Days of Infamy: Invasion, Occupation, and Liberation of Hawaii (1941-1943)

The puppet king did get his air force: half a dozen decrepit Ki-43 Oscars. (End of the Beginning, pp. 169-70) His problem was finding pilots small enough to fit in the cockpit. They were probably still in Japan, learning how to fly, when the islands were liberated by U.S. forces. They were likely given a choice: Fly for Japan or else...

On p. 289, the briefing officer (probably the Squadron's Air Intelligence Officer) for Crosetti's squadron (likely VF-17) mentions "Our assets on Oahu". Want to bet that those were either Marine Raiders or even OSS teams sent in by submarine? No actual guerilla warfare, mind, but they were sent in to observe and report.

EDIT: the B-17s that were at Hickam or the flight of 12 that came in during the attack were in all likelihood wrecked. Either by Japanese action or destroyed to prevent capture.

Ki-43 Oscars huh? Figures they'd be army aircraft. Even if it was only six planes, that still counts in my book as an air force. Or at least in this case an air wing. That's kinda funny that the main problem is just finding pilots small enough to fit in the planes. Not even finding trainers or anything, just finding tiny Hawaiians.

Yeah definitely likely those bombers were scrapped or destroyed during the fighting for Oahu.

I'd bet those "assets" would be OSS agents inserted via submarine. If they're just there to report and observe, you likely wouldn't need marine raiders to do a job like that.
 

Deleted member 2186

I am wonder, going by the Wiki article from the book series and the books themselves i have, there is not much mention what happens outside Hawaii what we do know is:

- The projected invasion of Port Moresby succeeded, so New Guinea was entirely under Japanese control from mid-1942 onward, thus we can expect more Japanese air raids on Australia then OTL.

- The Battle of Stalingrad took place and was a Soviet victory,

- There is no landings in French North Africa. Instead, the US shipped a massive army around Africa, possibly larger than the British and Commonwealth forces present for the historical Battle of El Alamein.

- The implication is that the Allies would not prevail in Europe, with no Sicilian or Italian campaign in 1943, and no D-Day landings in 1944.
 
I am wonder, going by the Wiki article from the book series and the books themselves i have, there is not much mention what happens outside Hawaii what we do know is:

- The projected invasion of Port Moresby succeeded, so New Guinea was entirely under Japanese control from mid-1942 onward, thus we can expect more Japanese air raids on Australia then OTL.

- The Battle of Stalingrad took place and was a Soviet victory,

- There is no landings in French North Africa. Instead, the US shipped a massive army around Africa, possibly larger than the British and Commonwealth forces present for the historical Battle of El Alamein.

- The implication is that the Allies would not prevail in Europe, with no Sicilian or Italian campaign in 1943, and no D-Day landings in 1944.

Its a tightly focused series of books. The main attraction, of course, is the invasion of Hawaii after a Pearl Harbor attack and the consequences that result from it. If anything the war is extended by a year or so, with the US fighting a longer war in the Pacific and in Europe. That, or certain battles play out differently, such as the Second Battle of El Alamein, with US troops taking part in the action there due to a loss of ships in the Pacific, with ships from the Atlantic being diverted there as a result.
 

Deleted member 2186

Its a tightly focused series of books. The main attraction, of course, is the invasion of Hawaii after a Pearl Harbor attack and the consequences that result from it. If anything the war is extended by a year or so, with the US fighting a longer war in the Pacific and in Europe. That, or certain battles play out differently, such as the Second Battle of El Alamein, with US troops taking part in the action there due to a loss of ships in the Pacific, with ships from the Atlantic being diverted there as a result.
Do we know the Germany first policy is still going on, even after the Japanese took Hawaii in 1941.
 
Do we know the Germany first policy is still going on, even after the Japanese took Hawaii in 1941.

@Matt Wiser would know more.

Based on the fact that the US organized a rather large fleet for the first attempt to take Hawaii back, allocating ships from the Atlantic so that more could be used in the Pacific, the "Germany First" plan was likely... compromised? Hard to say. The British would still heavily push the US into a Germany First Strategy, but with the Japanese taking actual US territory, defeating a US carrier fleet, and sending air strike over San Francisco, small at it was, there is substantial reason for the US not to go along that plan. Likely, the issue of allocating resources properly to strike at either Japan or Germany would be hotly debated, especially if the British were not willing to go along with a cross channel invasion sooner, which the US pushed for.
 

Deleted member 2186

@Matt Wiser would know more.

Based on the fact that the US organized a rather large fleet for the first attempt to take Hawaii back, allocating ships from the Atlantic so that more could be used in the Pacific, the "Germany First" plan was likely... compromised? Hard to say. The British would still heavily push the US into a Germany First Strategy, but with the Japanese taking actual US territory, defeating a US carrier fleet, and sending air strike over San Francisco, small at it was, there is substantial reason for the US not to go along that plan. Likely, the issue of allocating resources properly to strike at either Japan or Germany would be hotly debated, especially if the British were not willing to go along with a cross channel invasion sooner, which the US pushed for.
So if the war last until late 1945, witch seems likely as Germany might not need to shift focus on a Italian Front and maybe no French Front we might end up with a sunshine over Berlin as was first planned by the Americans.
 
So if the war last until late 1945, witch seems likely as Germany might not need to shift focus on a Italian Front and maybe no French Front we might end up with a sunshine over Berlin as was first planned by the Americans.

Mrmm. Yes, the war would likely be extended, either until late 1945 or early 1946 or perhaps beyond. However, the critical point in these first days after the invasion of Hawaii would likely be the US and British discussing a grand strategy for who to go after first. Advocates for a "Japan First" Strategy would come off as more sensible this time around, meaning the debate would be more hotly contested, with the British of course advocating for a "Germany First" strategy.

In March 1941 there was already an agreement between the Americans and British for a "Germany First" strategy before the US entered the war (surprisingly enough), but in the days after Pearl Harbor Churchill would meet with FDR for the Arcadia Conference to discuss the strategy again, to ensure the US had no second thoughts on changing the strategy.

A likely butterfly effect in this timeline though would be that the US would have doubts about a "Germany First" strategy, resulting in longer discussion and debate.

Its really hard to say. The British would probably get their way to some degree in this timeline since they still got US support in North Africa. This implies that FDR was still interested in keeping US troops committed to a fight with the Germans would likely still agree to the British strategy of peripheral campaigns despite his generals wanting a more direct attack through a cross channel invasion.

D-Day and the Italian Campaign would still happen in my opinion though. They would likely happen at different dates and involve different forces perhaps and pressure from the Russians to open up a second front anywhere in Europe to take the pressure off them would still be high.
 
I’m inclined to think that the war in Europe proceeds about as IOTL. The forces needed for each campaign are just too dissimilar. The number of ships available to move troops is going to be fixed, and there’s a point of diminishing returns past which adding more troops is counterproductive. As an example, what good would the 101st or 82nd Divisions be in the Hawaii campaign? What good would the 8th Air Force be in a campaign that requires throwing bombers away?

No, I expect the forces deployed to Europe IOTL to still go there. Might be some morale issues among Californian recruits sent to Italy or England while San Francisco is getting bombed, but...tough.

The inability of the US to do much in the Pacific until 1943 might, however, lead to a greater focus on Burma and China—to set up B-29 fleets in the latter and maybe fight the IJA directly.
 
I’m inclined to think that the war in Europe proceeds about as IOTL. The forces needed for each campaign are just too dissimilar. The number of ships available to move troops is going to be fixed, and there’s a point of diminishing returns past which adding more troops is counterproductive. As an example, what good would the 101st or 82nd Divisions be in the Hawaii campaign? What good would the 8th Air Force be in a campaign that requires throwing bombers away?

No, I expect the forces deployed to Europe IOTL to still go there. Might be some morale issues among Californian recruits sent to Italy or England while San Francisco is getting bombed, but...tough.

The inability of the US to do much in the Pacific until 1943 might, however, lead to a greater focus on Burma and China—to set up B-29 fleets in the latter and maybe fight the IJA directly.

It is very likely the case. US troops might've been in the Battle of El Alamein and ships might have been diverted from the Atlantic to the Pacific to make up loses, but besides those changes I'm still inclined to believe the war in Europe is going to turn out the same --- Germany loses, Allies win, Italy still falls from invasion, and D-Day still happens. There would however be some very tense bickering between the British and the Americans over grand strategy I feel especially after Pearl Harbor in this timeline. Its going to naval war primarily in the Pacific of course and a land war in Europe. Still resources and materials are still being built up. Changes will happen but events as we know it will still occur the same way.

If we're talking about details like where certain divisions end up because of the alternate timeline --- yeah some changes will occur, but they'd probably just be the same. The Big Red One might cut its teeth in the Battle of El Alamein, but they're still were they're supposed to be - fighting in North Africa. The 82nd Airborne might take a different objective or a different bridge in Sicily, but they're still deployed to Sicily. Perhaps the 8th Air Forces bombs targets at night instead of the day, but they're still bombing Germany and still deployed to Europe. I don't know, these are just examples. I'm just saying that they're still going be there, still doing they're supposed to be doing.

Side-note though --- American paratroopers were deployed to the Pacific, just not the 82nd or the 101st. Anyway, not important.
 
The European war probably went similar to OTL-the amphibious ships that OTL were in TORCH went to the Pacific instead. The U.S. could do either Hawaii or TORCH, and FDR went with Hawaii. Once Hawaii's liberated, the campaigns in the Med and Europe probably went as per OTL.
 
The European war probably went similar to OTL-the amphibious ships that OTL were in TORCH went to the Pacific instead. The U.S. could do either Hawaii or TORCH, and FDR went with Hawaii. Once Hawaii's liberated, the campaigns in the Med and Europe probably went as per OTL.

Right, because he can't have both. Its either or. And so the troops bound for North Africa would be shipped to Egypt to be disembarked in a harbor rather than storming a beach in Algeria.
 
And in the second book they where destroyed by American aircraft who could easy spot them due them being yellow painted and not camouflage by the Japanese.

Haven't gotten that far yet in the books. The Americans actually destroyed bulldozers too? I mean it makes sense, but damn lol
 
Top