WI: Pacific War Started before the War in Europe

Japan only decided to act against the West following the American embargo, most crucially of petroluem and related products. There's an implicit assumption that something similar would have to occur for Japan to embark on a similar course.

Umm... The oil embargo was only after Japan had started to take over French Indochina. They had no need to do THAT unless they were already planning to head south. So, I don't believe your statement is correct at all.
 

Delta Force

Banned
Umm... The oil embargo was only after Japan had started to take over French Indochina. They had no need to do THAT unless they were already planning to head south. So, I don't believe your statement is correct at all.

French Indochina was controlled by Vichy France, which complicates things. The Japanese and Thais weren't attacking Free France.
 
Certainly more inflamatory that a Japanese soldier knocking down a US second tier diplomat. Consider for a moment that had the Polish crisis not been starting & Europe quite that summer Britain might have sent part of the fleet east in a show of force... That would have inflamed Army officers like Yamashita & Tsuji.
 

Delta Force

Banned
How might the Imperial Japanese Navy have fared against the Royal Navy in a Pacific War where the United States is neutral?
 
In 1939 the RN had some operational radar, the Japanese hardly understood the concept.

..the RN trained as much and effectively at night battle as the Japanese.

..the RN had a large fleet of submarines, including a large number of deep diving long ranged cruiser submarines designed for use in the Pacific. Their submarine commanders were probably the best trained in the world that year.

..the RN was stuck with some 'average' aircraft for their carriers. The RAF was slightly better. The Japanese were a bit better off. Tho anyone who is thinking "Zero" at this moment needs to avoid posting for a while.

..RN torpedos varied in quality by type, but they had nothing comparable to the Long Lance carried by the cruisers and destroyers.

..The RN had been attacking Japanese codes since the first days of radio. The Japanese were much less capable. I'd have to do some digging to find which Japanese codes were broken, perhaps none. While the Japanese had a very small but capable signals analysis unit there is less evidence they had broken any British codes or encryption.

..Britain had a large & robust cargo ship fleet. Japans national flagged fleet was half the capacity needed to service the intake and export from Japans ports. Much of the difference was carried on British flagges ships.

..Britain had a healthy cash reserve and balance of trade. Japan had very thin cash reserves, and it was indebted to London and NY banks, both its government and industry.

..Aphibious doctrine and technical matters were neglected by the RN and Army. Japans Navy and Army had put considerable attention to the matter.

..Japan had two years of combat experience in China.
 
Some historians consider the 2nd Sino-Japanese war

which kicked off in 1937 as a part of WWII, so this question would already be answered in their minds. However, if the Japanese intentionally sink any US boats outside the Chinese theater (a series of Panay incidents in international waters) or attack the Philippines before September 1939 there would be war with the United States.

War between GB and Japan before September 1939 is difficult to draw up because GB is concerned firstly with Nazi Germany
 
In 1939 the RN had some operational radar, the Japanese hardly understood the concept.

..the RN trained as much and effectively at night battle as the Japanese.

..the RN had a large fleet of submarines, including a large number of deep diving long ranged cruiser submarines designed for use in the Pacific. Their submarine commanders were probably the best trained in the world that year.

..the RN was stuck with some 'average' aircraft for their carriers. The RAF was slightly better. The Japanese were a bit better off. Tho anyone who is thinking "Zero" at this moment needs to avoid posting for a while.

..RN torpedos varied in quality by type, but they had nothing comparable to the Long Lance carried by the cruisers and destroyers.

..The RN had been attacking Japanese codes since the first days of radio. The Japanese were much less capable. I'd have to do some digging to find which Japanese codes were broken, perhaps none. While the Japanese had a very small but capable signals analysis unit there is less evidence they had broken any British codes or encryption.

..Britain had a large & robust cargo ship fleet. Japans national flagged fleet was half the capacity needed to service the intake and export from Japans ports. Much of the difference was carried on British flagges ships.

..Britain had a healthy cash reserve and balance of trade. Japan had very thin cash reserves, and it was indebted to London and NY banks, both its government and industry.

..Aphibious doctrine and technical matters were neglected by the RN and Army. Japans Navy and Army had put considerable attention to the matter.

..Japan had two years of combat experience in China.

So the Birts had an advantage but it would be a close thing?
 

Delta Force

Banned
So the Birts had an advantage but it would be a close thing?

The Japanese would have some logistical advantages due to being the only Asian great power. Japanese optics were also among the best in the world. Upon the outbreak of war, many ships of the United States Navy were equipped with optics manufactured in Japan. Imperial Japanese warships were also more heavily armored and faster than many warships of the Royal Navy, allowing for a 25 knot battle line. However, while the IJN had a standard capital ship armament of 14", the Royal Navy had a standard armament of 15". Both fleets had a class of warships armed with 16" guns. The IJN had the two ships of the Nagato class, while the Royal Navy had the two ships of the Nelson class. The IJN and Royal Navy differed in the role of the cruiser. The IJN had heavy cruisers armed with the powerful Long Lance torpedo, more than adequate for inflicting major damage on capital ships. The Royal Navy was primarily a light cruiser fleet, with the ships being used for commerce protection.

In the long run the British have the advantage of finance and industry, although the Japanese do have the advantage of logistics. The only hope for the Japanese is to somehow fight the British back to India and reach a peace agreement. Essentially, Japanese victory plans against the British and/or United States rely on overwhelming force, rapid victory, and a quick cession of hostilities. In a long war, the Japanese are at a disadvantage.
 
Well I suppose you could have the Panay incident spark it, there was a TL somewhere with that exact same thing. The Japanese got curb stomped.

I think it's very unlikely the Panay or any similar "incident" would lead to a US-Japanese war in the late 1930's, due to US isolationist sentiment at the time. As David M. Kennedy writes in *Freedom from Fear: The American People in Depression and War, 1929-1945*, p. 402: "But the Panay was not to be a modern Maine, nor even a Lusitania. Its sinking produced a cry for withdrawal, not for war. 'We should learn that it is about time for us to mind our own business,' Texas Democrat Maury Maverick declared in the House. A few months later, a Fortune magazine poll showed that a majority of Americans favored getting the United States out of China altogether. When Japan tendered an official apology for the Panay incident and paid some $2 million in reparations, the crisis swiftly blew over.

"The principle residue of the Panay affair in Congress was not more bellicosity but more pacifism [citing the boost the incident gave to the proposed Ludlow Amendment]..." https://books.google.com/books?id=cL85ggyT9oYC
 

Delta Force

Banned
How might Germany and Italy respond to such a conflict? Might the German and Italian navies see increased funding?
 
Japanese optics were also among the best in the world. Upon the outbreak of war, many ships of the United States Navy were equipped with optics manufactured in Japan.
Eh?

Bausch & Lomb did most everything for the USN, as they had secured patent and process agreements with Zeiss before WWI, and after 1921, all military patents were granted.

Before WWII, Bausch & Lomb and Zeiss were so close, they were sued in Federal Court for anti-Trust violations.

In WWII, the US Government asked for people to donate [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+0]Leitz, [/SIZE][/FONT]Zeiss and other German made lenses, along with the US Bausch & Lomb.

Japanese optics just were pretty much unknown in the USA, till post 1945, when the US technical missions that they had done very well indeed, and not just poorly made knockoffs of what the Germans had done, as was thought during the war, and were well ahead of the USA in lens coating that assisted light gathering.
 
Carl Schwamberger said:
anyone who is thinking "Zero" at this moment needs to avoid posting for a while.
:D:D I was, til I checked the year.:eek:
Carl Schwamberger said:
While the Japanese had a very small but capable signals analysis unit there is less evidence they had broken any British codes or encryption.
Given how terrible Japanese cryppies were, I'd be astonished if any Brit cyphers were broken.
jeckl said:
So the Birts had an advantage but it would be a close thing?
Not really. Japan had no real understanding of blue-water warfare. The question is, how busy is Britain in ETO/MTO? If she's solely concentrating on Japan, it's going to look pretty much like the Pacific War, with better torpedoes & no MacArthur.:p
 
If you are looking at the Tientsin incident this makes the UK and USSR co belligerents vs Japan.

Also the UK has no need to sail off for a decisive battle with the IJN.

They just open up the taps to supply China.
 

Delta Force

Banned
Eh?

Bausch & Lomb did most everything for the USN, as they had secured patent and process agreements with Zeiss before WWI, and after 1921, all military patents were granted.

Before WWII, Bausch & Lomb and Zeiss were so close, they were sued in Federal Court for anti-Trust violations.

In WWII, the US Government asked for people to donate [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+0]Leitz, [/SIZE][/FONT]Zeiss and other German made lenses, along with the US Bausch & Lomb.

Japanese optics just were pretty much unknown in the USA, till post 1945, when the US technical missions that they had done very well indeed, and not just poorly made knockoffs of what the Germans had done, as was thought during the war, and were well ahead of the USA in lens coating that assisted light gathering.

Perhaps it was ship lights or small hand telescopes. I know there was something like that which was commonly found on American ships built before the war.
 
What you could do is somehow change the homefront of the US to push for war with Japan once the Sino-Japanese War kicks off. No idea how you'd get war hawks in charge of the 30s USA, but I suppose anything is possible with a PoD far enough in the past:p.
 
What you could do is somehow change the homefront of the US to push for war with Japan once the Sino-Japanese War kicks off. No idea how you'd get war hawks in charge of the 30s USA, but I suppose anything is possible with a PoD far enough in the past:p.

In the US even the most determined isolationist turns into a fervent war hawk when the casualties. If something like the Panay incident had involved say several hundred naval casualties or several thousand civilians then domestic politics take a complete 180. If Japan fucks up bad enough then even the most peace seeking isolationist will be forced to vote for war. American isolationism was ultimately a reaction to a lack of any significant threat. As 1898 and 1917 prove the US might be hard to induce but when enough men are killed the us will retaliate with all its might. It's similar to how the bombing of the uss Cole produced almost no response while 9/11 provoked multiple major wars.
 
Without the European war to distract the Allies, Japan gets curbstomped earlier and much worse than OTL.

I wonder how this would effect Europe, would Hitler try something in the East with the UK ( and maybe France distracted) would the Allies modernise their armed forces more, would Italy do things differently seeing how really out of their depth they are?
 

Delta Force

Banned
If you are looking at the Tientsin incident this makes the UK and USSR co belligerents vs Japan.

Also the UK has no need to sail off for a decisive battle with the IJN.

They just open up the taps to supply China.

Also, this is an interesting potential PoD, especially coming only a few weeks before the outbreak of war in Europe.
 
Top