Search results

  1. Better strategy against France in 1940.

    True, but the French made a reasonable advance into the Saar right through one of the heavily mined zones. As far as insane, how could it turn out worse than the debacle of OTL?
  2. Better strategy against France in 1940.

    Ah, another European member.:D Try 4.9.39:p
  3. Better strategy against France in 1940.

    Or spare itself the humilation by crossing the Rhine on 9/4/39 and crush the German forces there (which were very weak, especially in armor and air) like a wayward beetle and reach Berlin before the Heer could do a damned thing about it.
  4. Retain the Anglo-Japanese, no Pacific War?

    The Second is the Intervention into the Russian Civil War. Japan did everything in its power to retain the territory it was "protecting", to the extent of staying in Russia for two full years after any reason for its presence that could be justified in even the broadest sense of the word. BTW...
  5. Retain the Anglo-Japanese, no Pacific War?

    Yes, as we know the U.S. set up permanent governments in all of those states and maintained them until forced out at the point of a gun as the result of even more aggression. Comparing chasing bandits into Mexico to the Sino-Japanese War or the annexation of Manchuria to American actions in...
  6. Retain the Anglo-Japanese, no Pacific War?

    I can see we will never get close to agreeing here. Which is a good thing in a lot of ways. I consider Japan from 1890 through 1945 to be the most relentlessly agressive nation state of the 20th Century. In the middle of its so-called Golden Age of democracy (1912-26 according to the OP) it...
  7. Retain the Anglo-Japanese, no Pacific War?

    I never said it was rosy. I said it was as far from fascist as it is possible to get. Screwed up in many ways? Yes. Authoritarian for a decade? Not a chance in hell. Two years while at war? Yea, not exactly a Golden Moment. Nevertheless the Democrats LOST the 1920 election and left...
  8. Retain the Anglo-Japanese, no Pacific War?

    SIX entirely optional wars, beginning virtually as soon as they had sufficient foreign bought weaponry to pull it off. Not a one of the wars being anything but naked, baldfaced aggression to expand territory. I don't think that Germany had fought six entirely optional wars since it coalesced...
  9. Retain the Anglo-Japanese, no Pacific War?

    The UNITED STATES? Pre-WW I? With its pitiful little Army, no draft and near pathological dislike of standing military forces? With its robust democratic system? With a near predatory economic system (Rockefeller ring a bell? How about Carnegie? J.P. Morgan? Robber Baron in general?)...
  10. Retain the Anglo-Japanese, no Pacific War?

    Of course they did. Nazi Germany being one in roughly the same time frame. The reality, however, is that choosing to be on the right side of the U.S. along with the entire English speaking Commonwealth, was a far more productive decision than remaining an ally of a fairly poor nation on the far...
  11. Retain the Anglo-Japanese, no Pacific War?

    Horse hockey and other such comments. The Japanese were a robustly militaristic expansionist state from the time of the Meiji Restoration. They attacked China in 1894, Russia in 1904, and declared war on Germany in 1914, not because of any treaty but because they saw a way to massively...
  12. Looking for a PoD

    Goring was a pig. He would have done anything to stay in power & the way to do that was to continue with, and this is critical, the immensely POPULAR programs that Hitler had initiated. What seems to be forgotten all too often is that the Nazis were not operating in some sort of vacuum. The...
  13. Looking for a PoD

    Germany as the Good Guys? Lots of luck with that one. Germany was already repressing the Jews at the time of Munich (9/1/38 or, for our European friends 1.9.38 :D). The Nuremberg Laws went into effect in 1935 (19.9.35) and things went dowhill from there. IF, and its quite the if, they don't...
  14. Vietnam Wars elsewhere

    Nowhere in the Western Hemisphere. The U.S. would fight to win in the Americas and would be backed by a solid majority of the population. Viet Nam was a good place to politically defeat the U.S. It was too far away from anything that the average American saw as being important to them. The...
  15. WI: Post war Japan treated like Germany

    Well, not the beer and sausage part. At least not this time of year. :D
  16. WI: A more humanitarian Japanese military in WW2?

    Bollocks. Hirohito knew fully what was taking place. He was an active participant in the regular GHQ briefing, although he, as was the case for every Japanese Emperor since the establishment of the Shogunate, kept out of ordinary daily operational decisions. The Japanese Emperor was the...
  17. WI: A more humanitarian Japanese military in WW2?

    This is a singularly poor example. The Red Army had effective carte blance from the Political Commisars to do pretty much anything they wanted as soon as they crossed the Soviet Union's frontiers. Some troops engaged in spectacular acts of brutality, most did not. More Soviet troops shared...
  18. WI Battle of Britain is lost?

    By parachute perhaps. Sealion ALWAYS fails on the logistics. The Germans may be able to put troops ashore, albeit at horrific cost. What they can not do, not without so many T/L alterations that it becomes ASB, is maintain them once ashore. That is actually the much more difficult part of...
  19. WI: Axis Strategic Cooperation

    President Hoover? :confused::confused::confused: In 1940?:confused::confused::confused:
  20. WI: Axis Strategic Cooperation

    Just as an aside, the U.S. alone had about 40% more warmaking economic potential than ALL THREE Axis states combined. If the Axis had ever, even for an instant, considered economics the war would never have happened.
Top