Longest possible Pacific War

1946-47 if the US chooses to invade instead of dropping the bomb.

Lets assume no A Bombs. lets assume the European war went 3 months longer(almost ASB in itself-although with some sensible defensive preparation the Nazis could have made it last maybe 3 weeks or so more).

1947 is a fantasy. Starvation well before then. They lasted until August 1945 OTL. It was widely known that not just hunger, but starvation itself was only 2-3 months away at the current rate of progress. Lets say November. With Okinawa fallen, the heavy bombers would have nothing now to focus on except the home islands. British and Soviet forces could and would have joined in. Submarines and aerial mining. More city firebombing and more homelessness. OK so food stocks run out November. Taking into account the stoicism that was shown by the average Japanese soldier and transfer this to a civilian population that was already fatalistic as to their ultimate fate. That makes it Jan-Feb 1946. It pretty much can't last past that. Worse still, by that stage(in fact probably by November-December), they will have lost their ability to hurt the allies, even via suicide tactics.
 
OLYMPIC probably would have been the final battle. Even the Japanese after the war said that they were staking everything: all of their remaining fuel stocks, most of their ammunition reserves, such naval forces-mainly suicide craft as were available, and most of their remaining air assets, that very little would have been left materiel wise for the defense of the Kanto Plain (Operation CORONET set for 1 March 1946). If OLYMPIC is the final campaign, the war ends in January or February, 1946.
 

TFSmith121

Banned
If food runs out in November...

Lets assume no A Bombs. lets assume the European war went 3 months longer(almost ASB in itself-although with some sensible defensive preparation the Nazis could have made it last maybe 3 weeks or so more).

1947 is a fantasy. Starvation well before then. They lasted until August 1945 OTL. It was widely known that not just hunger, but starvation itself was only 2-3 months away at the current rate of progress. Lets say November. With Okinawa fallen, the heavy bombers would have nothing now to focus on except the home islands. British and Soviet forces could and would have joined in. Submarines and aerial mining. More city firebombing and more homelessness. OK so food stocks run out November. Taking into account the stoicism that was shown by the average Japanese soldier and transfer this to a civilian population that was already fatalistic as to their ultimate fate. That makes it Jan-Feb 1946. It pretty much can't last past that. Worse still, by that stage(in fact probably by November-December), they will have lost their ability to hurt the allies, even via suicide tactics.

If food runs out in November, 1945, who's left to surrender in February, 1946?

Best,
 
If food runs out in November, 1945, who's left to surrender in February, 1946?

Best,

Food will not run out, sufficient food to keep all people nourished at even an acceptable level will run out. Some will then start to die of starvation within a month or so. Others will do better. This situation was slso faced by many Japanese ww2 garrisons.
 
OLYMPIC probably would have been the final battle. Even the Japanese after the war said that they were staking everything: all of their remaining fuel stocks, most of their ammunition reserves, such naval forces-mainly suicide craft as were available, and most of their remaining air assets, that very little would have been left materiel wise for the defense of the Kanto Plain (Operation CORONET set for 1 March 1946). If OLYMPIC is the final campaign, the war ends in January or February, 1946.

I'd agree with that. Suppose the atom bomb test at Trinity had failed, leading to months of rework. Japan could have held out through stubbornness alone despite starvation hitting many parts of the country. Even after the atomic bombs in OTL there was sufficient opposition to surrender for it to take the unprecedented intervention of the emperor to swing it. Without such a shocking development, the Japanese may well have suffered the boiling frog fate, with each day or week getting worse but no prompt sufficiently big to think the unthinkable - until OLYMPIC succeeds.

IIRC, the Japanese thinking was not so much that there was a chance of winning (was there *ever* a chance of winning in a battlefield sense?!) but that they could inflict sufficient losses on the American army that they would call off the war. Deluded but in desperate situations, people often grasp at whatever straws are available. With all the armed forces utterly defeated - which they would have been - and with starvation all round, it's going to end in winter 1945/6; perhaps February at the very outside. Okinawa took three months but by the end, Japanese soldiers were surrendering in sizable numbers. The incentive to defend the home island might have been even stronger but the outcome would have been the same.
 
I think there are quite a number of events that need to happen in order for the Pacific war to be substantially prolonged:

1. No A-Bomb. Either Roosevelt decides not to fund the project in the first place or, better yet, he does but development is seriously delayed and numerous setbacks occur

2. Germany&Italy need to do much, much better -
a - (at least) Sicilly has to be held long-term, keeping the Med closed to allied shipping;
b - Allied ground, naval and air assets need to be kept focused on the European theater for as long as possible;
c - the Soviet Union needs to not be in a position to invade Manchuria any time soon

3. - some sort of semi-victory has to be achieved by Japan over China as early as possible

4. the IJN needs to do much, much better in '42 and the USN much, much worse (Pearl; Coral Sea; Midway; Solomons) - e.g. sinks all US carriers whilst loosing few if any of their own

following this...
5. the IJN needs to force a big battle somewhere in '43, before the US advantage in quantity and quality grows too big as the new ships, planes and pilots come online. Sure, they don't have any chance to achieve the same levels of succes as in the year before, but even 1:1 losses would set the US back considerably

following this...
6. the USN has to opt for only the southern Pacific strategy in '44. The longer US marines are stuck clearing jungles in the middle of nowhere, the longer Japanese cities are spared B-29 bombing raids.

Eventually though, US industrial might WILL take its toll - but if things are dealyed early on, they could really add another year to the fighting.
 
What if there was a de-facto peace or al least a lull in fighting for a year, may be longer right about the time Midway would happen in otl. My scenario: Japan's plan has always been to launch a 6 month conquering spree, then sue for peace while in a strong position. Imagine Japan offering a peace deal with the USA and UK: Return of the Philippines all former UK territories if Japan gets to hold onto Dutch Indonesia and French Indochina. In OTL both the US and UK would never have settled for anything less than an unconditional surrender of course, but just imagine a more war-weary nation might get swayed, or just the existence of such an offer would cause a rift between the UK and its Dutch and French governments in exile... May be the US considers it worthwhile to keep Japan at the bargaining table while at home they build up their war fleet. (of course, Japan will do the same). So you might have a one year building phase with no real fighting and afterwards an even bigger and longer drawn-out conflict that might well go o until 1947...
 
You could probably delay introduction of the B-29 awhile, as well as slow down the Bomb program.

English not getting killed would slow down the fix of the MkXIV's problems (which has a small impact on the outcome, maybe a couple of months).

To achieve this, you really need to have Japan be a lot smarter or the U.S. to be pretty stupid.:rolleyes: (Like, IDK, have the Tambor class rejected in favor of Mackerel, or something.)
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Summer 1946, much more likely Spring. This assumes no Bomb, no invasion, and no Soviet entry.

Full sea and air blockade, ongoing bombing (keep in mind that the 8th AF was scheduled to begin full operations with B-29s in September, flying from Okinawa, something that would bring Northern Honshu, Hokkaido and Korea into range), continuing the extremely successful air deployed mining campaign, fighter sweeps, and regular bombardment by surface ships.

No food reaches the urban areas from the countryside, no sea food come in from trawlers, no supplies from outside at all. Pretty soon there are no towns with a population over 30,000 or so that haven't been burned to the ground, no fishing vessels larger than sampans, and no fuel of any kind.

By summer of 1946 Japan is reduced to cannibalism. War's over.
 
Summer 1946, much more likely Spring. This assumes no Bomb, no invasion, and no Soviet entry.

Full sea and air blockade, ongoing bombing (keep in mind that the 8th AF was scheduled to begin full operations with B-29s in September, flying from Okinawa, something that would bring Northern Honshu, Hokkaido and Korea into range), continuing the extremely successful air deployed mining campaign, fighter sweeps, and regular bombardment by surface ships.

No food reaches the urban areas from the countryside, no sea food come in from trawlers, no supplies from outside at all. Pretty soon there are no towns with a population over 30,000 or so that haven't been burned to the ground, no fishing vessels larger than sampans, and no fuel of any kind.

By summer of 1946 Japan is reduced to cannibalism. War's over.

Sounds like The Red's Decisive Darkness TL, except without the nukings, Soviet invasion of Hokkaido, U.S. landings at Kyushu and Kanto, gas attacks and bio-warfare.
 

CalBear

Moderator
Donor
Monthly Donor
Sounds like The Red's Decisive Darkness TL, except without the nukings, Soviet invasion of Hokkaido, U.S. landings at Kyushu and Kanto, gas attacks and bio-warfare.

Honestly the scenario that Red uses is better than the lowest U.S. cost option, which was just starve and burn the Japanese Empire to its knees. U.S. KIA losses would have been low, probably under 3,000, certainly not more than 10,000, excluding PoWs who would have died before liberation but including losses from operational accidents.

Empire losses would be at least 10% perhaps as much as 25% of the population of the Home Islands either dead or permanently disabled to some degree from fire, traumatic amputation, concussive effect, bullet/splinter wounds, and malnutrition.
 
And various infectious diseases.
Empire losses would be at least 10% perhaps as much as 25% of the population of the Home Islands either dead or permanently disabled to some degree from fire, traumatic amputation, concussive effect, bullet/splinter wounds, and malnutrition.
 
fuel

no matter what, the Japanese run out of tankers and the means to move oil long before the Spring of 1946. Between Submarines and the mine campaign, maritime transportation has been eliminated which leaves only what fuel stocks are reserved for the Kamikazes and special units of the Navy that remain.

Mass starvation and the critical shortages of coal has already been touched on.

Japan is in effect collapsed as an industrial power even before the OTL surrender, even without nuclear strikes, because of the lack of raw materials and massive destruction in its major cities, while American fighter bombers, both land and carrier based, are systematically wrecking the Japanese rail network.

I don't see the people forcing a surrender, because history shows us that starvation does not bring riots in a modern police state. It instead brings mass death with examples like the Ukraine in the 1920s and 30s, much of Europe under the Nazis, North Korea are various intervals, the Soviets in World War II.

The death toll would be fearsome, far more than the nuclear strikes and for that matter the likely conventional fighting an invasion would have brought.

The only way I see the war against Japan extending further however is if the Emperor dies and central authority collapses. As we know, some Japanese soldiers continued to hide out for decades after the war. IF there is no organized surrender, then a pacification campaign might be required.

That could get lengthy indeed unless the Japanese Army, which does not have a good track record of seeing reality, chooses to surrender.
 
Japanese forces in Manchuria/China(Kwantung Army) launch an invasion of Siberia, somehow route Soviet forces, drive West putting pressure on Stalin to divert forces from fighting the Germans, fighting a two front war. Japan secures the oil of Russia, which is knocked out of the war, forcing more American resources to the European theater.

:cool:
 
What chain of events would be necessary for a longer Pacific War? US loss at Midway, really bad Allied strategy? Is it possible for the war to drag into 1947?*

*For that I think it would need more of a strategic set back in 1944 followed by a very long pacification campaign inside Japan proper.

A PoD of Panay Incident goes worse would lead to a much longer Pacific War than the Pacific Theatre of WWII.

The US didn't have the reach to hit Japan at that point, and wouldn't have been able to build it fast. Nor would Japan have been able to do much with the US.

The war might well have a long Phony War, low intensity phase, but from start to finish it would be a lot longer than 3 1/2 years.
 
Top