What if Japan had not attack the US?

What if Japan had not attack the US? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

Chris21wen -> What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 1:26:39 PM)
I've never seen or read anything about this hypothesis but what would the US have done if Japan had attacked Britain and her then allies and not struck at the US. Phillipines would be a big potential thorn in their side but Japan would take the Malaya, Burma, and the DEI much earlier, obtaining the oil and resources they wanted.

wwengr -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 2:15:10 PM)
It would have delayed the US entry into the war probably, but the British Security Coordination (BSC) organization under William Stephenson in New York and DC was meeting with a very high degree of success in turning American Sentiment away from isolationism. The BSC was running a hghly effective propaganda and political campaign against the isolationists as well as very effective covert operations to discredit them. BSC agents were connected to some of the most powerful people in Washington, New York, and Hollywood. Stephenson was a personal advisor to Roosevelt. Stephenson even recommended Wild Bill Donovan to head the OSS to Rossevelt. People such as Noel Coward, Roald Dahl, and Ian Fleming were all BSC operatives. It is estimated that the BSC had as many as 3,000 agents spying and conducting covert operations in the United States during the war. It would have been a short delay. A Japanese thrust into the Pacific, even just to the DEI would have seriously threatened US interests. That's why the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor. It was a pre-emptive strike because the Japanese assumed that the United States would immediately intervene. They wanted to destroy the American fleet so they could negotiate from a position of strength.

wdolson -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 2:33:17 PM)
If Japan had not attacked PH, the Philippines would have sat next to the most important shipping route in the Empire and it would have been in the hands of an enemy that had the luxury of declaring war when it wanted to. The US probably would have built up the PI more, then attacked Japan when they entered the war. If the Pacific Fleet hadn't been moved to the PI, definitely more aircraft, troops, and supplies would have been moved there. MacArthur wanted to defend the beaches, but didn't have the troops or equipment to do so. If he had time to build up the beach defenses, the Japanese could have been repulsed on Luzon and possibly other islands if they had tried to invade after a US declaration. The Japanese were as successful as they were because they had surprise on their side. Britain was bogged down in a war on the other side of the world, the Dutch were the remnants of a conquered country, and the US was caught flat footed. If the US stays neutral for a while longer and builds up Guam and the PI, the Japanese have enemy strongholds in their rear area with a prepared and ready enemy the day the US declares war. Ultimately the war probably would have been shorter than it was. Bill

Ghertz -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 2:39:33 PM)
Roosevelt wanted to enter the war against Germany and couldn't because of isolationist tendancies of the American population. Only after being attacked did American sentiment change. I concur that the US military capabilities would have been built up in the PI and Guam. I don't agree that the US would have declared war on Japan.

Twotribes -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 3:42:16 PM)
Americans did not care for Japan. It was a whole other kettle of Fish then Germany or Italy. We would have responded in short order and the people would have supported it. By the way we NEVER declared war on Germany till after Hitler declared war on US. Stupidest decision he made the entire war.

Shark7 -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 3:51:15 PM)
If Japan hadn't attacked the US, then WiTP-AE wouldn't exist and no one would be here in this forum asking or answering these types of questions. [:D] I don't think it would have mattered, Roosevelt wanted into the war, eventually the US would have joined the fight, IMO.

wworld7 -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 3:59:32 PM)
Search the WITP forum, I remember a discussion on this many years ago.

herwin -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 4:53:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ghertz Roosevelt wanted to enter the war against Germany and couldn't because of isolationist tendancies of the American population. Only after being attacked did American sentiment change. I concur that the US military capabilities would have been built up in the PI and Guam. I don't agree that the US would have declared war on Japan. There would have been a Tonkin Gulf incident--we had ships at sea on 7 December 1941 whose mission was to make sure a Japanese attack on the Commonwealth or DEI hit some (minor, expendible) US assets as well. At the time of the attack, the Asiatic Fleet was redeploying to Singapore via the DEI. (The DEI wasn't at war with Japan until 9 December.)

Joe D. -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 6:01:59 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ghertz ... I concur that the US military capabilities would have been built up in the PI and Guam. I don't agree that the US would have declared war on Japan. Perhaps, but I suspect lend-lease would have gone into high-gear.

wwengr -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 10:47:01 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ghertz ...I concur that the US military capabilities would have been built up in the PI and Guam. I don't agree that the US would have declared war on Japan. American isolationism with regard to Europe was two-fold. First, because Americans viewed Europe from the perspective of a bunch of old world nations that just could not get along. Many Americans believed that we should have nothing to do with that. Second, the combination of entrenched trade protectionism and dominant commercial interests of powerful European nations made it so that the US had little to gain or lose commercially by engaging in a European war. The Pacific rim was an entirely different matter. Look at the US holdings in 1941: US possessions in 1941, on the WITP AE map: Phillipines Panama Canal Zone Canton and Enderbury Islands (jointly administered by US & UK) Guam Wake Island Midway Atoll Hawaii Alaska American Samoa Baker Island Howland Island Jarvis Island Johnston Atoll Kingman Reef It was all about controlling all of the Trans-Pacific air routes as well as routes for shipping. Unlike a war in Europe, Japanese expansion in the Pacific, even into Malaya was viewed as a dire threat to the vital commercial interests of the United States. Roll back to 1941-42 and look at what some of the big political debates were. Air and sea travel was considered the key to the Pacific. American corporations and the US Congress viewed securing exclusivity on those routes and others as the key to American dominance. That is why the British had to exchange basing rights all over the world for lend-lease. If the Japanese had attacked Malaya without attacking the US, the Asiatic Fleet would have promptly steamed into harms way and forced a war. Ultimately, the United States jumped in to save the British, but they made the British pay with the empire for it. In the end, remember the famous words of Michael Corleone - "It's not personal, Sonny. It's strictly business."

bjfagan -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 10:55:38 PM)
These have all been good points from a military perspective, but I believe the two most important ones have been overlooked… they are US industry and public opinion. These were the two critical elements that lead to the overwhelming US victory. Once PH was attacked, public opinion swung totally in favor of war with Japan and although it wavered a little in the early months and with the mass casualties suffered in the island hopping campaign, it would not break or give up until Japan was conquered. This support of public opinion also allowed a switch of US industry into a full wartime production and the mass production that outstripped anything the Axis could produce. If the attack on Pearl never occurred and the Japs went straight for Malaya, Burma and the DEI, I am not so sure that we would have gone to war. Public opinion would be closely split and I am sure seesaw back and forth. However, if Roosevelt was successful in getting Congress to declare a war it could not be the all out commitment to victory that we had in WWII, because the public support could not be reliable for a long period of time and would have prevented our industry to switchover to total wartime production. We would have called up and trained some divisions, fortified the Philippines, prepared the Navy and then charge haphazardly into a modern war we had never experienced. I imagine we would meet with initial disaster, surprised that the current war isn’t like what we expected and trained for throughout the 1930’s. The losses and early setbacks would sap public support and turn the war into something no one wants to be in, but can’t get out of. <Sounds strikingly familiar these days> I am sure we would have adjusted our tactics and strategy to the new modern war, increased production, called up more troops and we would eventually beat back Japan with our technological advantage. But the end would not be unconditional surrender, but some kind of brokered peace. Who knows what Japan would have been left with in their possession. In my opinion, democracies are not good at starting wars. I believe Japan should have just declared war on Holland, taken the DEI and prepare for a US attack. They would be in a superior position with combat experienced troops/sailors waiting for the US to figure out what it will to do. Japan had 50/50 odds of the US starting a half hearted war to kick them out of the DEI. Instead Japan chose a direct attack with a 100% likelihood for war against the US and who would be totally committed to victory with the industrial base to carry it out.

Mike Scholl -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/7/2010 11:00:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Ghertz Roosevelt wanted to enter the war against Germany and couldn't because of isolationist tendancies of the American population. Only after being attacked did American sentiment change. I concur that the US military capabilities would have been built up in the PI and Guam. I don't agree that the US would have declared war on Japan. If you check the "polling" on that you will find that "isolationism" was dropping steadily as the War news arrived from Europe and Asia. The Brits made sure no Axis atrocity went unpublicised..., and the American press itself has a soft spot for China and "Plucky little England". Roosevelt could have never gotten away with the blatently pro-Allied moves he made had isolationist sentiment remained strong. What would have been lacking is the "Gung Ho! everything-for-the-war-effort!" spirit that PH created in spades. Production and manpower totals would have been lower overall.

wwengr -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/8/2010 12:21:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl quote: ORIGINAL: Ghertz Roosevelt wanted to enter the war against Germany and couldn't because of isolationist tendancies of the American population. Only after being attacked did American sentiment change. I concur that the US military capabilities would have been built up in the PI and Guam. I don't agree that the US would have declared war on Japan. If you check the "polling" on that you will find that "isolationism" was dropping steadily as the War news arrived from Europe and Asia. The Brits made sure no Axis atrocity went unpublicised..., and the American press itself has a soft spot for China and "Plucky little England". Roosevelt could have never gotten away with the blatently pro-Allied moves he made had isolationist sentiment remained strong. What would have been lacking is the "Gung Ho! everything-for-the-war-effort!" spirit that PH created in spades. Production and manpower totals would have been lower overall. That's the point. By December 1941, the BSC under Stephenson had scored a decisive victory against the isolationists. Public opinion had turned, the only thing that was lacking was a compelling event to finalize it. The British had won the Battle of Britain a year prior. The Nazi's had failed to capture Moscow and were bogged down in Russia. American vital interests were not threatened. A Japanese entry into the war against Britain in the Pacific would have been a seriously compelling event. There would have been no debate in Congress. Roosevelt would have moved to enforce the Taft-Katsura Agreement, the Nine-Power Treaty, the Kellogg–Briand Pact, the London Naval Treaty, or any of another dozen or so legal pretenses to place the Asiatic Fleet between the Japanese and the British. The Japanese would have been forced to attack and a declaration of war would have followed. The Japanese understood this all too well. That is why they moved pre-emptively to destroy the American Fleet as their first move. War with the US was a forgone conclusion. The American Asiatic Fleet was consolidating in the Phillipines in anticipation of war. If the Japanese had omitted the attacks on Pearl Harbor, Wake Island, Guam, and the Phillipines, it would have delayed American entry into the war by no more than a couple of weeks. IMHO[:)]

Feltan -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/8/2010 4:21:08 AM)
Something not discussed: Americans, in general, had no desire to help the UK and Dutch protect their colonies in the Pacific. During the war, the U.S. went to some length to insure that U.S. forces were not used (or have the appearance of being used) to liberate colonial holdings. As much as Roosevelt might have wanted to get into the mix, if Japan had bypassed the U.S. and just attacked the UK and the Dutch I suspect the U.S. would have stayed neutral for some extended time. Roosevelt was a politician first, and it would have hurt his party to initiate a declaration of war absent an attack. Regards, Feltan

Mike Scholl -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/8/2010 7:40:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Feltan Something not discussed: Americans, in general, had no desire to help the UK and Dutch protect their colonies in the Pacific. During the war, the U.S. went to some length to insure that U.S. forces were not used (or have the appearance of being used) to liberate colonial holdings. Regards, Feltan Reasonably true. But remember, the Dutch were clinging to the last vestige of Holland left to them after the German conquest, and Britain was the last democracy fighting against the Axis. The Japs stabbing both of them in the back would not go over well with the American public. Plus the fairly obvious self-preservationist note that "we better get into this mess while we still have some potential allies left". Even the Soviets were gaining sympathy with the American Public after Hitler broke his treaty and attacked them..., and the Communists had not been a popular group in the US. What was dragging the American Public toward war was the continuing proof by the Axis Powers that they could not be trusted to recognize any agreements with anybody, their utter ruthlessness, and a never ending stream of well-publicized atrocities. Even the most self-deluded isolationist could read the handwriting on the wall by the end of 1941..., "either fight now with some help, or fight later alone".

xj900uk -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/8/2010 1:56:28 PM)
It is a fascinating question. Would the US have come into the war to defend Dutch and British colonial interests in the East Indies & Malaya? Given the current strength of Lindenburgh's 'America First' movement, probably not in Dec '41 althuogh I accept that the BSC could have possibly turned things around by the middle of '42. However the attack on PH united the US against Imperial Japan in a way that was never quite forseen by the IJN strategy planners (other than possibly Yamamoto)

morganbj -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/8/2010 2:13:51 PM)
I'm sorry, gents, but this whole thread is nonsense, since the Japanese didn't bomb PH, the US did. It was an inside job, like 9-11. Where were theUS carriers, really? I'll tell you where: North of Oahu with their planes painted to look like IJN planes. (Some plywood was even added to give them the correct silhouette.) And, everybody knows McArthur bombed his own troops to add to the mayhem. It was many hours after PH, and he hadn't issued any war directives to his troops to prepare them for any attack, so it must be true. Clearly, Roosevelt and McArthur did all this so FDR could be the greatest wartime president ever, and McArthur could get the Medal of Honor. Oh, and don't forget, FDR funded Hitler's rise with 1 cent deposits from returned coke bottles. He drank a lot of cokes. Without those funds, Hitler would have been a waiter in a bierhall in Munich. As a matter of fact, he WAS a waiter in a bierhall in Munich. Carlie Chaplan ran Germany in those days. I've seen the pictures. So, the possibility that PH would not have been bombed ... well ... isn't. That's why arguing hypotheticals is silly. That's my story and I'm sticking to it. Now, if you'll excuse me, I need to find my tinfoil hat.

Chickenboy -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/8/2010 2:17:44 PM)
All good points, gents. Interesting discussion. What was a philosophical discussion between the "America First / avoid foreign entanglements" and "Help Europe Now" crowds was playing out in our political process as war approached. No guarantee how that would have resolved, how long a decision would have taken or what level of support would have been granted such a compromise decision. It may have dragged on for months or years while the US (more slowly than historically) rearmed for war. Who knows what our response would be, how it would have been provoked or what the outcome would be? I think eventually we would have found ourselves as co-beligerents against Japan. I still believe that war with Germany was a harder sell to most of the American public, but was a fait accompli after Hitler's initiation of war with the US on December 11. I think the arguments made above for a lesser commitment against Japan (versus historical) are pretty likely explanations. Pearl Harbor made the decision against Japan a no brainer. It crystalized the mindset, ended discussion and talk and forced action. The unprovoked attack also made American's thirst for vengeance legitimate and stoked the national animus needed to wage unrestricted warfare against a whole people. Furthermore, 'in for a penny, in for a pound' against the Nazis too. Might as well get used to the idea of fight 'em both, since we're for sure going to be fighting them both.

Mike Scholl -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/8/2010 5:32:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: xj900uk It is a fascinating question. Would the US have come into the war to defend Dutch and British colonial interests in the East Indies & Malaya? Given the current strength of Lindenburgh's 'America First' movement, probably not in Dec '41 althuogh I accept that the BSC could have possibly turned things around by the middle of '42. However the attack on PH united the US against Imperial Japan in a way that was never quite forseen by the IJN strategy planners (other than possibly Yamamoto) You are overestimating the waning popularity of the "America First" folks, and underestimating the US Public's sympathy for "the underdog". Current example: How much help did Haiti send the victims of Hurricane Katrina? Answer: Zilch! But when Haiti is struck by an earthquake, the American public from the President on down falls all over themselves to come to their aid.

wwengr -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/8/2010 10:54:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl quote: ORIGINAL: xj900uk It is a fascinating question. Would the US have come into the war to defend Dutch and British colonial interests in the East Indies & Malaya? Given the current strength of Lindenburgh's 'America First' movement, probably not in Dec '41 althuogh I accept that the BSC could have possibly turned things around by the middle of '42. However the attack on PH united the US against Imperial Japan in a way that was never quite forseen by the IJN strategy planners (other than possibly Yamamoto) You are overestimating the waning popularity of the "America First" folks, and underestimating the US Public's sympathy for "the underdog". Current example: How much help did Haiti send the victims of Hurricane Katrina? Answer: Zilch! But when Haiti is struck by an earthquake, the American public from the President on down falls all over themselves to come to their aid. On that note, I want to give you a piece of my mind about New Orleans!!!! They played well last night....[:D]

Feltan -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 4:36:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl You are overestimating the waning popularity of the "America First" folks, and underestimating the US Public's sympathy for "the underdog". Mike, I have to think that if the U.S. populace was as moved by an underdog as you state, the affinity for the Chinese would have bought the U.S. into the war before Pearl Harbor! While America First might have been slipping as a political movement/party, I don't think the desire of the majority to remain out of the war is fairly tracked by looking at only America First popularity. Roosevelt read this desire, and had promised on multiple occasions to keep us out of the war. The U.S. declaring war on Japan to insure Singapore was properly returned to the U.K., and Java went back to the Dutch? <--- Really, I think that is nearly an impossibility. Regards, Feltan

Mike Scholl -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 7:53:42 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Feltan quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl You are overestimating the waning popularity of the "America First" folks, and underestimating the US Public's sympathy for "the underdog". Mike, I have to think that if the U.S. populace was as moved by an underdog as you state, the affinity for the Chinese would have bought the U.S. into the war before Pearl Harbor! While America First might have been slipping as a political movement/party, I don't think the desire of the majority to remain out of the war is fairly tracked by looking at only America First popularity. Roosevelt read this desire, and had promised on multiple occasions to keep us out of the war. As had Woodrow Wilson during the 1916 election..., just before he took us into WW I in 1917! Presidents say a lot of things when they are trying to get elected.

bjfagan -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 9:19:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl quote: ORIGINAL: Feltan quote: ORIGINAL: Mike Scholl You are overestimating the waning popularity of the "America First" folks, and underestimating the US Public's sympathy for "the underdog". Mike, I have to think that if the U.S. populace was as moved by an underdog as you state, the affinity for the Chinese would have bought the U.S. into the war before Pearl Harbor! While America First might have been slipping as a political movement/party, I don't think the desire of the majority to remain out of the war is fairly tracked by looking at only America First popularity. Roosevelt read this desire, and had promised on multiple occasions to keep us out of the war. As had Woodrow Wilson during the 1916 election..., just before he took us into WW I in 1917! Presidents say a lot of things when they are trying to get elected. Even after many attacks on US shipping and threats by Wilson if the Germans did not stop their unrestricted sub campaign, we would have still stayed out of the Great War if it had not been for Germany trying to influence Mexico into attacking the US. Yes, many presidents will say things in their campaigns, but it is usually events that force them to act differently than what they promised.

Mike Scholl -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 10:40:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: bjfagan Even after many attacks on US shipping and threats by Wilson if the Germans did not stop their unrestricted sub campaign, we would have still stayed out of the Great War if it had not been for Germany trying to influence Mexico into attacking the US. Yes, many presidents will say things in their campaigns, but it is usually events that force them to act differently than what they promised. Of course, Wilson really did want to "keep us out of war". Whereas Roosevelt wanted to get us in. Actually, considering that the US Navy's "Neutrality Patrols" were already exchanging fire and suffering losses in the North Atlantic, you could argue that we were already in.

xj900uk -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 1:41:52 PM)
I thought that the 'America First' movement still had great support in the uS in late-41. After all it was fronted by Charles Lindenburgh, the great US-aviator and trail-blazer who was very popular (and whom woudl also always get the public sympathy vote). Funnily enough after PH, Lindenburgh volunteered for the USAAF but his application was quite abruptly and rudely turned down by Roosevelt, who told him to get lost in no uncertain terms. Lindenburgh then eventually quietly joined the USAAF on his own and flew a few combat missions (I think he was in P38 but I might be wrong), shooting down at least one EA before Washington realised he was there and called him home - he still might be a pariah to the powers that be but they had no wish to have him KIA or MIA...

AW1Steve -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 4:33:38 PM)
Having read a fair amount of the pre-war government , I can't help but feel that neither side had rulers who had a clue about the other. The Japanese could not get their mind around the concept that the USA wouldn't attack them (largely because that's what the Japanese rulers would have done) and the Allies seemed to feel that a combination of European style sabre rattling and "real-polotic" would cause the Japanese to roll over. (After all, isn't that what any sensible -read Euro style government- would do?). The few people who understood their opponents (Ambassador Grew and Admiral Richardson for the allies , Yammamoto and Noumeru for the Japanese) were ignored as "out of touch". On the other side of the world , Hitler jumps the gun against the USSR because he has to stab Stalin before Stalin stabs him! Paranoia vs. Ignorance=WAR. [:(]

Chris21wen -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 8:30:32 PM)
Would this make a good scenario?

Mike Scholl -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 8:59:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Chris H Would this make a good scenario? Could be if done right. Japan goes to war against the Commonwealth and the Dutch, with all US assets considered neutral and untouchable. Japan may declare war on the US any time after June 1st, 1942 (enough time to complete the conquest of the SRA and start getting the resources back to Japan to replace those used in the initial operations). Allied player has the option of bringing the US in early on a 1/6th chance in January, 2/6ths in February..., up to 5/6ths in May. Meanwhile the Americans can build up their holdings in the Pacific (Probably including inserting "neutrality forces" in Samoa and New Caledonia and that area). Lots of inherent tension in the situation..., but probably difficult to program.

AW1Steve -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 9:00:19 PM)
I'd love to see it. Especially if you built in "triggers" like the USSR involvement does in regular AE or vanilla WITP.

mdiehl -> RE: What if Japan had not attack the US? (2/9/2010 9:58:53 PM)
quote: thought that the 'America First' movement still had great support in the uS in late-41. Not as much as they wanted. By November 1941 US polls were favoring open warfare with Germany if that was what was required to prevent them from invading Britain (which of course, by then, wasn't remotely in the cards), otherwise the All Measures Short of War policy which was viewed with 90% favorability. In the event of war in the Pacific without Japan attacking the US, most likely arrangement would be substantial elements of the Netherlands East Indies transferred to US jurisdiction under a Lend Lease program. At least, that is what the Japanese feared the US would do, and it was one of the many reasons the Fleet Faction gave for initiating the war against the USA. The Japanese Army, of course, really preferred that the US not be brought into the war.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.203125