Japanese-American war of 1905

They decide to focus south instead of north. I don't know why they do it, it's WI. You tell me why they do what they do, or just accept something pointless occured.
 
They decide to focus south instead of north. I don't know why they do it, it's WI. You tell me why they do what they do, or just accept something pointless occured.

I might be able to help you out with a motive.

First POD

President William Taft 1905

I would suggest not having Teddy Roosevelt in the Whitehouse, as he was quite realistic with Japan by signing the Taft-Katsura Agreement of 1905. So lets make the first POD William Howard Taft entering the Whitehouse pre 1905. His and Secretary of State Knox's “Dollar Diplomacy” and fear of Japanese Expansionism are a good way to get the Japanese Government angry. Them been nearly racist over stopping Japanese Migration to the United States could be a potential power keg for war.

The US has interests in Manchuria, racial issues, Japanese policy in China, and a possible Japanese threat to the Philippines. These are the motivations for a Japanese – American war. However its still important to point out that Taft could be as racist about migration and paranoid as he wished as long as Russia remains in East Asia there is no hope of a US-Japanese war. So we need a second POD.

Second POD

Pre 1905 Russia-Japanese Treaty

Lets have the Japanese and Russian Governments signing a treaty recognising each other’s spear of influences in Asia. Japan would be happy with Korea and South Manchuria and if Russia is still in Revolution I don’t think they would be eager for war. I will point out however a Russia undefeated in 1905 will be a massive worry for Britain with fear of Russian eyes on India. That fear could involve a British siding in the Japanese-American conflict of 1905 if Japan starts losing.

This frees up Japans attention from Asia. Now America’s ignorant attitude to Japan might start hitting some notes, within the Leadership. I think unfortunately this war would be fought on Racism not on a real threat. It would have to be a US instigation to war. So if you can find that incident then you have your war.

About who would win, I would rather leave that to the people who have detailed knowledge of both Fleets and commanders to speculate. I will be reading with interest.

Good luck.
 

The Sandman

Banned
If the British come on the side of Japan (which they might, given that they have an existing defensive pact with the Japanese and the US would be the aggressors in this war), then the US is boned. You know how, in every non-WWII anime where a US fleet shows up, it sinks? That would pretty much be what happens here, as the Royal Navy sets to its job with a will. Also, since the Panama Canal isn't open yet, you can rule out any possibility of reinforcing the American Pacific Fleet in time for it to matter.

The Philippines could be interesting, though; I don't recall what the US Army presence was like at the time, but I would expect with a Taft Presidency that the Filipino Insurgency might still be active. That would be a complicating factor when the Japanese inevitably attempt to invade.

Also, someone, either the Japanese or the British, would make a play for Hawaii. It's too good of a position, and it isn't yet the heavily fortified nightmare that it would have been in WWII.
 
I think you should look at the Anglo-Japanese Pact. I believe that there was a clause that the British would remain neutral in the event of a war between the United States and Japan. Their main worry is Canada.
 
I almost want to say Japan would win this war. In 1905 the thoughts of all or nothing conflict are not really set in, neither is total war. So you'd have Japan who if the actions agaisnt Russia are a sign is a very effective military, against the United States which has a good military as well, but had difficulty against Spain.

So would you think America would give up the Philipines? Or would TR fight until Japan asked for peace terms?
 
I think you should look at the Anglo-Japanese Pact. I believe that there was a clause that the British would remain neutral in the event of a war between the United States and Japan. Their main worry is Canada.

David

On a technical point I think that was installed in the 2nd version of the alliance, circa 1911. Or more accurately Britain insisted that the treaty would not apply in relation to a 3rd power with which either signatory had a treaty of arbitration. This the Japanese signed, with some resentment as it was obviously aimed to give Britain an out if the US attacked Japan and post 1905 that was Japan's main concern. However the US then negated all this by rejecting the arbitration treaty that Britain proposed.

Can't remember the exact details as too long side I read up on it but the 1st version of the alliance, in effect at this time, had definitions limiting it to I think basically eastern Asia and fairly clearly aimed at Russia so it might not have applied in the event of a US attack on Japan.

In such a circumstance Britain would be in a difficult political situation. Desert an ally which has been attacked, with all the implications that poses, especially when Britain is trying to move out of “splendid isolationism”? Or fight one of our major trading partners and expose our Canadian ally to probably attack? Possibly the best bet might be "an all measures short of war type of policy". Supplying Japan with funding and economic supplies. Insist on protection of neutral [especially British] shipping by which supplies can be provided. Diplomatic support. Also if the RN reinforces Bermuda and Jamaica the US could find it difficult moving much of the Atlantic fleet in the event of a long war. Still a very difficult position for all concerned.

Steve
 
Japan cannot attack USA just after ending war with Russia - because of being pretty much bankrupt...
 
If I have my dates in the right order, Jackie Fischer is just becoming the first sea lord at the time. So the Royal navy is going to be going through a shift from concentration in foreign stations to home waters and a massive scrapping program of obsolescent ships. Just wanted to add that for consideration.
 
I might be able to help you out with a motive.

First POD

President William Taft 1905

I would suggest not having Teddy Roosevelt in the Whitehouse, as he was quite realistic with Japan by signing the Taft-Katsura Agreement of 1905. So lets make the first POD William Howard Taft entering the Whitehouse pre 1905. His and Secretary of State Knox's “Dollar Diplomacy” and fear of Japanese Expansionism are a good way to get the Japanese Government angry. Them been nearly racist over stopping Japanese Migration to the United States could be a potential power keg for war.


Significant problem there: Taft was TR's protege. With his judicial temperament, there was no chance he would have run for president on his own without TR providing both encouragement and endorsement. That's assuming that he MIGHT have been the '04 GOP nominee, which is unlikely: that would mean in turn that either McKinley served his second full term and was not assassinated, or that McKinley's VP was not interested in serving a term in his own right upon succession. In the former case, that means two Ohioans in a row getting the GOP nomination (which smacks of Reconstruction days, and the mediocrities from Ohio that the GOP nominated in the 1870s and 1880s); in the latter case, it's hard to imagine who might have been McKinley's running mate, particularly given the machinations of Mark Hanna et. al. in an attempt to sidetrack TR once and for all.

Add to that Japan's ongoing involvement in a war with Russia starting in 1904 and you're edging into ASB territory to have Japan fighting another major power.
 
If I have my dates in the right order, Jackie Fischer is just becoming the first sea lord at the time. So the Royal navy is going to be going through a shift from concentration in foreign stations to home waters and a massive scrapping program of obsolescent ships. Just wanted to add that for consideration.

That is true. I do not think that Fisher would be looking for a war with the United States as I think at this time he viewed Germany as the biggest threat. One also has to take into account which country will Britain want more as an ally, Japan or the United States.
 
Significant problem there: Taft was TR's protege. With his judicial temperament, there was no chance he would have run for president on his own without TR providing both encouragement and endorsement. That's assuming that he MIGHT have been the '04 GOP nominee, which is unlikely: that would mean in turn that either McKinley served his second full term and was not assassinated, or that McKinley's VP was not interested in serving a term in his own right upon succession. In the former case, that means two Ohioans in a row getting the GOP nomination (which smacks of Reconstruction days, and the mediocrities from Ohio that the GOP nominated in the 1870s and 1880s); in the latter case, it's hard to imagine who might have been McKinley's running mate, particularly given the machinations of Mark Hanna et. al. in an attempt to sidetrack TR once and for all.

Add to that Japan's ongoing involvement in a war with Russia starting in 1904 and you're edging into ASB territory to have Japan fighting another major power.


I am the first to admit I am not an expert on early 20th century US politics so lets get that out of the way first.

TR as President makes this ASB. I only picked Taft because in his time in the White House when he really started to get at the Japanese with his actions. TR respected the Japanese and recognised their control over Korea. You would have to change him to make war in 1905.

To answer your point on Japan if you look at the other part of my post you quoted from Earlier. There would be no Russo-Japanese War in this timeline. That was the idea. INSTEAD of attacking Russia Japan attacks the US. Not doing both.
 
Top