hipper
Banned
Originally Posted by Emperor Palpatine
Within the realms of plausibility of course.
PLAUSIBILITY being the keyword.
Plausibility is indeed important what are the bounds of plausibility.. interesting question I like to define plausibility as decisions which could have been made by people who had the power to carry them out. The consequences may be interesting Ill try and explore some of the consiquences are interesting of the decisions I suggested.
Originally Posted by hipper
Oppose Germany's reoccupation of the Rhineland with force. Hitler falls Germany is Governed by a succession of weak democratic Governments. Form an Anti communist coalition in Europe with distant support for Japan.
Too much political dissension and too little anti-communism at a time when European economies are in the dumpster.
well there would be considerable political dissention about a re occupation of the Rhineland by France and The United Kingdom - consequence possible defeat of the Government in an 1939/40 election. Of course the occurrence of that election would be one possible butterfly of the decision to oppose the rise of german militarism.
Quote:
America declares war on Japan after Japanese Provocation in China in late 1941.
The Rape of Nanking wasn't enough? Must be SOME provocation. The Japanese Army turns cannibal? Besides, Isolationism plus FDR's determination that Japan strikes first means FDR can't get a DoW against Japan without a direct attack on the USA.
Well both sides were spoiling for a fight, and since the Japanese militarists did not get one when they staged the Panay incident they would have to step things up a notch, assume they support a independence movement on a Philippine island then recognise it when it ousts the local military. sounds like a prime candidate for some sort of Incident leading to sunken ships and full scale war...what is requied for the purposes of this scenario is to get America involved in a war which does not have huge popular support.
Quote:
America loses Philippines, as the Japanese attempt to shut America out of the Pacific for good.
While the Japanese ignore all the Imperial colonies of Europe sitting astride their LOCs to the Philippines, and with no oil to wage this war? The Dutch, France, the Netherlands, and ESP. the British aren't selling their raw materials to the Japanese while they are at war with the USA.
well this is the first point about alternate history The Japanese did not declare war against the world in 1905 so lets assume in a world without an active war in Europe the decide to take out most interfering foreign power.
During an American Japanese war the UK could legitimately form a position of strict neutrality much the same as America did in 1914-1917 and 1939-1940. The difference is that assuming a swift Japanese conquest of the Philippines the US cannot block Japanese routes to Sumatran or Iranian Oil.
Quote:
America loses Hawaii, as the Japanese attempt to shut America out of the Pacific for good. America is defeated in attempt to retake Hawai in 1943. Britain hosts peace conference in which America regains Hawaii and the Philippines become independent. America relapses into Isolationism.
This scenario runs the gamut from Unspeakable Seamammal to full blown ASB. Google "Two Ocean Navy" & "Oahu Defenses 1941-42" & "Pearl Harbor Raid Fuel Limitations". Gingrich & Forstchen's books about the Japanese conquering Hawaii were for entertainment (Alternative history), not serious studies. That's why they totally ignored the whole of WWII outside of the islands, as if the rest of the world didn't even exist.
well without a european war the Two ocean navy act may not get through Congress in July 1940 this could delay the build up of the US navy into late 1944 and 1945.
Invading pearl harbour is indeed hard but not Impossible. It requires some small advances in the application of Naval power that did not historically happen until 1944 but there is no breakthrough in terms of new equipment required.
and to answer the question about invasion you seize some of the the outlying islands with fast transports (converted destroyers) while bombing Oahu flat with the KB The Japanese accept the risk of the KB refuelling at sea in the Hawaii region. New aircraft and pilots are supplied by using smaller carriers ferrying in planes from the marshal islands.
once you have captured bases in Hawaii then lay siege to Pearl harbour until an attempt is made to resupply it is made and have your decisive battle at sea off Hawaii. assuming you win occupy a starving island taking whatever casualties you care to - land on the less defended sides of the island and engage the garrison in a long wearing series of battles. as long as you can resupply and your opponent cannot its a winning strategy.
without armed conflict between the european forces and the Japanese then there is no lack of Japanese land forces to accomplish all of the tasks .
And BTW, after the termination of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance in 1922, no way do the Japanese trust the British of all people to conduct peace negotiations. -
only the UK had the stature to act as a broker between the two nations. especially in this scenario.
Quote:
In Europe an anti communist cold war continues until 1989 with Britain the leader of the Entente.
Easy
You actually believe that a Europe that embrace a social democratic cradle-to-grave safety net for its population can ALSO pay the costs for the Cold War on its own? OTL does not offer encouragement.
well without a world war and with an agressive Communist USSR making threatening moves in the early 40s some kind of alliance structure seems in order.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Palpatine View Post
No offence but I can't see America losing to Japan in a war.
There are some pretty silly TLs around here of America being repeated beaten again and again and again in exactly the kind of war it COULD fight.
America would win this war if it dragged on to 1944 or 1945 but the scenario I'm offering is that in the face of repeated defeats the America decides to settle without fighting to ultimate victory, return of the Hawaii islands and some form of face saving deal of an Independent Philippines might seem preferable to a land war in Asia.
The scenario asked for the maximum British outcome in WW2. In my opinion the "best" i.e. in terms of British Power outcome is no war with Germany, and a cold war with the soviet union with minor flashpoint to keep the rest of Europe grateful to have a superpower protector.
align that with some defeat for American Prestige so the Sterling area remains the words main trading block and you have the "Best outcome"
no Alien space bats required.
Within the realms of plausibility of course.
PLAUSIBILITY being the keyword.
Plausibility is indeed important what are the bounds of plausibility.. interesting question I like to define plausibility as decisions which could have been made by people who had the power to carry them out. The consequences may be interesting Ill try and explore some of the consiquences are interesting of the decisions I suggested.
Originally Posted by hipper
Oppose Germany's reoccupation of the Rhineland with force. Hitler falls Germany is Governed by a succession of weak democratic Governments. Form an Anti communist coalition in Europe with distant support for Japan.
Too much political dissension and too little anti-communism at a time when European economies are in the dumpster.
well there would be considerable political dissention about a re occupation of the Rhineland by France and The United Kingdom - consequence possible defeat of the Government in an 1939/40 election. Of course the occurrence of that election would be one possible butterfly of the decision to oppose the rise of german militarism.
Quote:
America declares war on Japan after Japanese Provocation in China in late 1941.
The Rape of Nanking wasn't enough? Must be SOME provocation. The Japanese Army turns cannibal? Besides, Isolationism plus FDR's determination that Japan strikes first means FDR can't get a DoW against Japan without a direct attack on the USA.
Well both sides were spoiling for a fight, and since the Japanese militarists did not get one when they staged the Panay incident they would have to step things up a notch, assume they support a independence movement on a Philippine island then recognise it when it ousts the local military. sounds like a prime candidate for some sort of Incident leading to sunken ships and full scale war...what is requied for the purposes of this scenario is to get America involved in a war which does not have huge popular support.
Quote:
America loses Philippines, as the Japanese attempt to shut America out of the Pacific for good.
While the Japanese ignore all the Imperial colonies of Europe sitting astride their LOCs to the Philippines, and with no oil to wage this war? The Dutch, France, the Netherlands, and ESP. the British aren't selling their raw materials to the Japanese while they are at war with the USA.
well this is the first point about alternate history The Japanese did not declare war against the world in 1905 so lets assume in a world without an active war in Europe the decide to take out most interfering foreign power.
During an American Japanese war the UK could legitimately form a position of strict neutrality much the same as America did in 1914-1917 and 1939-1940. The difference is that assuming a swift Japanese conquest of the Philippines the US cannot block Japanese routes to Sumatran or Iranian Oil.
Quote:
America loses Hawaii, as the Japanese attempt to shut America out of the Pacific for good. America is defeated in attempt to retake Hawai in 1943. Britain hosts peace conference in which America regains Hawaii and the Philippines become independent. America relapses into Isolationism.
This scenario runs the gamut from Unspeakable Seamammal to full blown ASB. Google "Two Ocean Navy" & "Oahu Defenses 1941-42" & "Pearl Harbor Raid Fuel Limitations". Gingrich & Forstchen's books about the Japanese conquering Hawaii were for entertainment (Alternative history), not serious studies. That's why they totally ignored the whole of WWII outside of the islands, as if the rest of the world didn't even exist.
well without a european war the Two ocean navy act may not get through Congress in July 1940 this could delay the build up of the US navy into late 1944 and 1945.
Invading pearl harbour is indeed hard but not Impossible. It requires some small advances in the application of Naval power that did not historically happen until 1944 but there is no breakthrough in terms of new equipment required.
and to answer the question about invasion you seize some of the the outlying islands with fast transports (converted destroyers) while bombing Oahu flat with the KB The Japanese accept the risk of the KB refuelling at sea in the Hawaii region. New aircraft and pilots are supplied by using smaller carriers ferrying in planes from the marshal islands.
once you have captured bases in Hawaii then lay siege to Pearl harbour until an attempt is made to resupply it is made and have your decisive battle at sea off Hawaii. assuming you win occupy a starving island taking whatever casualties you care to - land on the less defended sides of the island and engage the garrison in a long wearing series of battles. as long as you can resupply and your opponent cannot its a winning strategy.
without armed conflict between the european forces and the Japanese then there is no lack of Japanese land forces to accomplish all of the tasks .
And BTW, after the termination of the Anglo-Japanese Alliance in 1922, no way do the Japanese trust the British of all people to conduct peace negotiations. -
only the UK had the stature to act as a broker between the two nations. especially in this scenario.
Quote:
In Europe an anti communist cold war continues until 1989 with Britain the leader of the Entente.
Easy
You actually believe that a Europe that embrace a social democratic cradle-to-grave safety net for its population can ALSO pay the costs for the Cold War on its own? OTL does not offer encouragement.
well without a world war and with an agressive Communist USSR making threatening moves in the early 40s some kind of alliance structure seems in order.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Emperor Palpatine View Post
No offence but I can't see America losing to Japan in a war.
There are some pretty silly TLs around here of America being repeated beaten again and again and again in exactly the kind of war it COULD fight.
America would win this war if it dragged on to 1944 or 1945 but the scenario I'm offering is that in the face of repeated defeats the America decides to settle without fighting to ultimate victory, return of the Hawaii islands and some form of face saving deal of an Independent Philippines might seem preferable to a land war in Asia.
The scenario asked for the maximum British outcome in WW2. In my opinion the "best" i.e. in terms of British Power outcome is no war with Germany, and a cold war with the soviet union with minor flashpoint to keep the rest of Europe grateful to have a superpower protector.
align that with some defeat for American Prestige so the Sterling area remains the words main trading block and you have the "Best outcome"
no Alien space bats required.
Last edited: