Don't stop the chat on the Philippines campaign, I'm enjoying it, but I need to move on, I've a war coming up soon!
My understanding is that the 2 tank battalions first saw their new M3s as they reached the port they were shipping out from.I remember reading at the American Car & Foundry historical site, that the M3 also had rusting issues. This was addressed in subsequent manufacture alts. I don't know if this came about from the ocean transport or exposure to brackish coastal wetlands.
I remember that one of the NG units sent to the PI pre-war had operated with the M2A2, before the introduction of M3's. There is a photo of the NG unit operating their M2A2 with 3rd Army in the 1941 Summer(?) maneuvers. "Here's your new kit. It's called a tank. We have an agreement with our arms suppliers, like the Navy has with their torpedoes, about not firing any ordnance before war breaks out. It's all good. The manufacturer says so. "
You are right that Churchill is politically vulnerable, but the principle difference is that he is vulnerable to members of Parliament, not to any general who can raise the money to campaign against him. And unless he loses a vote of no confidence, he is secure in his position, and unlike the American President, gets to choose when he calls for an election. Note as he wasn’t for a long time the Leader of his Party, I am not sure that there was any way other than losing a confidence vote, or becoming medically incapacitated, for Churchill to be removed from power. While in theory the King, could have asked him to stand down, or offered the position to another, I can think of no way that this would happen.Thank you Ramp Rat, you've given me a lot to mull over here.
There is a lot that can be debated about the advantages and disadvantages of the "Continental Regiment System" and the British equivalent, the Brigade. Personally i think the British system is better, but being British, it's probably to be expected that I would hold that view.
You may be right about FDR having to worry about successful generals , but I don't believe he was politically more vulnerable than Churchill, indeed the British Political system made any British Prime Minister accountable to its members of Parliment. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norway_Debate#:~:text=At 23:00, the Speaker,speech, a vote of censure. to see how Chamberlain fell from office, and also note, that after the lost of Tobruk in June 1942, Churchill faced a vote of no confidence, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_capture_of_Tobruk
Prime ministers are often more vulnerable to the multiplicity of factions in their own party than they are to a parliamentary no confidence vote. In essence losing a non confidence vote means that you have already lost your own party and not realised it. Thatcher's downfall was a classic case. Chamberlain tried to hang on until Leo Amery from his own side did for him. party politics is both MPs as well as other influencers, business, court, military etc.You are right that Churchill is politically vulnerable, but the principle difference is that he is vulnerable to members of Parliament, not to any general who can raise the money to campaign against him. And unless he loses a vote of no confidence, he is secure in his position, and unlike the American President, gets to choose when he calls for an election. Note as he wasn’t for a long time the Leader of his Party, I am not sure that there was any way other than losing a confidence vote, or becoming medically incapacitated, for Churchill to be removed from power. While in theory the King, could have asked him to stand down, or offered the position to another, I can think of no way that this would happen.
The Temporary promotions was a hold over from WW1 and the civil war until the 70's thus when a cut back of troops was announced the oldest cadre was retained in their permanent ranks until all slots were filled. Still active in the Army where you are appointed to a position that carries a higher rank, you get to pin on the higher while holding the position (ah all the times I had a Major's slot while a Captain or 1st Lt. in the Marines (just tough shit).and
Hi vl100butch and gallen95, was this some hang over from the US Civil war?
IIRC, factory fresh in shipping containers, on the pier.My understanding is that the 2 tank battalions first saw their new M3s as they reached the port they were shipping out from.
I suspect that the guns were not mounted or the tanks had not been debugged when they were loaded
The AC&F Berwick. PA plant was producing the M series at the rate of one unit every forty (40) minutes or 36 tanks per day. I guess that would meet the definition of "slapping together". Debugging was probably minimal at best.
Hi Merrick, yes I agree, its hard to see how the Japanese could turn away from war after this, especially after setting the conditions for any peace with China. Thank you to everyone who liked post 1,982, The 6th Imperial Conference, but I have to confuse to being very disappointed with my writing, this was simply a stunning storyline, with the Emperor questioning his military advisors, berating them even, speaking publicly, something he never did! and I failed to do it justice. But hopefully you got the idea, and as always the ship sails on.And so the boulder rolls on down the hill, picking up momentum as it goes, in a manner grimly reminiscent of the July Crisis of 1914. They know what they're planning is at best reckless and at worst hopeless, they don't have a real answer to the Emperor's question about picking a fight with a stronger and more distant enemy when they can't even win their current war in China, but this is the only plan they can find that lets them hope for a win so this is the plan they're going to go with.
And no-one is seriously going to try and stop it, because the only alternative to the reckless gamble is the certainty of a humiliating climbdown and a catastrophic loss of face. And no-one, not the generals, not the politicians, not the Emperor, wants to be the one who stands up and suggests that.
Hi Ramp Rat, thank you for this, a very nice summary of the political aspect of my timeline, within the colony, something we speak little of, the focus always on the military. A consequence of these changes, and the harmony they bring is that there is no need now for Duff Cooper to be sent, see https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/alfred-duff-cooper/, for more on him. Historically, Cooper was sent to sort things out, but typical of the British mismanagement of Malaya, not given the powers to do so, although I think Cooper was very much a square peg in a round hole. Once war broke out, he was made Minister Resident, but was withdrawn mid January 1942, much to his relief.Just how much will the numerous small changes in British preparedness effect the eventual Japanese invasion of Malaya. Let us start with what is probably the least costly, but in all probability the most significant and effective change that has taken place. And the one that will have a major effect on any invasion, and do more to defeat it than any other. This is the change in the administrative process, with the Governor General, now having a regular, every Monday morning minuted meeting with first his inner war council, followed by a similar recorded and minuted meeting with his general council. I am of the opinion that this action will have the greatest impact for minimum cost, on future events, and will be the precursor to all the subsequent changes that take place. The modernisation of the administration, has made the colonies Malaya and Singapore both more defensible, resilient and equipped to cope with the invasion.
An error here don't you mean Robert MenziesIn 1941 Gordon Menzies, the Australian Prime Minister traveled to the UK to take part in an Imperial Defence Conference. While there, he was courted by Churchill opponents who made him believe he had a chance to depose Churchill and become the English Prime Minister. Of course, it played to his ambitions, he'd once charactised himself as, "British to his bootstraps", to the Australian Parliament. Menzies toyed with the idea for a few months before returning to Australia only to discover his party had disentegrated in his absence and he subsequently lost a vote of no- confidence there. John Curtin replaced him after an election was called. What about an Australian becoming an English minister?
Did the Emperor ever say such a thing to any of his military chiefs that they were lying to him? That would constitute a direct insult almost unpardonable in Japanese society. The loss of face for General Sugiyama would be so great he'd have to resign for losing the confidence of the emperor.1941, Saturday 06 September;
General Sugiyama assured him, they were good, but the Emperor, completely angered by this, turned on Sugiyama, “at the time of the China Incident, the Army told me that we could achieve peace immediately after dealing them one blow with three divisions, but you still can’t beat Chiang Kai-shek even today! Sugiyama, you were Army Minister at that time”. Taken aback, Sugiyama had replied “China is a vast area with many ways in and many ways out, and we met unexpectedly big difficulties”. His face turning red, the Emperor raised his voice at the General, “You say the interior of China is huge; isn’t the Pacific Ocean even bigger than China? Didn’t I caution you each time about those matters? Sugiyama, are you lying to me?
Possibly Smuts, or is that too much of a stretch?Not having the required knowledge of the people involved, I will refrain from suggesting someone to assume the position and responsibility of Minister Resident. I will however make two points, the first is that other than a woman being appointed to this position, which at this time would be unthinkable. The appointment of a man from any off the British Dominions, or even a British Nationalised subject, born outside the Empire, wouldn’t be unusual. The second point is that while I have no idea on who to appoint to this position, I do know one man that I wouldn’t want to see given the job, Sir Stafford Cripps, thankfully his well known health problems mean that he would be unwilling to accept the position.