficult to send them into Soviet Union to do that. I think you are overestimating the Japanese |
|
|
|
Post by John Marston on Jan 22, 2022 5:31:48 GMT
By sending their agents to sabotage. Am I underestimating the Soviets here? That would be a drop in the ocean. Human saboteurs can never hope to deal any significant damage to it. Also, it would be really difficult to send them into Soviet Union to do that. I think you are overestimating the Japanese Alright, fair point. But if the Japanese attack the Soviets, then the Soviets wouldn't have enough troops to drive the Nazis away from Moscow. Basically, the Soviets counterattack would have taken much more time and the Nazis could have gotten a second chance to take Moscow. |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 5:41:29 GMT
That would be a drop in the ocean. Human saboteurs can never hope to deal any significant damage to it. Also, it would be really difficult to send them into Soviet Union to do that. I think you are overestimating the Japanese Alright, fair point. But if the Japanese attack the Soviets, then the Soviets wouldn't have enough troops to drive the Nazis away from Moscow. Basically, the Soviets counterattack would have taken much more time and the Nazis could have gotten a second chance to take Moscow. That depends on when Japanese attack. Soviets would have brought men from somewhere else (probably by recruitment), if they would have been at war with Japan. Still, I think they would have brought parts of that reserve. Also, by December, Germany was in no position to launch any further major attacks till after spring of 1942. |
|
|
|
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Jan 22, 2022 7:26:36 GMT
Because they were far outnumbered and also outequipped, especially in aircrafts and tanks. How can they sabotage it? By sending their agents to sabotage. Am I underestimating the Soviets here? Japanese saboteurs? Stalin literally killed thousands of his officers, accusing them being Japanese saboteurs. To the actual topic, what would be going on with China though? It would be difficult for Japan to fund a war against China being outnumbered and running out of resources. They would be forced to a two front war. |
|
|
|
Post by Captain on Jan 22, 2022 9:05:04 GMT
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" But when did I said that Japan will invade India?? If Japan never falls (suppose) then they will continue their funding of AZAD HIND FAUJ Yes, there are only 43,000 mens in the very FAUZ(at that time) but there motives were encouraging so much to our youths which might result to further increase of their power There were many unemployed mens on that time who were obviously starving from the British rule, they might contribute their hands and soul for this Fauz I want to share an answer from Quora, www.quora.com/In-1947-did-British-decide-to-leave-India-or-were-forced-to-do-so/answer/Anirban-Karmakar-20?ch=15&oid=90354624&share=d2edb848&srid=uw3ZIZ&target_type=answerOverall the whole nation might be united to stand for a 'emerging superpower' |
|
|
|
Post by Shrimant Peshwa Madhavrao Bhat on Jan 22, 2022 9:43:11 GMT
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" But when did I said that Japan will invade India?? If Japan never falls (suppose) then they will continue their funding of AZAD HIND FAUJ Yes, there are only 43,000 mens in the very FAUZ(at that time) but there motives were encouraging so much to our youths which might result to further increase of their power There were many unemployed mens on that time who were obviously starving from the British rule, they might contribute their hands and soul for this Fauz Overall the whole nation might be united to stand for a 'emerging superpower' INA needed support from Japan to invade India, it clearly did not had the manpower and material to do that. Firstly, most people did not even knew about the existence of that army. British controlled the media and flow of information very tightly. Of those who knew (primarily in cities), many considered them traitors. British propaganda used the atrocities committed by Japanese in China and elsewhere to turn the public sentiment against Japanese and INA. Even Congress was against any cooperation with Japan. Muslim League supported Britain and Communists too preferred the allies over Japan. Hindu Mahasabha was generally cooperative with the government. Yes, there was a famine in Bengal, but it were ultimately the British Raj (especially Viceroy Wavell) which led the effort to address the famine and by January 1944, it was under control. No other province suffered suffered from famine. I am not aware of any particularly high unemployment, Any data or something? He is completely right except about mutiny. Firstly, the mutiny was largely limited to Navy and that too was largely limited to Bombay and Karachi. The aim of mutiny was not even independence. They were mainly up in arms because of poor living conditions and delay in demobilisation despite the end of the war and most of them were willing to end it the moment their demands were met. |
|
