Japan 1st in WW2 for the US

  • Thread starter Deleted member 1487
  • Start date

Deleted member 1487

Despite the nearly ASB levels of handwavery necessary to make it happen, what would a Japan 1st strategy for the US look like in the Pacific and Europe? I imagine that in 1942-43 the big difference in Europe would be no Operation Torch and invasion of Sicily, while in the Pacific I'm much more fuzzy on what would/could be sped up. Perhaps Guadalcanal is speed up and island hopping move ahead by 6-12 months? In Europe in 1943 the US then would 'just' stick to strategic bombing, perhaps to a lesser degree than IOTL, while Italy doesn't get knocked out of the war. Would Russia freak out and seriously consider a separate peace to pressure the US or would they suck it up and soldier on? How does Japan react to being on the receiving end of ~80% of US attention?
 
Unlike the German High Command and General Staff, the US Chief of Staff actually understood strategy and were competent at means-ends analysis and planning. This is what led to the adoption of the Germany First strategy. Asking "what if the US Chiefs of Staff did not conduct the strategic assessment that led them to adopt the Germany First strategy?" leads to the answer "then they wouldn't be the US Chiefs of Staff."

In any case without any Sicily, Kursk is a bigger disaster for the Germans as Hitler doesn't call back Manstein or the Panzer Corps, therefore leaving the Germans with no reserve to blunt the Soviet counter-offensive and buy the precious days 4th Panzer Army needed to avoid encirclement. 6th Panzer is then either annihilated in place or cut to pieces trying to withdraw. With a victory that big, the Soviets will be in Berlin probably a few months ahead of OTL. The Soviets will still be getting OTL levels of lend-lease "Somewhat less" strategic bombing isn't going to make a substantial alteration to the unfolding of events on the Eastern Front.
 
Last edited:
Russia and Germany lose a lot more men, Japan gets starved for supplies all the sooner.

Now if somehow Europe was at peace and there was an Alt Pacific War between Japan and the US, it could prove a lot bloodier for both sides.
 
Japan First means somehow starting the massive naval construction program of 1941-43 at least a year earlier. Not just the Essex class carriers but all the specialized ships of the fleet train that constituted the mobile forward base, the naval construction battalions trained & equipped at least a year earlier, a larger amphibious fleet than existed in late 1942 (blue water ships not small landing craft).

Essentially the US would have to do a critical portion of its industrial mobilization a full year or more earlier. While Admiral Starks 'Plan Dog' Memorandum recommended Germany First on the basis of that nation as the greater threat, it also was based on the fact that the naval strength to carry the war to Japan would not be ready until late 1943.

Simply diverting 'resources' from the ETO to the PTO would not do the trick. Even if every USN aircraft carrier had survived 1942 it would not have done the trick. The sort of speciallized logistics and engineering capacity that built the massive naval bases such as at Ulithi, or the mobile fleet train, did not exist in 1942, & were just starting to become operational in late 1943.
 
Top