Japan declares war on germany july 1941

thaddeus

Donor
possibly this could happen if Nazi Germany had backed the Vichy regime over Indochina and revived their cooperation with KMT China, by Sept. 1940, Japan had remained out of the war with GB for a year. (not speculating Vichy France and/or KMT China are joining the Axis, just that the Nazis might see their cooperation as more important)

when/if the Nazis invade East, Japan could make a play to improve relations with the USSR, there would be a Soviet state east of the Urals (likely) even if the USSR were defeated, what would Japan have to lose?
 
Did Japan really want to end the war in China? If they did want it, they wanted to keep their conquests (and maybe add some). So what is the goal of the negotiations and how does that align with what the UK and US want?
Mostly they wanted to get out of a costly war and keep the prior conquest of manchuria
 
When used as an adjective here, it means the scenario is preposterous/unfeasible. "This scenario is alien space bats."
Why. They get out of the China war that was neverending. They get oil from britan. Britan can realocate more resources west. Work out a deal to get access long term to Mideast oil. Germany has no way to strike against them. So no cost to the war except for some reallocated naval units and 2 infantry divisions. In 1920 they were allies with britan. So not long ago. Japans main reason for war was oil. This solve that.

The emperor sides with the army vs the navy.
 
The Japanese leadership believed they were in a position of strength in mid 1941, with the Allies preoccupied in Europe and their colonies vulnerable for the picking in SE Asia. This, coupled with their own racist views against both whites and other Asians, where they held their opponents in low regard, meant they weren't exactly in a compromising mood. They had been bogged down in China for a long time, and after committing atrocities there like the Nanjing Massacre, by this time there was no trust or goodwill to negotiate a peace on any side.

Japan also couldn't offer much to the Allies that they would feel the need to negotiate a settlement just to have them on their side - naval support and aircraft wasn't a deal breaker, especially with the USA producing a lot more.
 
Point 4 is imposble. Japan didnt have access to oil in July 1941 that was the main reason they Attacked on Dec 7.
Point 5 is also nuts as Japan could end the War in China any time ut wanted. it simply needed to leave.
Point 6 also make no sense, how does Japan offer another countries resorses as part of a deal? The Netherlands owned/control the Netherlands territories. Again this was why Japan attacked on Dec 7.
Point 8 is 100% irrelevant if Japan is not at war with the US as the only issue with shipping to the USSR that Japan could “help with” was that Japan was attacking US ships. So simply not going to war/attacking the US solves this point.

And NO Japan DIDNT want out of a costly war and NO Japan didnt want to keep Manchuria.
Not sure you were very clear with what you wrote. Are you trying yo say with point 4 and 6 that Japan gains access to Oil and the Netherlands resorses in return for whatever? Of that they are offering other access to them?
But either way i am not seeng much of anything that Japan is giving up here other then leaving China. And the were 109% absolutly not willing to do this as that was why they got in the problems they did and started WW2 in the Pacific.
If Japan is willing to end the war in China then you have NO Pacific war.

Not trying to be insulting but do you really understand the history involved here?
Who do you think was responsible for starting the Pacific half of WW2?

The military in Japan was out of control and doing almost anything it felt like. Even low kevel officers were doing things way way beyond what they should have. Japan was VERY aggressive at this point and want (more or less) to control/dominate pretty much all of Asia that touched the Pacific. (to over simplify)
Your post and comments look an awful lot like you are pro Japan or at least amongst those that somehow believe that Japan was not the agressor,
 
Its easier in 1940 and easier still with no sino japanese war.

Alexander Clarke has a recent You Tube - Zeros over the Med lecture so this starts at least with his scenario.

The 1940 argument would be something like this. The Fall of France is a strategic earthquake and Japan is faced with what looks like a German Soviet alliance but there is the offer to join an anti Soviet alliance. The Prime Minister at the time is Yonai ( who otl falls in July because the Army want to join the Axis and refuse to appoint an Army Minister). Essentially the reaction of the US to this is the two ocean Navy Act and lend lease. here a separate Japanese reaction is to stand firm with the Auld Alliance and fellow Democracy ( yes Japan is a Democracy or at least much more so that Germany, Italy and the USSR).

Yonai is very close to the Emperor, he is Pro British, Pro American, as Navy Minister was quite clear that the IJN could not win a war against the RN/USN. He has a formidable personality and inspires loyalty. Look him up.

This he says in 1939. So let us suppose that from that point Yonai is working with others to prepare Japan for its place in a world at war - but a far far away war and as a result of this he persuades the persuades the Army that the German Soviet Alliance is a very serious threat and the China war must be closed down or Sinified and forces reallocated to face the communist menace now being navally rearmed by the Nazis and when France falls Yonai steers things away from the Tripartite pact and the Army goes along because the Molotov Ribbentrop pact. There is an effort to close down the China war or turn it into a Chinese civil war. Essentially at this point its a stalemate and while there is a substantial troop commitment needed its a no win no lose proposition and a peace can be had if the KMT can be persuaded that no third party is coming to their rescue.

An alliance or Co Belligerency with Britain gives several advantages. Mostly its a peaceful insertion of Japanese interests into the Southern Resource Area. You get to fight nasty racist Nazi scum, and maybe commies. Maybe you also get an African Empire. You also cut the knees off any US support for Chiang and may help bring him to the negotiating table. The Sino Japanese war is not a Crusade of extermination in and of itself.

At this point East of Suez is an Anglo Japanese lake. The French possessions are in a quandary, pro Vichy aka the legitimate government of France an Anglo Japanese force may install a Free French Governor anyway. Free French this does not happen and France Fights On. For the sake of argument lets say Indo China goes Free French - its way more vulnerable than anywhere else. Madagascar does not and gets invaded by an Anglo Japanese task force.

What you probably have available for deployment a few months hence is a force of 2-3 Kongos, 3-4 Fleet carriers ( because of refits in 1940) the Nagatos and a couple of light carriers. The Nagatos and light Carriers probably do not stray far from Japan. A task force of say one Kongo a pair of Carriers and supporting units to the Med with the Shokakus coming available later on. A temporary task force to seize Madagascar then return to Japan. Maybe a pair of Kongos plus supports to the Atlantic. There is probably a maximum of 10-12 divisions available eventually from Japan, which is the initial invasion force for 1941. But probably only a corps in 1940 to the Middle East. The 10-12 divisions would come because thats an Army Command. And again over time a very significant air component.
 
The Japanese leadership believed they were in a position of strength in mid 1941, with the Allies preoccupied in Europe and their colonies vulnerable for the picking in SE Asia. This, coupled with their own racist views against both whites and other Asians, where they held their opponents in low regard, meant they weren't exactly in a compromising mood. They had been bogged down in China for a long time, and after committing atrocities there like the Nanjing Massacre, by this time there was no trust or goodwill to negotiate a peace on any side.

Japan also couldn't offer much to the Allies that they would feel the need to negotiate a settlement just to have them on their side - naval support and aircraft wasn't a deal breaker, especially with the USA producing a lot more.
The Japanese never believed they could defeat the western allies or USA. They wanted to make it not worth the cost to reconquor those areas back. The key conquest they wanted was the southern oil owned by the Netherlands. However the Philippines stood in the way. This solution gets them the oil.
 
Point 4 is imposble. Japan didnt have access to oil in July 1941 that was the main reason they Attacked on Dec 7.
Point 5 is also nuts as Japan could end the War in China any time ut wanted. it simply needed to leave.
Point 6 also make no sense, how does Japan offer another countries resorses as part of a deal? The Netherlands owned/control the Netherlands territories. Again this was why Japan attacked on Dec 7.
Point 8 is 100% irrelevant if Japan is not at war with the US as the only issue with shipping to the USSR that Japan could “help with” was that Japan was attacking US ships. So simply not going to war/attacking the US solves this point.

And NO Japan DIDNT want out of a costly war and NO Japan didnt want to keep Manchuria.
Not sure you were very clear with what you wrote. Are you trying yo say with point 4 and 6 that Japan gains access to Oil and the Netherlands resorses in return for whatever? Of that they are offering other access to them?
But either way i am not seeng much of anything that Japan is giving up here other then leaving China. And the were 109% absolutly not willing to do this as that was why they got in the problems they did and started WW2 in the Pacific.
If Japan is willing to end the war in China then you have NO Pacific war.

Not trying to be insulting but do you really understand the history involved here?
Who do you think was responsible for starting the Pacific half of WW2?

The military in Japan was out of control and doing almost anything it felt like. Even low kevel officers were doing things way way beyond what they should have. Japan was VERY aggressive at this point and want (more or less) to control/dominate pretty much all of Asia that touched the Pacific. (to over simplify)
Your post and comments look an awful lot like you are pro Japan or at least amongst those that somehow believe that Japan was not the agressor,
Japan absolutely wanted out of the war in China . They were not in ww2 at that time. A supportive war that helps britan in its darkest time was very valuable to them. Planes, escorts, troops. They had recently been allies. Oil from GB middle east. And the Netherlands were under occupation at this time. GB could have forced a oil share etc from an occupied country.
 
Its easier in 1940 and easier still with no sino japanese war.

Alexander Clarke has a recent You Tube - Zeros over the Med lecture so this starts at least with his scenario.

The 1940 argument would be something like this. The Fall of France is a strategic earthquake and Japan is faced with what looks like a German Soviet alliance but there is the offer to join an anti Soviet alliance. The Prime Minister at the time is Yonai ( who otl falls in July because the Army want to join the Axis and refuse to appoint an Army Minister). Essentially the reaction of the US to this is the two ocean Navy Act and lend lease. here a separate Japanese reaction is to stand firm with the Auld Alliance and fellow Democracy ( yes Japan is a Democracy or at least much more so that Germany, Italy and the USSR).

Yonai is very close to the Emperor, he is Pro British, Pro American, as Navy Minister was quite clear that the IJN could not win a war against the RN/USN. He has a formidable personality and inspires loyalty. Look him up.

This he says in 1939. So let us suppose that from that point Yonai is working with others to prepare Japan for its place in a world at war - but a far far away war and as a result of this he persuades the persuades the Army that the German Soviet Alliance is a very serious threat and the China war must be closed down or Sinified and forces reallocated to face the communist menace now being navally rearmed by the Nazis and when France falls Yonai steers things away from the Tripartite pact and the Army goes along because the Molotov Ribbentrop pact. There is an effort to close down the China war or turn it into a Chinese civil war. Essentially at this point its a stalemate and while there is a substantial troop commitment needed its a no win no lose proposition and a peace can be had if the KMT can be persuaded that no third party is coming to their rescue.

An alliance or Co Belligerency with Britain gives several advantages. Mostly its a peaceful insertion of Japanese interests into the Southern Resource Area. You get to fight nasty racist Nazi scum, and maybe commies. Maybe you also get an African Empire. You also cut the knees off any US support for Chiang and may help bring him to the negotiating table. The Sino Japanese war is not a Crusade of extermination in and of itself.

At this point East of Suez is an Anglo Japanese lake. The French possessions are in a quandary, pro Vichy aka the legitimate government of France an Anglo Japanese force may install a Free French Governor anyway. Free French this does not happen and France Fights On. For the sake of argument lets say Indo China goes Free French - its way more vulnerable than anywhere else. Madagascar does not and gets invaded by an Anglo Japanese task force.

What you probably have available for deployment a few months hence is a force of 2-3 Kongos, 3-4 Fleet carriers ( because of refits in 1940) the Nagatos and a couple of light carriers. The Nagatos and light Carriers probably do not stray far from Japan. A task force of say one Kongo a pair of Carriers and supporting units to the Med with the Shokakus coming available later on. A temporary task force to seize Madagascar then return to Japan. Maybe a pair of Kongos plus supports to the Atlantic. There is probably a maximum of 10-12 divisions available eventually from Japan, which is the initial invasion force for 1941. But probably only a corps in 1940 to the Middle East. The 10-12 divisions would come because thats an Army Command. And again over time a very significant air component.
Actually I like that better than mine. But of a similar nature
 
Where in the world do you find ANYTHING that indicates that Japan wanted out of China?????!?!?!??.

NOTHING forced Japan to go to war with China. (Or anyone else for that matter)
NOTHING stopped Japan from just picking up and leaving China any time it felt like it. So if Japan wanted out of China they could just get out of China. Nothing was stopping them other then themselves.
So not only do we have ZERO evidence that Japan wanted out of China we have the simple fact they they stayed in China to disprove the idea that Japan truly wanted out.

Japan was willing to go to war with the US rather then leave China!
And it was not just just the case in 1940-41. They had the 1937 Panay incident that almost started the war with the US 4 year ea

Did Japan want to fight all China … No. they didn’t want to fight GB and the US either. But they were 100% willing to Fight all of China and GB and the US all at the same time just in order to achieve its goals. Which happened to be to control directly a large part of China as well have domination over the rest of China and most of Asia. Obviously they would have been much happier if Japan and GB and the US just gave it to them but to say they didn’t want to go to war because they would rather have been just handed control is disingenuous at best.

Heck Germany didn’t want to go to war with France or GB but they were willing to take the chance because they wanted Poland.
Same is true for Japan. They wanted huge chunks of Asia including Korea, Mongolia and parts of China and there were willing to start wars with evryone to get what they wanted.

Note Japan was not Attacked by Korea, Mongolia, China, The. Netherlands, France , Australia, GB, the Philipeans or the US to name but a few of the MANY countries Japan attacked/invaded in the 20-30 or so year run up to WW2.

Japan leaves China and the US does not force the embargo. No Embargo and no China war and Japan has no oil issue.
Not to be insulting but did you get your history from/in Japan? Because you are sounding very much like the folks that try to push the narrative that Japan was the innocent party and that they didn’t really want to go to war with everyone they just were forced into it. And that is a sadly common belief by many folk’s education in Japan. Where they are shall we say less the freely willing to admit what they did wrong.
 
The other trouble With this concept is that Japan and the US had been at each other’s throats for more than a decade at this point. And if GB forms any sort of aliance with Japan the US is not going to be happy.

In order for the US to not go ballistic over this Japan will have to A) leave China completely. And B) give up all attempts to dominate militarily or economically or politically any and all of Asia.

And even then the US is not going yo be on friendly terms with Japan as it’s actions up to July of 41 have not been aimed at making the US it’s friend. It was July of 41 that the US froze Japans assets. So we are talking the exact same time that relations between the US and Japan go completely off the rails they suddenly suck up to GB.
This is going to sit bad with the US.
By July 41 the US and GB had concluded Destroyers for Bases and the US passed Lend Lease. And was starting its “patrols” in the Atlantic that would result in Oct with the sinking of the USS Reuben James. So the US was already supporting GB.
Now the OP is suggesting that GB side with Japan or at least conclude an agreement that seams to favor Japan. This will upset the US the question is how much?
And if GB has to choose between keeping the US happy vs Japan well GB would have to be suicidally insane to pick Japan. The US was the most powerful economy in the world at the time and could more or less match the industrial capacity of the entire rest of the plant. Only a complete fool would choose to keep Japan happy while upsetting the US.

So the OP is suggesting a change that Not only does Japan not want to do (leave China) but they are suggesting that GB would chose Japan over the US.

Well if we are going down this fantasy ASB POD then I have one of my own.
Germany Seeing the writing on the wall with Japan dies not invade the USSR.
Then when the Japanese do whatever dumb thing they will undoubtedly do that starts a war with the US. Germany and The US team up with to fight Japan and get the USSR to join them.
And the OP has successfully found a way for Germany to win WW2.
And while I know Germany will not resist invading the USSR nor will the USSR join Germany and the US fighting Japan. The reality is this is no more unlikely than the Idea that Japan and GB and the US would do what the OP proposes.
 
This one has been discussed before. here and on other websites. The only way it makes sense & moves from the ASB area if there is a fundamental divergence in Japanese politics years earlier. I see several people here have suggested that as well.

{quote]
Let's say Japan declares war in July 1941. The emperor makes a command.
Offers

1, naval support to protect the Pacific and Indian Ocean

Just denying German raiders and submarines ports for resupply would go far here.


2 infantry and ships to the Mediterranean


Now Im envisioning Japanese soldiers being gunned down by M34 as they rush ashore from Daihatsu landing craft. The Japanese army would find the Germans, or even Italians in a different class than the ill trained, equipped, and led Chinese they were used to. Now I'm recalling some hypothetical war games back in the day, of Japanese vs Germans. the players had to fudge the Japanese tactical ability a lot to compete.


3 zero aircraft to britan and Russia.


4 access to oil

Japan was increasingly dependent on the oil it was getting from the US. Britain and its allies were sucking up every bit BP and Royal Dutch Shell produced. Circa 1940 70% of the worlds oil production was in or controlled by the US, and even a Depression era levels over half that consumed by US industry.


5 help on negotiating an end to the war in China

A long difficult negotiation. The KMT long range plans were: 1. Eject Japan from China. 2. Eject Japan from Manchria/Korea/Formosa. 3. Finish off the Communists. In the short run they might defer #2 if the Japanese help destroy Maos Communist state in the NW. But, in the long run Japans future depends on developing its own empire. The traditional view of the Chinese, and of the KMT government is at odds with that.


6 a long term lease on Netherlands oil

Japan is better off if this is not a sole source contract. Japan had over the long run been playing the global market. If it gets a affordable long term lease on the DEI oilfields, the the Dutch oil company gets screwed over the long run, or else Japan eventually gets stuck with a contract priced to high. US oil companies were ramping up their efficiency and at the leading edge in keeping their costs and customer prices competitive. Japan is better off going for flexibility

7 alliance with britan.

They had one up through the Great War. In various forms it last several decades, ending around 1922. Things were fine as long as Japan remained a client state. But, when it shifted to a expanding Empire model it was at odds with Britain. And most other European nations as well. Britan, France, Russia Italy, Portugal, and the US all had major economic interests in Asia. Any expansion of a Imperial Japan ran headlong into those. Thats why the US and Britain were so interested in ending the Russian Japanese war. Its outcome threatened their plans in Asia.

8 support to Russia in transporting supplies from USA to Russia.

Well, technically 'Russia' still existed, but the government that mattered here is that of the USSR. 1941-1945 Japan cooperated with the Soviet government is the transit of material from the US to the Soviet Maritime provinces and across the Far Eastern and Siberian provinces. Not a lot changes here.


Results would be peace in China. Short term oil from middle east Netherlands oil britan and Russia gain support at a critical time.

The first is important. In the long run there's not much difference in petroleum delivery contracts from the US, the DEI, Iraqi or Persia, or Poland (Yes Poland had a small oil field and industry.). Not really any change in view of supply to the USSR.

Japan could supplement The USSR or Britan with its industrial production. Ammunition, vehicles, & other sundry items to the users specifications would be useful.
 
Just giving up on China won't work and the Emperor was too invested by the Army's propaganda in the China fight because of their slanted briefings to him, yes and somewhat the Navy's also. You would need something to happen way back in 37 or 38 to the IJA to make them want to have peace in China. If the US pushed back more on the Panay incident that makes the Emperor more involved in China and not being briefed on what is actually happening might make some changes. Have some of the Army officers try a Coup of some kind might work if it failed, but it would have to be in 39 or 40 to have any effect on the Army.
What if collaborators in the KMT were a real alternative to both the Great Helmsman and The Generalissimo?
 

Sekhmet_D

Kicked
Now Im envisioning Japanese soldiers being gunned down by M34 as they rush ashore from Daihatsu landing craft. The Japanese army would find the Germans, or even Italians in a different class than the ill trained, equipped, and led Chinese they were used to.
The Japanese would get thoroughly trounced by the Germans, but I'm pretty sure they'll whip the Italians. One interesting thing we'll probably see in an Italo-Japanese conflict is widespread use of chemical and biological warfare.
 
What if collaborators in the KMT were a real alternative to both the Great Helmsman and The Generalissimo?

There were a number or KMT collaborators with the Japanese. I don't have numbers, but the Japanese allowed them to set up a second KMT organization in the Japanese occupied areas. A collaborationist or puppet political party running a puppet government. This dual or clone KMT left many Chinese confused about who was on who's side & made a contribution to weakening KMT support vs the Communit post 1945. Several warlords followed the same path, retaining their local provincial power as Japanese puppets.
 
The Japanese would get thoroughly trounced by the Germans, but I'm pretty sure they'll whip the Italians. One interesting thing we'll probably see in an Italo-Japanese conflict is widespread use of chemical and biological warfare.

Depends I suppose on what the quality of the unit was. A fair number of the German formations of 1944 might fold up under Japanese shock tactics as well. In Tunisia the Allies found some very tough Italian infantry formations.
 
There were a number or KMT collaborators with the Japanese. I don't have numbers, but the Japanese allowed them to set up a second KMT organization in the Japanese occupied areas. A collaborationist or puppet political party running a puppet government. This dual or clone KMT left many Chinese confused about who was on who's side & made a contribution to weakening KMT support vs the Communit post 1945. Several warlords followed the same path, retaining their local provincial power as Japanese puppets.
Real automony would make then more visable
 
Japan bombs Pearl Harbor, Hitler declares war on Japan. Now that is funny.
While unlikely, it's not impossible to have German ships and crews in Pearl Harbour. Japan sinks an interned ship [1] and kills many of its crew. Hitler gets over-excited and declares war in response to their unprovoked aggression. He's from the Never Back Down, Never Apologise school of modern diplomacy and rational government, so refuses to retract the declaration, especially as Japan is at fault, and Japan then declares war to maintain face.

Due to diplomatic oversights, they remain technically at war until 12 years after German reunification, when somebody notices the awkward situation.

[1] are there other ways to legitimately have a German flagged ship in Pearl Harbour in late 1941?
 
Where in the world do you find ANYTHING that indicates that Japan wanted out of China

When they form the Wang Jiang Wei government. Though note he is attempting to get a treaty with Japan far earlier than they with him.

After all the Japanese position is the 21 demands the only ones that are not accepted by the Chinese anyway ( under protest) are those that would reduce China to the position of the Philippines or Hawaii. What the Japanese want per their demands is control of major economic assets ( like United Fruit have) recognition of their position in Manchuoko and total control of Foreign policy. What they don't want in China, but do in Korea and probably Manchuoko is to create a settler or totally japanified culture. And they are willing to do this by a war of aggression.

The US demands on Japan BTW were to withdraw from China and Indo China. China OFC includes Manchuria according to everyone and according to the Chinese Formosa and the Pescadores which is agreed by the wartime Allies in 1943, as is the freedom of the enslaved Koreans. From the Japanese perspective the US position is dismember the Empire and agree to our ( US) economic dominance and control of your Foreign policy through imposing treaties in you or we will strangle your economy immobilise our Navy and then sail into Tokyo Bay and open fire like Perry did.

The KMT position, well its not, Its Chiang's faction of the KMT, Wang's is to accept the existence of a Chinese government within the Japanese sphere but it all happens much too late in 43. He is proposing this in 38-41 and on the back of the Rape of Nanking and Panay incident producing several scathing articles in the American Press and a strongly worded note. The other Diplomatic responses are in response to Japanese occupation of French Indo China. So basically US to China, you are on your own mate.

The supposition which is not at all ASB is this happens earlier - basically in response to Wang's break with Chiang in 38.

Now in 41 this is not at all likely in 40 plausible - at least for AH purposes with no Sino Japanese war i.e. the whole thing is around the occupation of Manchuria clearly plausible in 1940 which would be Wang breaking over Chiang's insistence on wars to reconquer Manchuria.
Now Im envisioning Japanese soldiers being gunned down by M34 as they rush ashore from Daihatsu landing craft. The Japanese army would find the Germans, or even Italians in a different class than the ill trained, equipped, and led Chinese they were used to. Now I'm recalling some hypothetical war games back in the day, of Japanese vs Germans. the players had to fudge the Japanese tactical ability a lot to compete.
Now imagine Japanese infiltrating in Ethiopia and around Monte Cassino at night. Yes it will require a different Japanese army eventually but they are not mindless idiots and fully aware of their limitations in a mechanized/artillery war. But not building Yamato's sundry carriers and masses of merchant shipping and having access to British and possibly American resources does change that.

The Japanese equipment levels and technology are broadly comparable to Italian and in many ways German. in 1940. But with better armour plate technology. And clearly superior to indigenous US technology except for aircraft engines. In 1940. They are not going to turn themselves into the Arsenal of Democracy nor are they backwards orientals.

are there other ways to legitimately have a German flagged ship in Pearl Harbour in late 1941?
No. Not with a crew anyway. If its a warship its interned and disarmed as a belligerent or kicked out if a merchie, not of any particular use, except for spying on the USN. And quite possibly impounded for not paying harbour fees.

The supposition which is not at all ASB is this happens earlier - basically in response to Wang's break with Chiang in 38.

Now in 41 this is not at all likely in 40 plausible - at least for AH purposes. With no Sino Japanese war i.e. the whole sino japanese dispute is around the occupation of Manchuria, clearly plausible. The 1940 model would be Wang breaking over Chiang's insistence on continuing to fight an unwinnable war. Japan accepting that on the basis that they too have an unwinnable war but have actually all the aims they started with achieved. The Kwantung army being humbled by the Higher Command having left them out to dry at Nomohan and Tojo executing people.
 
Top