A more effective Dec 1941 preemptive attack on the USA

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I remember reading long ago an in depth analysis of the plan and execution of the attack and I recall the third wave on the fuel farm and dry docks and facilities was part of the original plan but cancelled at the last moment for two reasons: 1) the startling success of the first two waves and 2) It was believed the US was swimming in oil and would replenish the lost oil very quickly. The belief that the US Navy might soon be on their way after them with, possibly, any or all of the four missing carriers was also a factor in their decision to leave sooner rather than later.
 
And that's the real reason Japan surrendered. The Russians were already on Japans northern island.
 
chuter said:
2) It was believed the US was swimming in oil and would replenish the lost oil very quickly.
Click to expand...
Well yes, but the US was swimming in real and potential industrial capacity and manpower as much as they were surplus in oil. By Sept 1940 the US has seven fleet carriers and eleven Essex class ordered and ten new battleships ordered. And that's under a peacetime economy. What part of all that suggested to Japan that the US could be defeated?
 
Last edited:
SaparotRob said:
Warrior spirit?
Click to expand...
That speaks to Japan's second miscalculation, that unfounded belief that the US lacked the will to fight. Where on God's Earth did that assumption come from? 1781, after a grinding five year uprising, the US defeats the British, the greatest superpower the world had yet known, handing the Empire it's worst ever defeat (Singapore saw more captured, by Britain was back in three years). They again beat Britain to a standstill in 1812-14. Then in 1898, less than forty years after the Civil War the US defeats Spain, another major power. Then in 1907 the US sends its battlefleet around the world to remind everyone of US power. Did the US ever demonstrate a lack of Warrior spirit? Where was Japan looking?
 
There was certainly a belief in warrior spirit

The French called it Elan or Esprit de corps.

Remember just because it's nonsense don't make it valid.

Please don't bring in the glorious British Empire into this equation. I can only sing Land of Hope and Glory so many times before the neighborhood starts complaining.
 
I prefer to believe what was said in the movie Tora Tora Tora. Yamamoto was very familar with not only the psyche but the industrial might of the USA. He said we will not have a third strike to conserve our forces and resources. From what I have read about him - this is in line with his pragmatic viewpoint.
 
The Basket said:
The French elan and esprit de corps went up in smoke in WW1.
Click to expand...
True, but why did Japan think America had none? The US has never lost a war and is armed and arming for bear.

I suppose the question is, if Japan doesn't attack the US, and understands that they cannot attack Malaya and the DEI without also attacking the Phillipines, thus precluding any attack on Britain or Dutch territory, what does Japan do? By early 1942 Japan is bankrupt and starving, but they we're still so after they started the war. But pull from FIC and China back to Manchuria and Korea and everything Japan needs for food, industry, aerospace and shipbuilding will be available to buy.
 
Last edited:
That battle was unauthorized by Tokyo.

It was also ill-planned and under supplied.

Had it been a planned attack, complete with full resources, logistics and adequate manpower, the results would have been much different.

Also, there were resources Japan could have used in that region: coal, oil and iron are the key resources.
 
Not really the area had almost no roads and railway infrastructure making any advance a crawl at best as for the resources yes they would be nice but the main Japanese bottleneck was a lack of Oil and Rubber the Oil fields in Siberia were not discovered until 1961 and are in Western Siberia over 4,000km away from Vladivostok and there is no Rubber in Siberia. The Idea of a successful strike on the Soviet Union is fanciful at best. Key issues are

1. Logistics as the area has infrastructure so bad it makes what the Germans faced in Western Russia look like an Autobahn
2. Terrain the area is simply not suited for mobile warfare
3. Weather this is Siberia if the Germans were freezing to death in Western Russia wait till someone is dumb enough to try and invade through the east.
4. It diverts troops away from the China front leaving an exposed flank not only to China but also to Mongolia a Soviet puppet at the time that also provided a significant part of the Far Eastern defence and is not a fun place to try and invade/occupy also by not cutting off the Burma Road the level of support the Chinese get is significantly higher
5. By going after Soviet Union instead of the Western Allies you massively strengthen the Western Allies over 1 million British and Indian troops fought in the Burma Campaign alone when you also add Malaya, Guadalcanal etc etc that is a significant amount of manpower and equipment that can be re diverted to other areas a much greater amount than what was used in the Normandy and Italy campaigns IRL most likely causing the North Africa and Italian Campaigns to finish significantly earlier (Germany lost more men and equipment in Tunisia than they did at Stalingrad) This also means that a lot more equipment is free to be given to the Russians through lend lease as well especially as the demand for use by Western Allied forces is reduced. The Commonwealth supplied the Soviet Union with 5,218 tanks, of which 1,388 were from Canada (the Valentine was very popular with Soviet troops and in May 1942 letter from Soviet premier Joseph Stalin to Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov in London ended with this missive. "Tell the British to send more fighters and tanks, especially Valentines."). and 7,411 Aircraft the USA supplied another 3129 Aircraft as well as thousands of Tanks this would only increase if the US are not also needing to refit it's own divisions due to combat losses with less equipment and manpower needed by the Western Allies to fight in the Pacific the Western Allies are in a much stronger position even If the US stays out of the actual fighting. Plus without the Japanese attack on Burma the local trade routes are not disrupted and there is no Bengal Famine as pre-war the primary food source for Bengal was the Burmese rice fields.

In 1918 Japan and the US did try to intervene in the Russian civil war by invading Siberia and marching to Moscow give you a hint at how it turned out it was a disaster and in four years of trying they didn't even advance 500 km
 
Last edited:
Their were oil fields in Siberia as early as 1930.

There would be no rubber in Siberia, as the rubber tree (source of rubber) is a tropical plant.

The Japanese are no strangers to cold - the home islands are most certainly not a tropical paradise.

Again, the skirmishes at Khalkin Gol were not authorized by Tokyo. The Kwantung Army was out numbered, under manned, ill supplied and got their ass kicked because of that.

Numbers say alot:
Soviet troops: 70,000
Japanese troops: 25,000

Soviet AFVs: 900+
Japanese AFVs: 93

Soviet aircraft: 900
Japanese aircraft: 400

Starting to get the picture, yet?
 
Even those oil fields were small and in "WESTERN SIBERIA" and over 4000km away from Manchuria as Siberia is really big Japan simply didn't have the forces available and never would to conquer the region they would have needed an army in the Millions especially engineers and other support troops that simply was not an option the infrastructure was non-existent and to even attempt an invasion of Siberia they would have had to pull in every single soldier they had in China as well as other theaters it simply cannot be done and is an example of ridicules over enthusiasm in the planning department. Plus there is a significant difference in temperature Japan almost never gets to -30c, Siberia does every year. The Average coldest Temperature in Japan is -11 in Rikubetsu that is very different from -30 with Verkhoyansk getting to -58, -11 is a German winter. The logistical requirements are mind boggling your talking about marching an army 4000km (2.500 miles through one of the most densely forested and mountainous regions in the world. A place that has no paved roads and only a handful of dirt tracks and a single railway line that is of a completely different railway gauge 83% of Japan's railway uses a 3 foot 6 narrow gauge with the rest using a 4 foot 6 inch gauge while Russia uses a 5 foot guage thus you would need to replace every single piece of track even if you did capture it intact, an thats not even going int what you would need to pacify the region and keep your supply lines secure from partizans or the resources needed to repair any mines etc captured as the Soviests were very good at detroying mines oil wells etc as the Germans found out.
 
Last edited:
To invade Siberia first you have to get through the Stanovar, Yaboryvny, Sayan, and Chersky mountains then you have a defensive river line that goes North to South from Lake Bakai to the Laptev sea with the Lena River. Then you have the central Siberian Plateau and after that you have the Yenisey River going north to south from the Tanna-Ola Mountains all the way to the Kara sea after that you have the Obb and the Itirsh Rivers going all the way North to South. When attacking from the Manchuria and the Pacific Siberia is probably the most naturally defensible terrain in the planet apart from maybe Antarctica. These are not small rivers the Yenisey has an average depth of 14 meters (45 ft) you are not fording that as for the mountains we are talking about mountain ranges going all the way north to south hundreds of miles wide with comparable heights to that of the ones in Alaska.
 
Last edited:
Japan had a military and nationalism which was rampant so any loony who said they did stupid stuff for the good of Japan was let go.

This is a breakdown in military discipline but they became an example to follow rather than to be a treated as insubordination.

Fighting spirit is a difficult one as it's all propaganda and Bushido and your favorite Anime wrapped in truths and nonsense. But the proof of the pudding is late war when the Japanese fought on half starved and willing to die. Them fighting spirit. Certainly no comparison to a western army. So I would argue to say the Japanese were correct in having superior fighting spirit. But dying ain't much of a living.

The Japanese had a signature look of superiority which sadly was the reason for crimes. Underestimated the enemy is but one.

Again the Germans are fighting the Soviets. So hopefully enough forces have been diverted west. Japan shared borders and many disputed islands so they had real beef with USSR. Plus history. So it was not illogical.
 
SaparotRob said:
What if the IJA court martialled the hot head junior officer who staged the Marco Polo Bridge incident?
Click to expand...
That incident was good for Japan, leading to the seizure of Nanking and Shanghai. It was the new offensives after January 1938 leading to the IJA's defeat at the April 1938 Battle of Taierzhuang and their Oct 1938 Pyrrhic victory at Wuhan that demonstrated that Japan had overstretched. Japan should have realized that they could now negotiate with the US and Britain (and Dutch) on sanctions from a position of strength. Jan 1938, diplomatic communiques to Washington and London: "We feel we have accomplished our goal of resisting China's aggressions against the Empire of Japan, and are willing to withdraw to our borders in Manchuria and Korea in exchange for the US/British recognition of Japan's ownership over Manchuria and the cancellation of sanctions and renewal of all trade". There, a face saving exit.
 
GrauGeist said:
Dimlee would you care to weigh in on this?
Click to expand...
I agree about the vastness of the region to be conquered and the lack of infrastructure. The difference in rail gauges was probably the smallest nuisance. The deficit of roads was more serious.
Some oil deposits were known but did Japan have enough funds to develop them and to carry the oil out there? Except for the Sakhalin, but those reserves were not large.
The area is scarcely populated and the Soviets are engaged in the West. But how many men can Japan afford to send in Siberia, taking into account that the war in China continues?
Saying all that, I do think that Japan could achieve some local success, not in Siberia but in the Soviet Far East, if landings are carefully planned and quickly executed in some key areas. Soviets can protect Vladivostok for some time, but not other coastal cities due to lack of naval strength. If Tokyo intelligence is aware of GULag geography (probably it was, after the defection of Lyushkov) Japanese could try to reach some camps. Should they play the anti-communist card smart (not like Germans), they could attract hundreds of thousands on their side, from the prisoners and from that part of the population that hated Bolsheviks.
We have discussed such scenario in another thread:

Soviet vs. Japanese Fighters

There's nothing in the Soviet Far East for the Japanese, no oil, only trees.
ww2aircraft.net
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

H
More fuel in Hurricane?
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
RCAFson
R
An even greater inter-Allied cooperation on the technical & tactical matter?
3 4 5
Replies
80
Views
4K
Barrett
B
A
Planning a IJN strike against the Sembawang Naval Base
Replies
18
Views
2K
EwenS
E
What if the Bugatti 100p became a fighter?
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
GTX
Getting the best mileage from the squeeze-bore guns?
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
2K
Shortround6
S
Menu
Log in
Register