AHC: Fortify western Aleutians Islands before WWII.


As it says in the title, come up with reasons to develop fortified US army and navy bases on at least Kiska and Attu islands. Bonus if these bases are unknown and unsuspected to the Japanese in mid-1942.:D
 
Nobody?:(

I saw the post about the 'Alcan hiway', getting built sooner, and thought this would be the time to ask this question, but perhaps not. Anyway, while I am alone here in this stillborn thread, I guess it wouldn't hurt anything to once again plug "The Thsound Mile War", by Brian Garfield. This book was a real eye-opener for me about this forgotten theater of the pacific war against Japan.
 
Article XIX of the Washington Naval Treaty

Article XIX
The United States, the British Empire and Japan agree that the status quo at the time of the signing of the present Treaty, with

Page 253

regard to fortifications and naval bases, shall be maintained in their respective territories and possessions specified hereunder:

(1) The insular possessions which the United States now holds or may hereafter acquire in the Pacific Ocean, except (a) those adjacent to the coast of the United States, Alaska and the Panama Canal Zone, not including the Aleutian Islands, and (b) the Hawaiian Islands;

(2) Hong Kong and the insular possessions which the British Empire now holds or may hereafter acquire in the Pacific Ocean, east of the meridian of 110° east longitude, except (a) those adjacent to the coast of Canada, (b) the Commonwealth of Australia and its Territories, and (c) New Zealand;

(3) The following insular territories and possessions of Japan in the Pacific Ocean, to wit: the Kurile Islands, the Bonin Islands, Amami-Oshima, the Loochoo Islands, Formosa and the Pescadores, and any insular territories or possessions in the Pacific Ocean which Japan may hereafter acquire.

The maintenance of the status quo under the foregoing provisions implies that no new fortifications or naval bases shall be established in the territories and possessions specified; that no measures shall be taken to increase the existing naval facilities for the repair and maintenance of naval forces, and that no increase shall be made in the coast defences of the territories and possessions above specified. This restriction, however, does not preclude such repair and replacement of worn-out weapons and equipment as is customary in naval and military establishments in time of peace.
 
OTL: US wins
ATL: US wins
Well yes, but...

I was hoping for just a bit more, like what would happen if the Japanese attempted their invasion, and instead of encountering a 10 man weather team, sound asleep, they instead encounter an enemy that is dug in and waiting for them.:eek:
 
Aleutians would be considered a hardship posting.

E.g. .... after he got caught screwing the general's daughter, a junior officer gets "promoted" to command a US Army weather station on the farthest Aleutians Island.
Hah!
Hah!
 
Yep, definately a hardship tour! Maybe even worse that South Korea.:D

OTL, I was amused by reading how the Japanese tried to question one of our airmen they had fished out of the sea, by blindfolding him and making him 'walk the plank', only to stop at the last moment, and all trying to get information on the location for the previously unsuspected airbase near Dutch harbor.

That was the reason I asked about the possibility of fortifying Attu and Kiska, secretly, so the Bruckner could have given the invaders an even more warm reception.
 
True, but my thinking is what happens in 1935 onward, after the Japanese renounce the WNT and the two subsequent London treaties? We would have had at least 4-5 years to build defenses before the war.

But money spent in the Aleutians is money not spent at Midway or Wake or Pearl, almost certainly.

Unless you can come up with a PoD that frees a lot more money for fortifications. And where is THAT coming from? Building new planes? Building new aircraft carriers?
 
Top