Any changes to Timeline-191/Southern Victory

[PGSBHurricane]

I'll start with How Few Remain and work from there.

How Few Remain:

• Kentucky joins the CSA but remains in a constant state of de facto Civil War and most are still angry at the CSA for violating their neutrality like IOTL.
• Switch the timelines of the purchases of Cuba and northern Mexico
• Make the Mexican purchases based on the boundaries of the Departments of the Second Mexican Empire IOTL, with California, Arizona and Sonora (combined into the Confederate state of Sonora), and Chihuahua and Batopilas (combined into the Confederate state of Chihuahua) being purchased. This makes for a much cleaner Mexican border.
• The Confederacy attempts to purchase Cuba in 1880 during the Little War but Kentucky (which was already polarized) threatens to rejoin the Union as slavery was the least prevalent there and was the most industrialized state. Tennessee and North Carolina, two more states that merely tolerate slavery rather than enthused it (the former with East Tennessee, the Tennessee Valley, and the swing region of Nashville which initially voted against secession IOTL opposing this move and the latter being the most reluctant state to join the CSA IOTL and largely did so as its neighbors already did), also oppose it.
• The USA under Blaine intervenes on behalf of Kentucky and, to a lesser extent, Tennessee and threatens war if the Confederacy does not withdraw its claims from Cuba. The CSA refuses and the Confederacy and Union go to war again. The Second French Empire (which remains intact as having troops in Mexico deters Napoleon from declaring war on Prussia ITTL) joins up with the CSA but Britain stays out of it due to slavery. With French help, the CSA gains Cuba but at the expense of Kentucky which is ceded back to the Union.

Great War:

• The CSA officially allies with France, leading the USA to engage in rapprochement with Great Britain
• With no unified Germany (just the North German Confederation led by Prussia), France doesn't withdraw from Fashoda and the Fashoda incident is worse than IOTL leading to Greater tensions between France and Britain
• Being successful in Mexico, France allies with Austria-Hungary and later Russia (to try and contain North Germany). At the same time, Britain forms an alliance with Italy (against A-H) and the Ottoman Empire (against Russia). North Germany officially stays neutral but plays both sides.
• The CSA is the last country in the Western Hemisphere to abolish slavery (largely in response to the opening of Ellis Island in New York Harbor in 1892 and the Confederacy's own desire to attract immigrants, the Panic of 1893, and the Congo Scandal) but follows South Africa's lead in 1913 and bans blacks from voting and purchasing land from whites, restricting blacks to homelands or reservations like OTL's Bantustans South Africa and implementing a harsh apartheid system
• The Great War breaks out in 1914 following Franz's Ferdinand's assassination but with different alliances, the war in Europe has a less obvious outcome. In North America, the Confederates and Mexicans join France against the Americans, Canadians, and British. Japan commits to its alliance with Great Britain in the Pacific.
• The Americans, Canadians, and British wins in North America in 1916 or 1917. An analog to the Mexican Revolution begins which has influences of OTL's Russian Revolution. Cuba and Texas are granted independence as US puppet states. Tennessee, Seqouyah, Houston, Chihuahua, Sonora, and California (renamed South California) are annexed into the Union outright along with parts of far northern Arkansas (into Missouri) as well as Blue Ridge Mountain and Potomac River regions in West Virginia and the Delmarva Penninsula into Maryland.

Also, I would avoid the Mormons becoming terrorists and avoid a Confederate analog to the Holocaust. The rest of the timeline after the Great War has too many butterflies for me to continue. Sorry if this is a lot of information. I think Timeline-191 is ultimately a good read but very predictable at times with the parallels to OTL in later installments being extremely obvious. Hopefully this would make the Southern Victory series feel less cliche.

 

[PsychoNeo]

And another non-sense annexation is CSA at end of GW2. How USA even think that they could annex country which has been independent more than 80 years with millions of people who are not going to accept that? Or if they would think that, it is not going to be easy thing and probably failure at end.

I could actually see a case for this. On top of the millions of blacks the CSA killed, do we even have a casualty count of both CSA soldiers and civilians killed? If the numbers are as high as OTL's Soviet Union casualty count (27 million soldiers and civilians) or close to it, the CSA by surrender should in theory literally be de-populated. Both due to them genociding a shit ton of blacks and already having a smaller population than the US, which would be killed in warfare and bombing raids.

This would make annexation practically easier, since most of the CSA died in the war.

 

[YusaEmi]

4. The Pacific War would have been a much bigger deal. (After two whole generations growing up with the Remembrance Ideology, I can't see the US settling for a status quo ante bellum peace.) At a minimum the US would have fought on until they had taken the Philippines. (They need to take something big off Japan, so the American people will l feel like they won, and so Japan will know it was beaten.) This would also set up US vulnerabilty to Featherston being not from appeasement and weakness but from imperial overreach. (And especially since most of the defense budget in the early 30s would have had to go to the Navy and Marines for the fight against Japan.

But they couldn't take the Philippines.
The entire point of the Pacific War was to establish the fact neither the US or Japan had the ability to project power across the Pacific to such a significant degree. (Yet)

Japan couldn't project enough power to seize the Sandwich Islands and the US couldn't project power to seize the Philippines. Japan is already demonstrated to of been far more capable and competent than OTL as well so there's also that fact to consider.

I just don't think even if the US wanted to they would of been able to push the war further, the logistics wasn't there. The technology wasn't there and neither was the doctrine there. At best all they could do is lone bombing raids by carriers which are both risky and infrequent.

 

[YusaEmi]

Drop the genocide angle entirely. The freedomites can do mass forced labor instead.

Nah, I actually think it makes sense for Featherston's character. He's (at least my impression of him) a far more chaotic character than Hitler was otl.

I'd describe Featherston as a man who just wants to watch the world burn, as opposed to Hitler (who was insane not going to deny that) had a plan despite everything he did.

 

[Aisha Clan-Clan]

The holocaust arguably shortened the war by a year or so due to how much manpower/resources were wasted in it. The CSA under featherston trying Population Reduction, to kill 25-30% of it's population. Sounds more Khmer Rouge and I highly doubt it lasts as long as it did in canon, nevermind building a superbomb.

 

[PobreCesar]

Nah, I actually think it makes sense for Featherston's character. He's (at least my impression of him) a far more chaotic character than Hitler was otl.

I'd describe Featherston as a man who just wants to watch the world burn, as opposed to Hitler (who was insane not going to deny that) had a plan despite everything he did.

See, oddly that's kind of the opposite of my point of view. I thought that Featherston (while certainly evil) lacked the over-imaginative paranoia of Hitler. In that way Featherston seemed more akin to Stalin than Hitler, the obvious Hitler-rôle notwithstanding. (Stalin was paranoid too, but he didn't imagine ludicrous scenarios of convoluted racial fantasies like Hitler.)

 

[PGSBHurricane]

Nah, I actually think it makes sense for Featherston's character. He's (at least my impression of him) a far more chaotic character than Hitler was otl.

I'd describe Featherston as a man who just wants to watch the world burn, as opposed to Hitler (who was insane not going to deny that) had a plan despite everything he did.

I could see a genocide of the black Confederate happening albeit more along the lines of the Khmer Rouge IOTL where all the black population is rounded up for forced labor for the war effort de facto bringing slavery back. I would suppose everyone who fails to meet their quotas otherwise steps out of line is shot and killed. If the proportions of the death toll fall in line with the Khmer Rouge then you would still see 2-3 million black Confederates killed. It would still be horrifying but it would be a much more realistic number and set of circumstances given that the black population would be needed for the war effort to make it as far as it did in the Second Great War as opposed to the implication that up to 10 million people were killed on the Population Reduction.

 

[PGSBHurricane]

The holocaust arguably shortened the war by a year or so due to how much manpower/resources were wasted in it. The CSA under featherston trying Population Reduction, to kill 25-30% of its population. Sounds more Khmer Rouge and I highly doubt it lasts as long as it did in canon, nevermind building a superbomb.

Also IOTL the Holocaust was at its peak in 1944 in terms of death rate outside of Operation Reinhardt due to the sheer efficiency of the camps at that point. By that time ITTL the CSA was on the defense and defeated by that July. Without that extra year of efficiency I’m not sure the Population Reduction death toll would match the 6 million Jews of OTL’s Holocaust, let alone the implications in that books that up to 10 million African Americans were killed.

 

[wcv215]

What changes would you make to Timeline-191/Southern Victory?

Drop the Lost Cause plot point that underlie How Few Remain would be a good start.

Beyond that…while I agree with those who would like less parallelism, I feel like some of the changes to the Freedom party would undermine the point about America not being uniquely resistant to fascism.

 

[Lalli]

Nah, I actually think it makes sense for Featherston's character. He's (at least my impression of him) a far more chaotic character than Hitler was otl.

I'd describe Featherston as a man who just wants to watch the world burn, as opposed to Hitler (who was insane not going to deny that) had a plan despite everything he did.

Killing of 1/3 of population would eat so much resources that I am amazed that CSA lasted that long. And it too would take lot of cheap/free work force. Featherston was surely damned racist but surely some others would had some rationality even if still racists and told Featherston that genocide would be impracitcal act.

 

[YusaEmi]

Also IOTL the Holocaust was at its peak in 1944 in terms of death rate outside of Operation Reinhardt due to the sheer efficiency of the camps at that point. By that time ITTL the CSA was on the defense and defeated by that July. Without that extra year of efficiency I’m not sure the Population Reduction death toll would match the 6 million Jews of OTL’s Holocaust, let alone the implications in that books that up to 10 million African Americans were killed.

Counter point, there's a hell of a lot more African Americans around to kill compared to European Jews both in total population and in proportion to the rest of the population. The 10 million figure could be achievable ESPECIALLY if it includes victims in the Caribbean's since it is heavily implied they're doing the same in places like Cuba, Bahamas and Haiti in which the majority of the population of the later two were majority black. (with Haiti's being almost exclusively black)

 

[YusaEmi]

See, oddly that's kind of the opposite of my point of view. I thought that Featherston (while certainly evil) lacked the over-imaginative paranoia of Hitler. In that way Featherston seemed more akin to Stalin than Hitler, the obvious Hitler-rôle notwithstanding. (Stalin was paranoid too, but he didn't imagine ludicrous scenarios of convoluted racial fantasies like Hitler.)

Oh no I agree with you, Featherstone isn't as paranoid/insane as Hitler. But Hitler at least had plans, he a coherent plan you could follow along with that you can rationally follow that can explain the invasion of Poland and France for instance. Featherston just doesn't he wanted a fight regardless of what the US did despite the fact Al Smith (in my opinion at least) appeased him at much greater lengths than Chamberlain appeased Hitler.

I do believe WWII could of potentially been avoided if Hitler was further appeased on Poland (I might be wrong i'm not even going to argue this point), Featherston on the other hand couldn't be appeased. Regardless of what Al Smith did, regardless of whether he gave Featherston everything he wanted Blackbeard would of still happened it's made very clear in the story.

 

[PGSBHurricane]

Counter point, there's a hell of a lot more African Americans around to kill compared to European Jews both in total population and in proportion to the rest of the population. The 10 million figure could be achievable ESPECIALLY if it includes victims in the Caribbean's since it is heavily implied they're doing the same in places like Cuba, Bahamas and Haiti in which the majority of the population of the later two were majority black. (with Haiti's being almost exclusively black)

Keep in mind Germany IOTL had more time and resources to devote to their genocide project than the Confederacy did here so that’s not going to help them at all.

 

[PGSBHurricane]

Killing of 1/3 of population would eat so much resources that I am amazed that CSA lasted that long. And it too would take lot of cheap/free work force. Featherston was surely damned racist but surely some others would had some rationality even if still racists and told Featherston that genocide would be impracitcal act.

And even though Turtledove handwaves it by saying machinery and Mexican immigrants would replace cheap black labor, wouldn’t the population shift in Mexico be detrimental towards their own growth?

 

[PobreCesar]

I think (since Featherston wasn't genociding Yankees, and since there was an outsized guerilla movement) that his genocide of the CSA's Black population is a parallel both the Holocaust and Generalplan Ost eliminations of Slavs.

I'm not sure how many changes I would make to the Second Great War other than those already mentioned, but I think I might have tried to make Clarence Potter slightly more involved with the coup.

 

[bguy]

But they couldn't take the Philippines.
The entire point of the Pacific War was to establish the fact neither the US or Japan had the ability to project power across the Pacific to such a significant degree. (Yet)

Japan couldn't project enough power to seize the Sandwich Islands and the US couldn't project power to seize the Philippines. Japan is already demonstrated to of been far more capable and competent than OTL as well so there's also that fact to consider.

I just don't think even if the US wanted to they would of been able to push the war further, the logistics wasn't there. The technology wasn't there and neither was the doctrine there. At best all they could do is lone bombing raids by carriers which are both risky and infrequent.

IOTL in the 1920s and 30s the US Navy extensively war gamed how to advance across the Pacific in the event of a war with Japan. (By 1941 the Navy War College had war gamed out War Plan Orange, the plan for an advance across the Central Pacific in the event of war with Japan, 127 times!) The Navy knew it wouldn't be easy or quick, but they believed they could do it. (The plan called for advancing from the Marshall Islands to the Marianas Islands to the Philippines and recognized that a fleet could not operate effectively more than 2,000 miles from a major naval base and thus that a fleet base would have to be built along the way to enable the advance.)

There's no reason to think that the US Navy in TL-191 would not have also designed and extensively war gamed a similar plan for war with Japan. (Japan is by far the most likely opponent for the US Navy in the inter-war period, so obviously the US Navy would have plans ready for how to fight it.) And the technological level of TL-191 is comparable to OTL, so if the OTL US Navy believed it had the technological capability to drive across the Pacific to the Philippines, there's no reason to believe that the TL-191 US Navy wouldn't be similarly capable.

As for Japan being more capable and competent in TL-191, I'm not sure that really holds up either. They don't accomplish anything against the US in any of the three wars they fight against it in TL-191 (and this despite the Pacific being very much a secondary if not tertiary theater for the US in two of those wars), and the only real Japanese success in the novels comes when they are bullying much weaker powers or backstabbing their own allies. Being able to bully weaker nations and backstab your own allies doesn't suggest you will hold up well in a fight against an undistracted peer opponent that is actually taking the fight seriously.

 

[YusaEmi]

IOTL in the 1920s and 30s the US Navy extensively war gamed how to advance across the Pacific in the event of a war with Japan. (By 1941 the Navy War College had war gamed out War Plan Orange, the plan for an advance across the Central Pacific in the event of war with Japan, 127 times!) The Navy knew it wouldn't be easy or quick, but they believed they could do it. (The plan called for advancing from the Marshall Islands to the Marianas Islands to the Philippines and recognized that a fleet could not operate effectively more than 2,000 miles from a major naval base and thus that a fleet base would have to be built along the way to enable the advance.)

The US had the Philippines and Guam to base themselves out of and to defend and worry about.

All the US has in TL 191 is just Midway island and the Sandwich Islands. That's it, and there's no mention whatsoever of any kind of war games or planning in the novels over war games to power projection across the Pacific which is very notable since we have Sam Carsten as a PoV character. (whom I might add before the Pacific war mentioned that the US has no ability to attack Japan in any meaningful way and vice versa).

Besides that US Department of Defense faced significant budget cuts under Sinclair and Blackford and it's a pretty big plot point which is even blamed for the US's unpreparedness for the Second Great War.

As for Japan being more capable and competent in TL-191, I'm not sure that really holds up either.

They launched a successful air raid in the early 1930s against Los Angeles, OTL the attack of Pearl Harbor was the end of their logistics train,

They don't accomplish anything against the US in any of the three wars they fight against it in TL-191

They took midway and slapped the entente around. (albeit admittedly while they were in a bad position).
They also made zero attempts on the Sandwich Islands as far as we're aware, which kind of makes sense from the perspective that they're more concerned with China (and later Malaya, Russia, Australia and New Zealand)

 

[bguy]

The US had the Philippines and Guam to base themselves out of and to defend and worry about.

War Plan Orange didn't involve the US using bases in either the Philippines or Guam. The Navy (rightfully) assumed both locations were indefensible, and thus that the US Navy would have to advance across the Pacific from Hawaii, taking Japanese islands and building fleet bases as it advanced. (Indeed Marine officers during the inter-war period trained on the "Guam Problem" which concerned them having to make an opposed landing to liberate a Japanese occupied Guam.)

All the US has in TL 191 is just Midway island and the Sandwich Islands. That's it, and there's no mention whatsoever of any kind of war games or planning in the novels over war games to power projection across the Pacific which is very notable since we have Sam Carsten as a PoV character. (whom I might add before the Pacific war mentioned that the US has no ability to attack Japan in any meaningful way and vice versa).

The novels don't show any US war plans. And are you seriously trying to argue that the US in TL-191 wouldn't have any war plans/conduct war games for a confrontation with Japan?

And I'll need a citation as to where in the novels Sam Carsten said the US had no ability to attack the Japanese in a meaningful way. My (admittedly cursory) glance at the book shows the exact opposite.

"If we go at the J*** full bore, instead of doing a half-assed job of it the way we did last time, we'll lick 'em," Sam said."
-The Victorious Opposition, Chapter 17

Thus far from saying the US has no way to strike at Japan, Sam is insisting the US could defeat Japan if it made a serious effort at doing so.

Besides that US Department of Defense faced significant budget cuts under Sinclair and Blackford and it's a pretty big plot point which is even blamed for the US's unpreparedness for the Second Great War.

The US Navy is still portrayed as pretty big even under the Socialists though. In particular there's a reference in The Center Cannot Hold that the Navy has four aircraft carriers.

"Now as Sam returned to the Remembrance, she still looked strange. He shook his head as the boat neared the carrier. No, that wasn't right. She looked strange all over again, but for different reasons this time. By now, the Navy had three aeroplane carriers that had been built for the purpose from the keel up."
-The Center Cannot Hold, Chapter 8

That chapter is set in late 1927/early 1928. IOTL the US Navy had 3 aircraft carriers in service by late 1927. Thus even with the Socialist budget cuts, the TL-191 US Navy appears to still have been larger in the late 1920s than the OTL US Navy was at that time.

Furthermore, the size of the US Navy at the start of any war with Japan is somewhat irrelevant anyway, because if the US is serious about fighting the war then it will build up its navy over the course of the conflict. (Just as the US did IOTL in World War 2.) It will take several years to build new carriers and dreadnoughts of course, but if the US is committed to defeating Japan then the war is going to take several years anyway. (Building the necessary fleet bases to sustain an offensive across the Pacific is going to take considerable time.) Thus it doesn't really matter how big the US Navy is at the start of the conflict. What matters is how many warships the US starts building once the conflict starts and if the president can sustain support for the war long enough for those ships to come into service.

They launched a successful air raid in the early 1930s against Los Angeles, OTL the attack of Pearl Harbor was the end of their logistics train,

Militarily though that air raid was insignificant. (Indeed it's mentioned in the books that at the same time the Japanese launched that attack they also launched a failed air attack on the Sandwich Islands, so the Los Angeles raid might have even been a net loss to the Japanese war effort as the two carriers used to strike Los Angeles would probably have been much more useful participating in the attack on the Sandwich Islands.)

"After hitting Los Angelese, Japanese bombing aeroplanes had attacked the Sandwich Islands from carriers, but they were spotted on the way in, did little damage, and took losses from US fighters based near Pearl Harbor."
-The Center Cannot Hold, Chapter 16

That the Japanese are using two of their carriers for a glorified publicity stunt rather than having them support an attack on the US Navy's main Pacific base does not make the Japanese high command seem particularly competent.

They took midway and slapped the entente around. (albeit admittedly while they were in a bad position).

And abandoned Midway after taking it. Seizing territory only to then abandon it for no discernable reason does not suggest a coherent war effort.

They also made zero attempts on the Sandwich Islands as far as we're aware, which kind of makes sense from the perspective that they're more concerned with China (and later Malaya, Russia, Australia and New Zealand)

Which raises the question why go to war with the United States if you don't intend to neutralize their main fleet base in your ocean? Japan didn't seem to have any sort of strategy or even war goals in either the Pacific War or the Second Great War in the novels which calls into question the idea that they are more capable and competent than Japan was IOTL.

 

[YusaEmi]

"If we go at the J*** full bore, instead of doing a half-assed job of it the way we did last time, we'll lick 'em," Sam said."
-The Victorious Opposition, Chapter 17

This is post Pacific War and that's a personal opinion of his which as a navy man you can't fully take at full face value since he as a navy man has pride which will affects his judgment. (Note I am not saying he is wrong, I am saying that due to his personal bias as a navy man he will end up overestimating his sides own ability while underestimating his opponents abilities, it's a normal thing among service members.)

The novels don't show any US war plans. And are you seriously trying to argue that the US in TL-191 wouldn't have any war plans/conduct war games for a confrontation with Japan?

They shut down the barrel works and delayed barrel development by several years. It's pretty safe to assume any naval war plans and war games would also had been severely cut back in the lead up to the Pacific War.

Furthermore, the size of the US Navy at the start of any war with Japan is somewhat irrelevant anyway, because if the US is serious about fighting the war then it will build up its navy over the course of the conflict. (Just as the US did IOTL in World War 2.) It will take several years to build new carriers and dreadnoughts of course, but if the US is committed to defeating Japan then the war is going to take several years anyway. (Building the necessary fleet bases to sustain an offensive across the Pacific is going to take considerable time.) Thus it doesn't really matter how big the US Navy is at the start of the conflict. What matters is how many warships the US starts building once the conflict starts and if the president can sustain support for the war long enough for those ships to come into service.

They're in the middle of a great depression, and they would still be reeling back out from budget cuts. This while the political willpower and public enthusiasm for the war just isn't there for a prolong conflict.

That the Japanese are using two of their carriers for a glorified publicity stunt rather than having them support an attack on the US Navy's main Pacific base does not make the Japanese high command seem particularly competent

Would you say the same about the otl Doolittle raid? The point I was also establishing by mentioning the LA raid was that the Japanese were capable of launching naval raids on the west coast as early as 1932. Something they never were capable of, even in 1941 otl Hawaii was the end of their logistics train.

 

[bguy]

They shut down the barrel works and delayed barrel development by several years. It's pretty safe to assume any naval war plans and war games would also had been severely cut back in the lead up to the Pacific War.

And again the canonical evidence is that the US built 3 new aircraft carriers during the Sinclair Administration. Do you seriously believe the US quadrupled its number of aircraft carriers and didn't give any thought to how they would employ them in a war? (It's not like a war with Japan is unthinkable during this time period after all. Japan fought against the US in the First Great War and acted in an aggressive, imperialistic manner throughout the 1920s with it annexing both French Indochina and the Dutch East Indies, so the US would certainly be aware that they might come into conflict with Japan in the Pacific.)

They're in the middle of a great depression, and they would still be reeling back out from budget cuts.

Nothing about a great depression prevents defense spending. IOTL Franklin Roosevelt's first New Deal budget included 238 million dollars for new naval construction including two aircraft carriers (the Yorktown and the Enterprise, both of which were built in the mid-1930s.)

Virginia New Deal Navy Ships - Photo #1 - USS Yorktown (CV-5)

kermitproject.org

And indeed that would be even more true in TL-191, since defense spending would probably be one of the few things on which President Blackford could get the Democratic controlled Congress that came into power after the 1930 midterms to agree to spend money. (Naval construction = jobs for the unemployed.)

This while the political willpower and public enthusiasm for the war just isn't there for a prolong conflict.

It wouldn't be hard to obtain the public enthusiasm for a war with Japan which is obviously a threat in TL-191. Japan ITTL fought the US in the First Great War (where it was the only one of the Entente powers that wasn't defeated), it's since gone on an empire building spree (seizing both Indochina and the East Indies), it's been caught red handed smuggling weapons into US occupied Canada, and it attacked an American aircraft carrier, killing US sailors on the high seas.

(Nor has it traditionally been difficult to fire the American public up for a war. IOTL look at how quickly the US went from reelecting Wilson on a platform of keeping the US out of war, to being so gung-ho for the war that they renamed German measles to "Liberty measles.") Getting the US public riled up to fight Japan would be a trivial task for any president in TL-191.

Would you say the same about the otl Doolittle raid?

Of course! Not to take away anyway from the remarkable courage and skill of the service members that conducted the raid, but from a strategic standpoint the Doolittle raid was a reckless, colossal misallocation of resources. It violated basic Mahanic principles (never split the fleet), and the two carriers that were used in the raid would have been infinitely more valuable to the war effort if they had been part of the fleet at Coral Sea (where they might have turned a tactical draw into a decisive American victory.)

The point I was also establishing by mentioning the LA raid was that the Japanese were capable of launching naval raids on the west coast as early as 1932. Something they never were capable of, even in 1941 otl Hawaii was the end of their logistics train.

Was it Japan was not capable of doing that or was it that Japanese admirals realized that sending two carriers on a joyride to launch a nuisance air raid on the US west coast would be idiotic and thus they never considered doing it? (The US in 1942 IOTL had such crushing industrial superiority over Japan and a truly massive number of Essex class carriers coming down the pipes that it could afford to risk two carriers on what was little more than a publicity stunt. Japan having no where near the US's industrial muscle and shipbuilding potential could not afford to be so cavalier with its carriers.)

(Also even if I accept your premise that Japan in TL-191 is more capable and competent than their OTL counterparts, that is an argument for the US taking them more seriously as a threat not less.)