Pacific war What-ifs

[joegrundman]

So there is RR's interesting thread about the U-boat war and the what-if story. The fact that what-ifs abound in the european war highlights the fact that it was a close-run thing and that other scenario endings were possible.

But for the Pacific war, Japan's GDP was 1/6th that of the US. So they attack in some Satsuma rebellion style apocalyptic do-or-die spasm of violence.

I cannot think, for the life of me, of any what-ifs that may not have ended in total Japanese defeat. But then I know little about that war.

So here's my question:

What, apart from backing down from Manchuria after the oil embargo was in force, could Japan have done that may have yielded a different outcome from the one that did actually develop?

[Ducimus]

Adopt a different strategic doctrine with the IJN.

[AVGWarhawk]

Simply have resources to conduct a war. The Japanese knew that resources would be their undoing. They knew oil would not last but a few years to fuel the war machines. Perhaps a stock pile of resources before you conduct war. Most people do not go on a 400 mile trip with a 1/4 tank of gas and expect to get their.

One other thing, a second wave at Pearl Harbor should have happened.

[The Fishlord]

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Adopt a different strategic doctrine with the IJN.

Yep. Japanese subs were the largest and some of the most sophisticated of the war, but they used them to scout and sink warships, instead of trying to strangle the USA's merchants.

They were fast, had radar later in the war, and had Kaitens (like a Cutie, except with longer range, higher speed and a human pilot). If they had really focused on slaughtering US merchants they could have at least slowed down the island-hopping compaign.

[Torplexed]

One thing Japan could have done to change the equation a bit was to dispense with the initial Pearl Harbor attack. The surprise attack on the Pacific Fleet goaded and united Americans as never before. If Japan had declined to declare war on the US in December 1941 and had instead bypassed the Phillipines and other US possessions to attack the resource-rich British and Dutch colonies in the Far East that they desired, they probably would have still found themselves at war with the US as we were bound to come to Britain's aid. But without the surprise attack element it would have taken out a lot of the sting the American public felt on December 7th, 1941. We would have found ourselves going to war not to avenge Pearl Harbor or Bataan or Wake Island but to protect British and Dutch colonial interests in Asia. Not as much of a rallying point for a staunchily isolationist nation. America was fairly oil independent at the time so Japan taking oil-rich Sumatra and Borneo wouldn't have been a matter of life and death. Of course without the surprise attack on the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor the US would have gone ahead with Plan Orange. Sending a vast fleet of battleships and carrier across the Pacific to protect or relieve the Phillipines. Well...that was the battle the IJN had been preparing for for many years. They had more carriers at that point and excellent pilots. Not to mention a lot of land based air enroute. Battleships sunk in the mid-Pacific couldn't be raised from the bottom like the ones on Battleship Row.

Japan probably still would have lost. But it might have been a longer contest. Certainly a what if scenario. :hmm:

[Takao]

There really is not a what if where Japan, alone, wins the war. The Japanese policy of rearmament during the 1930's was bankrupting the nation. They had to import almost everything and their exports hardly covered this cost. So, if they did not go to war in 1941, the Japanese nation would have been bankrupt shortly there after.

A different strategic policy for the IJN is a non-starter. The USA is, for the most part, self-sufficient. A commerce raiding & I-Boat strategy would hinder the American war effort, but would not cripple or halt it. At most, the IJN can only delay the inevitable rise in American war production and the USN's march across the Pacific. The same for any strategic air campaign, the USA is to far away. Even if the Japanese had taken Hawaii, the Islands are to far from the West Coast to be of any good here. Not to mention, putting undue strain on the Japanese logistics to keep the islands supplied. Nor, can Japan hope of damaging any industries located on the East Coast.

A Japanese "victory" during World War II would rely heavily on Germany. Here, events would proceed normally through the fall of France. Here would be the deviation. Germany shifts its economy to "war production". The U-Boat campaign I'd keep, it holds the British Isles in check. Then, there is no Battle of Britain, that was a useless waste of German planes, pilots, and time. Instead, Germany moves to secure the Med and the Mid-East. Once this is done, both Germany and Japan move against Russia. The increased German war production and the addition of Japanese forces moving into Siberia will, hopefully, cause the downfall of Russia. With Russia out of the way. Germany is free to move against the British Isles and Japan can move into against India and the British territories in the Pacific. Even still, you would have to include what the USA would be doing during this time. If the combined efforts of Germany and Japan take out Russia by the end of 1941. The Japan, well the Axis, have a good chance of winning World War II.

Notice, I don't mention a Pearl Harbor. There is no way, I would attack it. Let the USA come to me to do battle. Nothing infuriated the Americans more than that attack. No Pearl Harbor, and much of the willingness of the American public to go to and then sustain a prolonged war is gone. If Germany and Japan could quickly dispose of Britain, than any overt action by the USA is unlikely. Germany gets Europe and Africa, Japan has Asia and the Pacific(out to but excluding Midway), and the United States has the Americas. What a different World that would be.

Not really a Japanese What-If, but an Axis one.

[FAdmiral]

Pure & Simple !! EXPANSION FEVER Without any loss to speak of, the
Japanese just kept going instead of grabbing what they needed and go into
a defense mode. Someone should have given them the book "Rise & Fall of the
Roman Empire"


JIM

[Torplexed]

Assuming a declared war on America but given hindsight I'd change a lot of things in the prewar production cycle if I were the Emperor. (Not that it'd make much of a difference) Cancel the Yamato BBs for starters. For roughly the same tonnage 3 Unryu class carriers could be built per Yamato.

Put more emphasis on pilot training and rotating veteran pilots home to train rookies. Japan had an insane policy of keeping veteran pilots at the front until they were dead or wounded. And they didn't train enough of them. The carrier pilots who fought in the Marianas battle in 1944 were almost all green. By Leyte Gulf they were switching to kamikazes.

Change ASW doctrine radically. Beg, borrow and steal any radar and sonar technology you can from allies and enemies alike. Beat and whip it into the destroyer and escort captains heads that defending merchant ship from subs is their most honorable profession. Cancel wasteful and counter-productive projects like the midget subs and the massive I-400 class in favor of building escorts. Frankly I'd cancel all Japanese sub production except for the advanced ST types. The RO-class in particular was virtually useless.

Scrap all the pre-war battleships for their steel with exception of the Kongo class. The old and slow Nagato, Ise and Fuso classes contributed very little to the war effort. Build even more escorts with the steel. Use the guns for coastal defence.

Well...there's a million things Japan could have done ahead of time. But assuming war with America they probably would have only delayed defeat given the disparity between the two opponents. Here's a link to a page on combined fleet site that compares Japan and the USA economically. Quite an eye-popper considering the historical decisions made.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm

[LobsterBoy]

It's a great paradox.

Japan went to war with China to create a resource base so they would be able to conduct a war against a major power (US). In so doing, their actions created the resource shortfall they were trying to avoid (US embargo). The solution, of course, is to go to war and end up in the situation they were trying to avoid in the first place.

Sometimes cooler heads have to prevail.

I don't think there is any way that Japan defeats the USA in the 1940's. They could have done things to make the war last longer, but the balance of force ALWAYS favors the US in the end.

[TheSatyr]

One major "what if?" is,what if Japan had started it's chemical warfare and long range bomber (That could reach San Francisco) program a few years earlier? The Japanese were actually in the process of constructing the bombers and developing the chemical bombs needed when the war ended.(Having already done CW tests in China).

I wonder what the affect of a chemical weapon attack on US soil would have had on the average American?

[joegrundman]

There's been some interesting responses, but generally back up my main feeling that Japan had no chance. I can't quite understand why they went for it anyway.

As for that last point. Unless they could proceed to hit every single US city, and the US did not have a counter or equivalent retaliation to it, i think it would have just have made Americans more angry and less inclined towards the stunning magnaminity the US did in fact show upon victory.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by TheSatyr

I wonder what the affect of a chemical weapon attack on US soil would have had on the average American?

I shudder to think. One thing is certain. Any guilt the average American might feel about the twin A-bomb attacks or the firebombing of Japanese cities probably would have been expunged.

[Torplexed]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

There's been some interesting responses, but generally back up my main feeling that Japan had no chance. I can't quite understand why they went for it anyway.

They went for because they had a recent history of being giant killers. They defeated Imperial China in the 1890s. They humbled Russia in 1905. They overran German Asian and Pacific possessions in World War One. They were gobbling up China again in the 1930s. The first six months of the Pacific War only bolstered their belief in their martial superiority. A lot of men in the Imperial Navy knew better. They had seen the outside world. But the Imperial Army drove policy.

At Pearl Harbor:
No midget subs. Placing at least 4 big subs near the harbor approach. Launching the third wave and risk the losses.

At Midway:
No clump of carriers! Building a northern and a southern carrier group. Stuff the diversion for the Aleuthans and use the ships for Midway.
After Coral Sea they should've had at least a hint that their codesystem was broken.

[PepsiCan]

Originally Posted by joegrundman

There's been some interesting responses, but generally back up my main feeling that Japan had no chance. I can't quite understand why they went for it anyway.

As for that last point. Unless they could proceed to hit every single US city, and the US did not have a counter or equivalent retaliation to it, i think it would have just have made Americans more angry and less inclined towards the stunning magnaminity the US did in fact show upon victory.

Japan went for it because of one simple reason: the leadership didn't want to relinquish power. Just like with Germany, the policies of the government were bankrupting the nation. That would have resulted in a destabilised political ituation where the leadership would have to give up power and where the military would have to accept cutbacks. In a non-democratic society, nations then try and find a scape goat. Plenty of examples are available: the Argentinian junta went to war over the Falklands and Robert Mugabe is blaming white farmers.

And the US would have been able to beat both Germany and Japan regardless of what scenario you think of. US production capacity and population were so large that the outcome was always certain. It was just the time it would take that was in question.