What if Hitler didnt become allies with Japan?

That is, the alliance prompted a declaration of war against the United States that otherwise, either wouldn't have happened, or would have been at least slightly delayed?


The Tripartite Alliance had nothing to do with the US and, once Japan kicks things off in the Pacific, Germany has to declare war on the the US as soon as possible. Why? Let me explain...

Britain is the elephant in room everyone always manages to forget in these repetitive threads. Japan's attacks in the Pacific meant the US and Britain were now de jure allies instead of merely de facto ones. When Britain and the US find themselves at war with Japan, the US is going to ship supplies to her new ally across the Atlantic and past German U-boats.

Just what do you think those U-boats are going to do? :rolleyes:

We're not talking about stuff Britain as bought and is paying to have shipped anymore. We're not talking about peacetime Lend Lease either. We're talking about supplies sent by one ally to another ally during a war.

Germany is going to sink those ships because, despite what some knuckleheads have actually suggested, there is no way for Germany to differentiate between ore being used to manufacture bombs dropped on Germany from ore being used to manufacture bombs being dropped on Japan. Neither is there any way to differentiate food being consumed by a munitions worker while working on guns used against Germany from food being consumed by a munitions worker while working on guns used against Japan.

There is also no way for Germany to differentiate between a ship full of ammo or avgas or tanks leaving Britain for Egypt or one full of ammo or avgas or tanks leaving Britain for Australia. And Britain isn't paint a huge FOR USE AGAINST JAPAN ONLY sign across that ship's hull either.

Once Germany sinks a US ship carrying US supplies to a US ally in the war against Japan, the US will automatically declare war on Germany. Period. All Hitler's declaration of war on December 10th did was allow Germany to choose when that automatic war would start.

And that's not such an idiotic decision once you finally chose to understand why it was made.

In late 1941 the US had been rearming for little over a year. The pace had been fast and progress had been made, but the US was far from ready for a war as events in the Pacific and off the East Coast would show.

Among other things, by declaring war at the time of her choosing, instead of when US' readiness would further advanced, Germany was able sink over 600 ships during the Second Happy Time while only losing only 22 U-boats.

Once Japan attacked the US and Britain, the US' entry into the war against Germany was only a matter of time. Even absent the Japanese attacks, the US and Germany were on a collision course. Every day that war was put off allowed the US to increase her preparations and decreased Germany's chances of landing a telling blow.
 
The Tripartite Alliance had nothing to do with the US and, once Japan kicks things off in the Pacific, Germany has to declare war on the the US as soon as possible. Why? Let me explain...

Britain is the elephant in room everyone always manages to forget in these repetitive threads. Japan's attacks in the Pacific meant the US and Britain were now de jure allies instead of merely de facto ones. When Britain and the US find themselves at war with Japan, the US is going to ship supplies to her new ally across the Atlantic and past German U-boats.

Just what do you think those U-boats are going to do? :rolleyes:

We're not talking about stuff Britain as bought and is paying to have shipped anymore. We're not talking about peacetime Lend Lease either. We're talking about supplies sent by one ally to another ally during a war.

Germany is going to sink those ships because, despite what some knuckleheads have actually suggested, there is no way for Germany to differentiate between ore being used to manufacture bombs dropped on Germany from ore being used to manufacture bombs being dropped on Japan. Neither is there any way to differentiate food being consumed by a munitions worker while working on guns used against Germany from food being consumed by a munitions worker while working on guns used against Japan.

There is also no way for Germany to differentiate between a ship full of ammo or avgas or tanks leaving Britain for Egypt or one full of ammo or avgas or tanks leaving Britain for Australia. And Britain isn't paint a huge FOR USE AGAINST JAPAN ONLY sign across that ship's hull either.

Once Germany sinks a US ship carrying US supplies to a US ally in the war against Japan, the US will automatically declare war on Germany. Period. All Hitler's declaration of war on December 10th did was allow Germany to choose when that automatic war would start.

And that's not such an idiotic decision once you finally chose to understand why it was made.

In late 1941 the US had been rearming for little over a year. The pace had been fast and progress had been made, but the US was far from ready for a war as events in the Pacific and off the East Coast would show.

Among other things, by declaring war at the time of her choosing, instead of when US' readiness would further advanced, Germany was able sink over 600 ships during the Second Happy Time while only losing only 22 U-boats.

Once Japan attacked the US and Britain, the US' entry into the war against Germany was only a matter of time. Even absent the Japanese attacks, the US and Germany were on a collision course. Every day that war was put off allowed the US to increase her preparations and decreased Germany's chances of landing a telling blow.

The problem with this theory was that the America irst set was active up until December seventh even as the U.S. was already keeping Britain in the war and trading fire with the Germans in the Atlantic. So long as only Japan is formally at war with the Americans, there will necessarily be an effort for the U.S. to fight Japan to a much fuller extent sooner than was true in our timeline.
 
The problem...

The problem is your incomprehension of what I actually wrote and of what a Japanese offensive in the Pacific would actually entail. Let's tackle the second point first.

Japan is going on the offensive in the Pacific in order to grab the DEI and other resource producing regions in southeast Asia. In order to safeguard her LOCs between the Home Islands and the regions she's targeting, Japan must also attack the US forces based in the Philippine islands. That brings the US into the war whether the Pearl Harbor raid occurs or not.

Japan must also target British possessions in Asia like Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore and British protectorates like Brunei for the same reason she needs to attack the Philippines: the lines of communication between the DEI and the Home Islands must be made secure.

Given her strategic goals, any Japanese offensive in the Pacific will embroil that nation in a war with the US and Britain. That's the point I was making and the point you have failed to understand.

Once the US is involved in a war against Japan with Britain as an ally, the US will begin shipping materials to the British islands as part of the war effort against Japan. Germany cannot let those materials through because, as I pointed out, there is no Cosmic Accountant making sure what the US ships to Britain will only be used in the war against Japan.

Germany cannot differentiate between US ships carrying supplies "only" for the war with Japan and there's no actual difference to determine anyway. As I explained, the iron ore, copper, and Spam provided by the US to supply and feed a munition worker won't only be used and eaten when that worker is producing bombs to be dropped on Japan. Germany will have to attack US ships carrying US supplies to a US ally because any supplies will help Britain with her fight with Germany. Sinking US ships carrying US supplies to a US ally will then provide the US with the casus belli FDR has been looking for all along.

So, what's the difference between the US-sourced, British-bound cargoes being sunk by U-boats in the Atlantic on December 6th and the US-sourced, British-bound cargoes being sunk by U-boats in the Atlantic on December 8th? The difference is that on December 6th the US and Britain are not de jure allies in a war against Japan and on December 8th the US and Britain are de jure allies in a war against Japan.

Before December 7th, Britain is either purchasing supplies or leasing them and then arranging to have those supplies transported across the Atlantic. The US is aiding Britain as much as she can while still maintaining some semblance of neutrality. Along with providing or lending materials, RN warships are being overhauled and even constructed in US yards. The US is also "defending" the Western Hemisphere against Axis aggression by aggressively patrolling against Axis submarines and surface raiders. While the US is undoubtedly a de facto ally of Britain, she has not crossed the line to become a legal or de jure ally of Britain in the war.

Germany is playing along with this little game too. As the events of the Second Happy Time showed, she can easily dispatch U-boats to US coastal waters and sink the cargoes being assembled there prior to be being convoyed across the Atlantic. Germany hasn't done that, or taken any other actions, which would provide FDR with a casus belli because Germany doesn't want the US to fully participate in the war. The situation is fine to Germany as long as the US only nibbles around the edges.

So, the US does as much as it can without actually joining the war and Germany pretends not to notice as long as the US doesn't do too much and, apart from a few incidents like the Reuben James, everyone is happy to dance up to the line and dance back again.

Then Japan shits in the punchbowl.

Now, as I seemingly must continually repeat, the US and Britain are de jure allies in a war against Japan. Now the US has every legal right under international law to ship US supplies aboard US ships guarded in US convoys to a US ally in the war against Japan. The entire situation in the Atlantic has been completely changed. US forces aren't going stay in the Western Hemisphere or be content with turning over convoys to the RN/RCN at MOPP. US forces are going to hunt, attack, and sink any submarine they come across that threatens any US LOC with her ally in the war against Japan. And, because U-boats won't have huge fucking signs which proclaim I'M GERMAN, REALLY! SO DON'T SHOOT BECAUSE YOU'RE ONLY FIGHTING JAPAN, OKAY?", German U-boats are going to be sunk by US warships anywhere US warships can find them.

Because German U-boats cannot tell War-Against-Japan supplies apart from War-Against-Germany supplies, they'll sink both. Because US warships cannot tell German submarines apart from Japanese submarines, they'll sink both too. And because both those things are going to happen, a war between Germany and the US cannot be prevented.

Japan's offensive makes a war between the US and Germany automatic. The only question left to answer is when that war will officially begin and Hitler decided to begin that war at a time of his choosing. He could officially start the war immediately while the US was still essentially unprepared or he could wait until later events in the Atlantic officially start the war when the US will be better prepared.

Japan left Germany with no choice about going to war with the US. The only choice left to Germany was when that war would begin.

So long as only Japan is formally at war with the Americans, there will necessarily be an effort for the U.S. to fight Japan to a much fuller extent sooner than was true in our timeline.
Do you even bother to read the many Pacific War threads here? The US cannot even consider fighting Japan to a "fuller extent" until the results the the 1940 Two Ocean Navy Bill begin sliding into the water in 1943.
 
The problem is your incomprehension of what I actually wrote and of what a Japanese offensive in the Pacific would actually entail. Let's tackle the second point first.

Japan is going on the offensive in the Pacific in order to grab the DEI and other resource producing regions in southeast Asia. In order to safeguard her LOCs between the Home Islands and the regions she's targeting, Japan must also attack the US forces based in the Philippine islands. That brings the US into the war whether the Pearl Harbor raid occurs or not.

Japan must also target British possessions in Asia like Hong Kong, Malaysia, and Singapore and British protectorates like Brunei for the same reason she needs to attack the Philippines: the lines of communication between the DEI and the Home Islands must be made secure.

Given her strategic goals, any Japanese offensive in the Pacific will embroil that nation in a war with the US and Britain. That's the point I was making and the point you have failed to understand.

Once the US is involved in a war against Japan with Britain as an ally, the US will begin shipping materials to the British islands as part of the war effort against Japan. Germany cannot let those materials through because, as I pointed out, there is no Cosmic Accountant making sure what the US ships to Britain will only be used in the war against Japan.

Germany cannot differentiate between US ships carrying supplies "only" for the war with Japan and there's no actual difference to determine anyway. As I explained, the iron ore, copper, and Spam provided by the US to supply and feed a munition worker won't only be used and eaten when that worker is producing bombs to be dropped on Japan. Germany will have to attack US ships carrying US supplies to a US ally because any supplies will help Britain her fight with Germany. Sinking US ships carrying US supplies to a US ally will then provide the US with the casus belli FDR has been looking for all along.

So, what's the difference between the US-sourced, British-bound cargoes being sunk by U-boats in the Atlantic on December 6th and the US-sourced, British-bound cargoes being sunk by U-boats in the Atlantic on December 8th? The difference is that on December 6th the US and Britain are not de jure allies in a war against Japan and on December 8th the US and Britain are de jure allies in a war against Japan.

Before December 7th, Britain is either purchasing supplies or leasing them and then arranging to have those supplies transported across the Atlantic. The US is aiding Britain as much as she can while still maintaining some semblance of neutrality. Along with providing or lending materials, RN warships are being overhauled and even constructed in US yards. The US is also "defending" the Western Hemisphere against Axis aggression by aggressively patrolling against Axis submarines and surface raiders. While the US is undoubtedly a de facto ally of Britain, she has not crossed the line to become a legal or de jure ally of Britain in the war.

Germany is playing along with this little game too. As the events of the Second Happy Time showed, she can easily dispatch U-boats to US coastal waters and sink the cargoes being assembled there prior to be being convoyed across the Atlantic. Germany hasn't done that, or taken any other actions, which would provide FDR with a casus belli because Germany doesn't want the US to fully participate in the war. The situation is fine to Germany as long as the US only nibbles around the edges.

So, the US does as much as it can without actually joining the war and Germany pretends not to notice as long as the US doesn't do too much and, apart from a few incidents like the Reuben James, everyone is happy to dance up to the line and dance back again.

Then Japan shits in the punchbowl.

Now, as I seemingly must continually repeat, the US and Britain are de jure allies in a war against Japan. Now the US has every legal right under international law to ship US supplies aboard US ships guarded in US convoys to a US ally in the war against Japan. The entire situation in the Atlantic has been completely changed. US forces aren't going stay in the Western Hemisphere or be content with turning over convoys to the RN/RCN at MOPP. US forces are going to hunt, attack, and sink any submarine they come across that threatens any US LOC with her ally in the war against Japan. And, because U-boats won't have huge fucking signs which proclaim I'M GERMAN, REALLY! SO DON'T SHOOT BECAUSE YOU'RE ONLY FIGHTING JAPAN, OKAY?", German U-boats are going to be sunk by US warships anywhere US warships can find them.

Because German U-boats cannot tell War-Against-Japan supplies apart from War-Against-Germany supplies, they'll sink both. Because US warships cannot tell German submarines apart from Japanese submarines, they'll sink both too. And because both those things are going to happen, a war between Germany and the US cannot be prevented.

Japan's offensive makes a war between the US and Germany automatic. The only question left to answer is when that war will officially begin and Hitler decided to begin that war at a time of his choosing. He could officially start the war immediately while the US was still essentially unprepared or he could wait until later events in the Atlantic officially start the war when the US will be better prepared.

Japan left Germany with no choice about going to war with the US. The only choice left to Germany was when that war would begin.

Do you even bother to read the many Pacific War threads here? The US cannot even consider fighting Japan to a "fuller extent" until the results the the 1940 Two Ocean Navy Bill begin sliding into the water in 1943.

Point taken, but you are acting as if there was no action in the Pacific involving the United States after its assorted islands were occupied. I will grant you that rolling back the Japanese advance required time and materiel, but until the Burma Road closes and flights from India to Chona can no longer be carried out, the U.S. has a fight in the Pacific. You've also taken for granted that the same course of events between 1937 and 1941 in our timeline still happen with respect to relations between the United States and the Empire of Japan.
 
Point taken, but you are acting as if there was no action in the Pacific involving the United States after its assorted islands were occupied.


I am suggesting no such thing. In fact, I'm suggesting the exact opposite.

It's the need for the US to supply it's ally in the Pacific fighting that will trigger events in the Atlantic which will lead to a war between the US and Germany.

I will grant you that rolling back the Japanese advance required time and materiel, but until the Burma Road closes and flights from India to Chona can no longer be carried out, the U.S. has a fight in the Pacific.

Of course the US has a fight in the Pacific. The transfer of the strategic initiative at Midway and the beginning of the attrition at Guadalcanal both occurred in '42. The actual beat down, however, had to wait for 1943 when the shipping started to become available.

You've also taken for granted that the same course of events between 1937 and 1941 in our timeline still happen with respect to relations between the United States and the Empire of Japan.

Seeing as this entire thread makes the same assumption, your quibbles on that point are of no consequence.

By the way, is it really necessary to quote a 16 paragraph post in it's entirety to post a three sentence response?
 
Japan must also attack the US forces based in the Philippine islands. .


Nope, that is where the Japanese where wrong, Roosevelt isn´t Hitler, he can´t just order a war, he must convince congress and the US public.
He couldn´t have brought a declaration of war against Japan if it was only the brits that where attacked, isolationist feeling before 12/7 was just too great and Roosevelt himself wanted a war with Germany. Only reason he sought conflict with Japan was that isolationism would be weakened if the Japanese could be provoked into attacking.
 
Nope, that is where the Japanese where wrong...


Tell you what. Why don't you go back in time and explain that to the Japanese military and government when they began planning their offensives? I'm sure they'd welcome the information.

You see, they were so fucking stupid that, when they looked at the map, they noted that the Philippines sat smack dab in the middle of the lines of communications between the Home Islands and the DEI. Because they knew about the US' hostility towards Japan's goals in Asia, they believed that they had no other choice but to attack and neutralize US bases as part of their "lunge to the south" and been planning on doing just that for decades.

If only someone had set them straight...

... Roosevelt isn´t Hitler...

I never knew that!

... he can´t just order a war, he must convince congress and the US public.

Is that how the US Constitution works? I simply had no idea.

He couldn´t have brought a declaration of war against Japan if it was only the brits that where attacked...

Well, it is most certainly a shame that the Japanese didn't know that!

Only reason he sought conflict with Japan was that isolationism would be weakened if the Japanese could be provoked into attacking.

And the US provoked Japan into starting the war too? Well, you learn something new everyday.

Well folks, now that the Grand High Poobah of the Loony Brigade has arrived, it's time to abandon the thread. See you all elsewhere.
 

Bearcat

Banned
Would there have been an immediate declaration of war? Maybe, maybe not. It would not have been unanimous, but even a lot of Republicans outside America First could see which way the wind was blowing.

And it makes far less difference than you might think.

The USN is already fighting one undeclared war in the Atlantic. One more isn't going to affect FDR politically all that much. Everyone already loves or hates FDR by now, nothing much will change. The US will send 'observers' to interfere with the Japanese SLOC from the DEI. There will be an incident, and the shooting will start.

The Japanese know that leaving a large American sword at their flank is a bad idea. The USN's power will only grow with time as the Two Ocean Fleet ships begin to enter service. Very soon, the Japanese movement of oil from the DEI would be at the mercy of the Americans.

Yamamoto simply cannot allow events to unfold this way. The man is hardly an unmitigated genius, but he has to account for enemy capabilities, not his interpretation of our intentions.

The IJN's choice in the Pacific is stark: go all the way, or don't go at all. In for a penny, in for a pound. Given the Japanese collective delusion that the great American strength of logistics is unimportant, its no wonder they made the choice they did.
 
And the US provoked Japan into starting the war too? Well, you learn something new everyday.

The scrap metal embargo.

The freezing of Japanese assets.

The oil and gasoline embargo.

Nah, the US wasn't provoking Japan.

Also, a nit: Japan didn't need to attack the UK. They needed to attack the DEI, which means war with an ally of the UK. They figured (probably correctly) that the UK would fight if their allies were attacked. That's also why they attacked the US; they figured the US also would intervene when Japan invaded the DEI. Considering the series of escalating US responses to actions in China, the occupation of Indochina, etc., that wasn't an unreasonable assumption from their perspective.

However, there was a strong anti-war movement in the US. Whether they had the votes in congress to block a declaration of war absent a direct attack on the US I admit I don't know (if anyone who can point me to data on this point I would be grateful), but the lack of a DoW even after USS Reuban James (DD245) was sunk on 10/31/41 is an indicator. The sinking of a US Naval vessel by a German submarine didn't result in a declaration of war against Germany; in fact even after Pearl Harbor the US didn't declare war on Germany until Germany had already declared war on the US. All that seems to set a fairly high bar for a declaration of war on Japan absent an attack upon the US.

Edit to add: Oh, and according to Wikipedia the US had also closed the Panama Canal to Japanese merchant traffic. I hadn't heard that one before, so take it with the usual grain of salt, but...
 
Nah, the US wasn't provoking Japan.

Sadly, there are no sarcasm tags.

Also, a nit: Japan didn't need to attack the UK.

Sadly, the Japanese leadership didn't know that and wouldn't believe you if you told them. Japanese planning had been predicated on attacking both the US and UK for decades. Not only couldn't they see any other options, they couldn't conceive of any other options.

They needed to attack the DEI...

And they believed that attack required attacks on the US and UK.

However, there was a strong anti-war movement in the US.

Minor nit: The was a strong anti-European war movement in the US. The feelings about a war against Japan in the Pacific and/or in support of China were, let's say, more nuanced. Such a war had even been seriously suggested as a way out of the Depression.
 
Minor nit: The was a strong anti-European war movement in the US. The feelings about a war against Japan in the Pacific and/or in support of China were, let's say, more nuanced. Such a war had even been seriously suggested as a way out of the Depression.

Japanese invasion of China didn´t cause a major expansion of the US army, invasion of France did. :D
 
going on the assumption the US and japan go to war. FDR and churchill still want the US to join the fight in Europe does britain declare war on japan and you end up with OTL just a bit later
 
Here's how I see it:

-Japan only allied with Germany and Italy in 1941 because they wanted to take control of the resource-rich French and Dutch colonies in Indochina and Indonesia respectively and Germany had already conquered said mother countries.
-Even with the treaty between the Axis nations, what could really be done to help each other? Italy was more a hindrance to Germany than a help and Japan was on the other side of the world.
-If Japan still attacks Pearl Harbor, the U.S. declares war on them and maybe Germany later. Since Hitler honored the treaty between his country and Japan (one of the only times he did so), it gave the U.S. the excuse to go with its "Germany first" strategy.
-Given Germany's actions in the Battle of the Atlantic, it was likely just a matter of time before the U.S. declared war. Japan's Pearl Harbor simply gave them a better rallying cry.
 
going on the assumption the US and japan go to war. FDR and churchill still want the US to join the fight in Europe does britain declare war on japan and you end up with OTL just a bit later

-Japan only allied with Germany and Italy in 1941 ...


There is no chance, no as in none, zip, zilch, nada, of Japan "only" fighting the US or "only" fighting the UK. Japan's war plans included attacks on the colonies, territories, and bases of both the US and UK at the start. Those attacks had been planned for decades and were necessary to secure the sea routes between the "Southern Resource Area" and the Home Islands. Once Japan attacks both the US and UK will be at war with her.

Japan's leaders never ever considered not attacking the US and UK as part of her "lunge to the south". Just as withdrawing from China was inconceivable, failing to secure those sea routes was inconceivable.

Japan signed alliances with Germany twice and neither of those times was in 1941. The first was the Anti-Comintern Pact in late 1936 which was aimed at the Soviets. The second, the Tripartite Pact, was signed while the Battle of Britain was still being fought.

That last pact contains this very interesting article:

ARTICLE 3. Japan, Germany, and Italy agree to cooperate in their efforts on aforesaid lines. They further undertake to assist one another with all political, economic and military means if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict.
It should be fairly obvious that only two nations meet the "... Power at present not involved in the European War or in the Japanese-Chinese conflict." requirement; the Soviet Union and the United States.

Germany wanted assistance with it's planned attack on the USSR and Japan wanted assistance with it's planned attacks on the US, but, because both were rat bastards of the highest order who only met treaty obligations when it suited them, they both wrote themselves an "out" in the language of the article.

Note the phrase "... if one of the Contracting Powers is attacked by a Power...". When Germany attacked Russia, instead of the other way round, in June of '41, Japan could and did point to that phrase while declining to involve herself directly against Russia.

Germany could have done the same in December of 41 when Japan attacked the US, instead of the other way round, but Germany's ability to weasel out was gone thanks to the role of Britain.

Japan's actions meant that Britain and the US became automatic and immediate allies in the war against her. As an ally, the US would then begin to ship US supplies in US hulls guarded in US convoys to Britain the US ally in the war against Japan. Those ships would steam past German U-boats and those U-boats would have no recourse but to sink them. Once a US ship carrying US supplies to a US ally in a US convoy was sunk by a German U-boat, Germany and the US would be at war.

Hitler could either wait for this war to happen - and it was going to happen - or he could select the time and place when the war would happen. Hitler could not choose whether the war would happen or not. So, Hitler started the war at the time of his choosing and the Second Happy Time resulted with over 600 ships lost.
 
Last edited:
Top