Slitherine

quote:

ORIGINAL: Swenslim

Build submurines, they are very good.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Don't build the RO-Boats.

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

Think you're ignoring the major dictum of the Pacific War 41-45 :
Attacking Pearl Harbour may have been a might Japanese tactical victory, but it was a strategic blunder of the worst possible sort. It p*ssed off the Americans so much they were in no mood to compromise, not ever, after 7/12/41, and they were determined to keep coming no matter how long it took and no matter what the cost in blood (althogh the front line troops, particularly after the kamikaze's started coming, may have disputed the last point).

After PH, has Yamamoto himself mused in his diaries, the only way that the Imperial High Command would have been able to dictate any kind of peace or armistice to the US would be when the Japanese troops were marching up the steps of the White House, and even then he doubted the Americans would ever listen...

However, an more interesting hypothetical 'what if', is if the Japanese ignored PH and instead concentrated purely on the British in Burma and Malaysia, + the DEI. Rooseveldt would have had an insurmountable mountain to climb trying to sell a Pacific war to both Congress and the American public purely to shore up European colonial interests far, far away from US soil and to which America had no real interest. You could also argue that an attack on the PI may only have precipitated 'limited' US intervention, as the White House had already privately agreed that Plan Orange was unworkable and that the PI could not be defended indefinitely from Japanese attack (no matter what MacArthur thought or said) and again Rooseveldt would have had trouble getting the necessary funds for all out unlimited war purely to protect an admittedly large US interest that was far away across the other side of the Pacific which hardly anyone had ever heard of or even knew where it was...

quote:

And the capture of 100,000+ Americans in the PI wpold not have angered the US public? The death march surely would have

quote:

ORIGINAL: CarnageINC

quote:

ORIGINAL: Q-Ball

Don't build the RO-Boats.

I've seen you say this before QBall, why is that? The range, the armament, the time?

quote:

ORIGINAL: xj900uk

quote:

And the capture of 100,000+ Americans in the PI wpold not have angered the US public? The death march surely would have

But my point is that the Japanese could have expanded W & SW without attacking US possessions in the PI if they'd wanted to, and not drawn the uS fully into the conflict. Also a lot of the attrocities in the PI (like the Bataan Death March) didn't come out until a lot later on. And I still believe that Rooseveldt could not have got much past Congress & the US public if they thought that they were going to war soley to shore up Dutch and British colonial possessions

quote:

ORIGINAL: SqzMyLemon

I just wrote a paper on Japan's militarism in World War Two. I think a lot of people are forgetting the United State's intransigence towards the Japanese and their efforts at expansion, especially in China. The United State's raw material and oil embargo really left Japan no choice. People mention the "wither on the vine" strategy, that's exactly what the Japanese felt was going to happen to their country at the instigation of the United States. It was either strike now while we can, or wait two years for their strategic reserves of oil to be used up and never have the opportunity to attack again. They always knew, and accepted, any expansion in the Pacific would bring them into conflict against the Americans. The hope was that a decisive defeat of the United State's Pacific Fleet might just bring the Americans to the negotiating table. However, I totally agree that the surprise attack sealed their fate. It wasn't the attack itself, but the fact that it occurred prior to that all important declaration of war. The urge for revenge was completely unforeseen, and never fully understood by the Japanese.

There was an incredible lack of understanding of each side that I believe contributed to the way the war was initiated, pursued and ulitmately ended. The West really had no clue about the Far East and an understanding of the Asian way of doing things. Japan could be said to have completely underestimated the reaction of the United States to the way the attack on Pearl Harbor was carried out. Japan, to my understanding wanted out of China, but they needed to save face in order to do so. The Americans denied them that opportunity by the unilateral declaration that Japan must remove all her troops from China before any reconsideration of the resource and oil embargos. To Japan that was completely unacceptable, as was the later "unconditional surrender" demands of the United States, which threatened the continuation of the Japanese Imperial tradition. This was a huge factor in Japan fighting well beyond her means, any nation would do so if they felt their entire way of life was threatened. Japan reaped the whirlwind by the decision to attack America as she did, and rightfully so. On the other hand, the United States did nothing to prevent the conflict from happening either, in fact it could be arged they did much to guarantee a conflict would arise, and then settled for nothing less than the complete destruction of the Japanese. I'm not trying to point blame on either side, just a mutual lack of understanding and unwillingness by either side to compromise that really made a showdown inevitable.

Just some thoughts, but I think it is naive (no offense intended) to think that Japan could have expanded anywhere in the Pacific without an eventual war against the United States.