No Pearl Harbour raid. Victory for Japan?

[David T]

What do you all think?

I think the notion that if the Japanese "only" attack the Philippines and not Pearl Harbor, the US is going to agree to a compromise peace with them in 1942 is nonsense. The Philippines were scheduled for independence, yes, but they were still US territory, plenty of Americans would still be killed in any attack on them, and the resentment of the "treacherous Japs" for launching a surprise attack on US territory while negotiations were still going on would still be there. It would be politically suicidal for the administration to agree to a compromise peace in 1942.

There is a big difference between "hatred of the Japanese wouldn't be quite as intense as in OTL" and "within months the US could say 'let bygones be bygones' and agree to a compromise peace.'"

 

[RMcD94]

Read the Roosevelt Letter. What is the subject of the letter? French Indochina. What did Roosevelt write in the letter? In plain English... translated with the diplo-bullshippery stripped away.

By December 1941 the war was already happening, Roosevelt knew this, Hull knew this. The whole reason Roosevelt chose not to embargo oil was because to do so would force Japan to declare war.

A letter in Dec 1941 that was written as a direct result of the embargo is not evidence that the embargo was meaningless. If you want to start arguing that the USA completely misunderstood Japan and had done so for years, that Roosevelt, Hull were all wrong about how provocative an oil embargo would be you'll need more evidence than meaningless posturing made after everyone already knew war was coming.

Even if it's true, so what, after the oil embargo in the five month period between it and war oil no longer mattered? If the USA had cancelled the embargo and opened up oil back to Japan you think they'd have gone to war? Maybe that's the scenario you're trying to argue but if so it's not really related at all to the OP.

Also just because Roosevelt was posturing that he would declare war does not mean that he could, again I would recommend you read the orders in the period, the USA was willing to sail ships into the Japanese fleet and just wait to be shot at. They at least believed that an attack against them would be the only way to (definitely) secure a war.

Yes. That is the premise I wanted to explore in this thread. Could it have saved Japan from defeat? Probably not. But it is an interesting idea.

Well I'm trying my hardest to talk about this and suggest how to make it work or ways to improve it but I'm afraid you've riled a nest of unimaginative determinists.

 

[RMcD94]

I think the notion that if the Japanese "only" attack the Philippines and not Pearl Harbor, the US is going to agree to a compromise peace with them in 1942 is nonsense. The Philippines were scheduled for independence, yes, but they were still US territory, plenty of Americans would still be killed in any attack on them, and the resentment of the "treacherous Japs" for launching a surprise attack on US territory while negotiations were still going on would still be there. It would be politically suicidal for the administration to agree to a compromise peace in 1942.

There is a big difference between "hatred of the Japanese wouldn't be quite as intense as in OTL" and "within months the US could say 'let bygones be bygones' and agree to a compromise peace.'"

So let's imagine how we can make it work huh? Maybe try and have some alternate history here?

So surprise attack, that can't happen, it will aggravate Americans too much. The Japan publicly announce a war declaration, and cherry on top, suggest that civilians evacuate some areas. Japan has local superiority in 1941 (or earlier if they attack sooner), can they afford to give notice and still win or would they fail to win any battles if the allies had 24 hours - 1 week notice.

The Japanese also say that it's just a war on the colonies, and that it's because of the economic embargo, and they will leave the Philippines as soon as they have access to the oil. Unfortunately I think even this propaganda is see through, they should just give an ultimatum to DEI and Shell demanding they release oil, when they refuse then they make this statement and then they go to war with DEI only. But if the OP requires a Philippines attack too it becomes much harder. Still maybe they say something like piracy from the Philippines endangers the supply route, or something I don't see what their response would be to 'Why the Philippines too?' Liberation perhaps?

Depending when Japan comes to the realisation that the winning massively against the USA won't work they have time to try some propaganda to appeal to Americans. It's hard work because of the Chinese lobbyists so perhaps some assassinations or maybe trying to economically seduce them (if you support us you'll have first pickings in China).

 

[Antiochus V]

So let's imagine how we can make it work huh? Maybe try and have some alternate history here?

So surprise attack, that can't happen, it will aggravate Americans too much. The Japan publicly announce a war declaration, and cherry on top, suggest that civilians evacuate some areas. Japan has local superiority in 1941 (or earlier if they attack sooner), can they afford to give notice and still win or would they fail to win any battles if the allies had 24 hours - 1 week notice.

The Japanese also say that it's just a war on the colonies, and that it's because of the economic embargo, and they will leave the Philippines as soon as they have access to the oil. Unfortunately I think even this propaganda is see through, they should just give an ultimatum to DEI and Shell demanding they release oil, when they refuse then they make this statement and then they go to war with DEI only. But if the OP requires a Philippines attack too it becomes much harder. Still maybe they say something like piracy from the Philippines endangers the supply route, or something I don't see what their response would be to 'Why the Philippines too?' Liberation perhaps?

Depending when Japan comes to the realisation that the winning massively against the USA won't work they have time to try some propaganda to appeal to Americans. It's hard work because of the Chinese lobbyists so perhaps some assassinations or maybe trying to economically seduce them (if you support us you'll have first pickings in China).

The problem for Japan is the starting point. They have been at war since 1937 in what is viewed by the US as an unwarranted war of conquest, and not content with merely invading China, Japan has seized FIC and is now about to take further territory. The Philippines and other US trading interests are clearly under threat and Japan has an established track record of building an empire at the expense of other nations through warfare. I don’t think there is any way to credibly claim that Japanese actions are anything other than efforts to build an empire. To sum it up, Japan like Germany had no diplomatic credibility at this point, I think the most Japan could hope for is a lethargic response in the form of a few months before the US feels it is ready to declare war.

‘Liberation’ is a challenging claim when the US was already in the process of packing its bags in the Philippines. I don’t think combining this with a campaign of assassination is going to be particularly popular either, bear in mind the Chinese lobby is composed of Americans with trading links there.

If hypothetically Japan manages to leave the US out of the initial period of hostilities, the violence and success of a 2-3 month campaign is very likely to push the US over the edge. Furthermore it is highly likely that the US will start supporting the Allied powers from day one, and could take some very provocative steps. As I see it if Japan does not include the US on day one it faces the US having the ability and willingness to initiate hostilities at a point in time that is worse than dec 1941.

It is not so much that forum members here are determinist, as that the topic has been discussed before and the problems of geography and the existing ship construction schedule left Japan with little choice once they decided they wanted to continue the war in China.

 

[McPherson]

By December 1941 the war was already happening, Roosevelt knew this, Hull knew this. The whole reason Roosevelt chose not to embargo oil was because to do so would force Japan to declare war.

A letter in Dec 1941 that was written as a direct result of the embargo is not evidence that the embargo was meaningless. If you want to start arguing that the USA completely misunderstood Japan and had done so for years, that Roosevelt, Hull were all wrong about how provocative an oil embargo would be you'll need more evidence than meaningless posturing made after everyone already knew war was coming.

Even if it's true, so what, after the oil embargo in the five month period between it and war oil no longer mattered? If the USA had cancelled the embargo and opened up oil back to Japan you think they'd have gone to war? Maybe that's the scenario you're trying to argue but if so it's not really related at all to the OP.

Also just because Roosevelt was posturing that he would declare war does not mean that he could, again I would recommend you read the orders in the period, the USA was willing to sail ships into the Japanese fleet and just wait to be shot at. They at least believed that an attack against them would be the only way to (definitely) secure a war.

Well I'm trying my hardest to talk about this and suggest how to make it work or ways to improve it but I'm afraid you've riled a nest of unimaginative determinists.

1. The oil embargo was not mentioned because it was not prima causus (first cause). The escalation of Japan's aggression, a historical pattern, beginning with the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, is. Indo China was the ultimate red line, where isolationists or no isolationists, Roosevelt would have to go to war.

2. Am I* a determinist? If the vector solution says two freight trains (hostile nations) are headed for each other since ~1848, you better believe I add up sums and expect a collision.

My interpretation for CLARITY.

You see the obvious?

McP.

 

[Histor32]

Only that ameri

1. The oil embargo was not mentioned because it was not prima causus (first cause). The escalation of Japan's aggression, a historical pattern, beginning with the Marco Polo Bridge Incident, is. Indo China was the ultimate red line, where isolationists or no isolationists, Roosevelt would have to go to war.

2. Am I* a determinist? If the vector solution says two freight trains (hostile nations) are headed for each other since ~1848, you better believe I add up sums and expect a collision.

My interpretation for CLARITY.

View attachment 479243

You see the obvious?

McP.

Only that America would defend European interests and their own.

Either way Japan goes the way it did or bogs down in China and ultimately loosed there too. It was go big or go homr

 

[McPherson]

Only that ameri

Only that America would defend European interests and their own.

Either way Japan goes the way it did or bogs down in China and ultimately loosed there too. It was go big or go homr

1. Nation states are not nice.
2. The US was decolonizing the Philippine Islands. It was mandated in American law. But that nation was also committed to defend the new Philippine Nation. Also mandated in the American law. As for the European interests, well how did the Americans behave after WW II? Mixed bag result. Inconsistent policy. The British were US pressured to decolonize, but the Americans quagmired in Indo China in support of France and were kicked out of China proper.

Shrug. No worse than most, and better than some (Belgium, Russia, Japan are three that come to colonial imperialist mind.). YMMV and should.

 

[Alanith]

I think the notion that if the Japanese "only" attack the Philippines and not Pearl Harbor, the US is going to agree to a compromise peace with them in 1942 is nonsense. The Philippines were scheduled for independence, yes, but they were still US territory, plenty of Americans would still be killed in any attack on them, and the resentment of the "treacherous Japs" for launching a surprise attack on US territory while negotiations were still going on would still be there. It would be politically suicidal for the administration to agree to a compromise peace in 1942.

There is a big difference between "hatred of the Japanese wouldn't be quite as intense as in OTL" and "within months the US could say 'let bygones be bygones' and agree to a compromise peace.'"

"Hmmm, we'll inevitably win if the war goes on longer then 1943.. let's give up now and face a crisis of faith in the Government and the capability of the American People!"

 

[Draconis]

"Hmmm, we'll inevitably win if the war goes on longer then 1943.. let's give up now and face a crisis of faith in the Government and the capability of the American People!"

Not so much that. I'm thinking more along the lines of, "Lets agree to a peace treaty (hiatus) with Japan so we can concentrate on the Germans. Then well come back later and demand new terms or else from Japan.

 

[Johnrankins]

Not so much that. I'm thinking more along the lines of, "Lets agree to a peace treaty (hiatus) with Japan so we can concentrate on the Germans. Then well come back later and demand new terms or else from Japan.

It won't work. The Japanese would see it as a sign of weakness and almost certainly demand too much in the peace treaty. Also I think the US public would see it as caving in to the Japanese, particularly when the Japanese come out with their proposal.

 

[Admiral Fischer]

Not so much that. I'm thinking more along the lines of, "Lets agree to a peace treaty (hiatus) with Japan so we can concentrate on the Germans. Then well come back later and demand new terms or else from Japan.

The whole Munich debacle convinced world leaders that no variation of "peace in our time" works against the Axis powers. This supposed treaty essentially is a surrender treaty which cedes the whole East Asia including China to Japanese conquest and Roosevelt has absolutely zero reason to believe that Japan would stick to the treaty while the Western Allies are busy fighting in Europe.

 

[DougM]

If Japan attacks ANY US troops, ships, bases, or territories ANYWHERE in the whole world the US citizens will insist on a war and will fight it t the bitter end. They will see themselves as the victims.

So the only chance Japan has (as small as it is) is if the IS declared war on Japan BEFORE any armed conflict between the two started. Even if Japan give a year warning and declares war 6 months ahead of schedule if the US does not “start it” in the eyes of its own citizens then the US will fight to the bitter end.

As for the determininist bit. Well the problem you have with this and many other attempts to change history is that you have to change things SO much that they are no longer recognizable. If you change the US to the point it is weak enough to lose it will not be recognizable as the US any longer. Same holds true with a Japan strong enough to win or with a US that would be willing to accept a treaty. In any of these types of situations you have to change so much that it no longer is what you want.

If you change things enough that I could kick Arnold Schwarzenegger’s but then either him or I am so changed that it is not the same two people.

I mean you can make anything happen. I mean if Yellowstone goes BANG in January of 42 and causes the big one in California and this is followed by a major eruption in Hawaii then the US probably agrees to terms.

 

[Draconis]

That's quite interesting about the U.S. oil embargo being initially mishandled by FDRs' administration. I can well believe it could have happened that way because FDR would have been trying to slow down the Japanese military centered economy. But he perceived he was walking a fine line with Japan and he was hoping not to push then too hard as he would have thought that might precipitate a war immediately. FDR was playing for time as the U.S. built-up their military and naval strength at home and overseas.

But it was a faint hope at best. What FDR could not have known at the time was that the Imperial Japanese command were going to ahead with their long planned attack against the U.S., the British Empire and the Dutch in Dec. 1941 irregardless of how tight the oil embargo was. It made no difference if it had been mismanaged. Japan simply was not going to wait while the U.S. rearmed.

 

[RMcD94]

http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-P-Strategy/Strategy-2.html#cn28

http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/monos/146/146chap1.html#Occupation of Northern French Indo-China

Some interesting insight into the division of Japanese government and the fairly last minute nature of their decisions. Also I had no idea how much opposed the navy and government was to the army attack on Manchuria, China and Indochina. They really were out of control.

 

[Histor32]

okay.. japan gives notice to the usa .. doesn't matter the usa will have to respond if they attack us territory.

now so they decalre war .. a month passes and nothing happens .. then they bomb pearl .. it still doesn't matter, propaganda and the fact of the tiems means that well the usa is at war and add your own crap what ever on white man or what ever .. but .. no matter wwhat the bad thing about ww2 .. if you are still at war in 1941 .. by 1945 there is glass coming your way

Japan could no defeat the USA outright .. they knew that. a fully mobilized USA is not something that Japan wanted to fight. they hoped to gight a distracted not engaged USA who would say .. eh.. I don't really want to be at war. ( major miscalculation honestly .. but hey.. )

Japan hit a road block..

 

[McPherson]

okay.. Japan gives notice to the USA .. doesn't matter the USA will have to respond if they attack US territory.

If that notice is a demarche, or an actual declaration of intent to attack another nation, and threatens the US if the US interferes (still a demarche) what will be the result?

Now so they declare war .. a month passes and nothing happens .. then they bomb Pearl .. it still doesn't matter, propaganda and the fact of the times means that well the USA is at war and add your own crap whatever on white man or what ever ... but .. no matter what the bad thing about WW2 .. if you are still at war in 1941 ... by 1945 there is glass coming your way.

I understand the distasteful bigotry that infused the Pacific War, but let us put that aside for the larger issue, in that can we agree that there was intense hostility and confliction between the Americans and Japanese because of conflicting geo-political and economic interests in China? (Refer to map.(^^^)

Japan could not defeat the USA outright .. they knew that. a fully mobilized USA is not something that Japan wanted to fight. They hoped to fight a distracted not engaged USA who would say .. eh.. I don't really want to be at war. ( major miscalculation honestly... but hey... )

Japan hit a road block...

Hmmm. If your government's top military and civil echelon has lost control of the mid-grade field officers who have started a no-win war in China, and you have a psychotic as your foreign minister and the senior government leadership is too frightened to confront the hereditary chief of state and tell him he needs to bring order to the chaos his inaction, and passive connivance has caused, then what are you as the SENIOR military leadership supposed to do?

A lot of them tried to rein in the crazies and were assassinated. That is a real historical fact.

Those that were left, chose to make the best war they could and they botched it. I mean there IS ONLY ONE MOVE THAT HAS A SNOWBALL'S CHANCE.

It takes everything Japan has, all 15 divisions they have allotted for the Southern Resources Area, all their lift, and everything they can scrap up that floats and flies and they better not miss when the PACFLT fights them, cause if they lose that one battle in their one main-chance gamble, they are DONE. The US will crush them like an egg in the riposte.

 

[Kaze]

Why would Hitler declare war on the US? the only reason why Hitler did OTL was because of Pearl Harbor. And the US wasn't gonna just give away the Philippines.

German submarine sinks US Navy ship before Pearl Harbor. But it was ignored and left behind because Pearl happens a few days later.

 

[Alanith]

If that notice is a demarche, or an actual declaration of intent to attack another nation, and threatens the US if the US interferes (still a demarche) what will be the result?



I understand the distasteful bigotry that infused the Pacific War, but let us put that aside for the larger issue, in that can we agree that there was intense hostility and confliction between the Americans and Japanese because of conflicting geo-political and economic interests in China? (Refer to map.(^^^)



Hmmm. If your government's top military and civil echelon has lost control of the mid-grade field officers who have started a no-win war in China, and you have a psychotic as your foreign minister and the senior government leadership is too frightened to confront the hereditary chief of state and tell him he needs to bring order to the chaos his inaction, and passive connivance has caused, then what are you as the SENIOR military leadership supposed to do?

A lot of them tried to rein in the crazies and were assassinated. That is a real historical fact.

Those that were left, chose to make the best war they could and they botched it. I mean there IS ONLY ONE MOVE THAT HAS A SNOWBALL'S CHANCE.

View attachment 480053

It takes everything Japan has, all 15 divisions they have allotted for the Southern Resources Area, all their lift, and everything they can scrap up that floats and flies and they better not miss when the PACFLT fights them, cause if they lose that one battle in their one main-chance gamble, they are DONE. The US will crush them like an egg in the riposte.

And when they lose all their sealift around Hawaii, without having taken a single one of their resource areas, they can lose the war even faster!

The Japanese could barely reach Hawaii for the Pearl Harbor raid, how in gods name are they going to sustain 15 divisions?

 

[Johnrankins]

If that notice is a demarche, or an actual declaration of intent to attack another nation, and threatens the US if the US interferes (still a demarche) what will be the result?



I understand the distasteful bigotry that infused the Pacific War, but let us put that aside for the larger issue, in that can we agree that there was intense hostility and confliction between the Americans and Japanese because of conflicting geo-political and economic interests in China? (Refer to map.(^^^)



Hmmm. If your government's top military and civil echelon has lost control of the mid-grade field officers who have started a no-win war in China, and you have a psychotic as your foreign minister and the senior government leadership is too frightened to confront the hereditary chief of state and tell him he needs to bring order to the chaos his inaction, and passive connivance has caused, then what are you as the SENIOR military leadership supposed to do?

A lot of them tried to rein in the crazies and were assassinated. That is a real historical fact.

Those that were left, chose to make the best war they could and they botched it. I mean there IS ONLY ONE MOVE THAT HAS A SNOWBALL'S CHANCE.

View attachment 480053

It takes everything Japan has, all 15 divisions they have allotted for the Southern Resources Area, all their lift, and everything they can scrap up that floats and flies and they better not miss when the PACFLT fights them, cause if they lose that one battle in their one main-chance gamble, they are DONE. The US will crush them like an egg in the riposte.

They don't have the capacity to do that, even with their entire lift. Even with their entire lift they can't supply 15 divisions in far off Hawaii. If they try it they lose right then and there. It has exactly zero chance. They won't even get surprise on your side because at the speed you have to go with slow transports there isn't a chance in hell you won't be spotted long before you reach Hawaii.

 

[McPherson]

And when they lose all their sealift around Hawaii, without having taken a single one of their resource areas, they can lose the war even faster!

They don't have the capacity to do that, even with their entire lift. Even with their entire lift they can't supply 15 divisions in far off Hawaii. If they try it they lose right then and there. It has exactly zero chance. They won't even get surprise on your side because at the speed you have to go with slow transports there isn't a chance in hell you won't be spotted long before you reach Hawaii.

I said that before. But if they pull off a Tsushima in Hawaiian waters, (35% chance) and land their troops, and take possession, it does not take a genius to figure out that they have corked Uncle. They have 6,200 kilometers to supply a garrison in Oahu. To the Indonesian oil fields it is about the same distance.

San Francisco to Oahu is roughly 3,800 km. To the Indonesian oil fields it is 14,000 km. Have you ever heard of Antoine Jomini? How about Dennis Mahan? How about Alfred Thayer Mahan? They were sort of eclipsed by Clauswitz and Sun Tzu, but they, all three, did harp on one thing that is often overlooked. If the enemy has taken up a strong position between where you are and you need to go, then you are short sheeted in the shaddocks. He can dictate terms of battle to you because of his interior lines of movement.

That is what the Japanese did in the Mandates (And botched it because they did not forward deploy. Already commented on how the Indonesian fuel oil contamination led to their late 1943 early 1944 IJN inaction.); but it is about the much better attrite and decrease strategy going forward, if the shock of losing not only the PACFLT but HAWAII does not bring Uncle to the table.

Uncle has to mount a rather large Normandy type operation to retake Hawaii. That will take at least 2 years and then he will be about where he starts March 1942 RTL after that operation. Instead of a 3 year 9 month war, you have a full 6 year war. What will that cost? RTL 125,000 dead; 380,000 wounded; $67BUSD. ATL triple it.

McP.

P.S. They mounted their Pearl Harbor raid and moved those 15 divisions equally far through quite disorganized but fierce opposition with incredible rapidity with the lift they had allocated (about 3 million GWT) in 4 different directions and in the space of just 120 days. (Malaya barrier, Philippine Islands, Indian Ocean Raid, and of course Burma.). I'm very aware of exactly what they could do if they had to do it, because what they did in the Southern Resources Area was far more logistically and militarily difficult RTL than taking Hawaii ATL. They did not attempt Hawaii because that was not possible with all the other operations they planned and executed. If they had postponed the sickle by 4 months, then Hawaii is mountable. A successful Hawaii operation means a still difficult SRA campaign which follows that also hobbles the China War, but what the hey? At least you have your bargaining position for a truce if you are Yamamoto.