Without the CBI or a victory in India, Japan would have opened a vital trading station and reduced it's needs in the CBI providing more shipping, sailors and soldiers for the war against the U.S. If you, honestly, believe that the CBI had no affect on the U.S 'steam-roller' then you're deluded and frankly should be ignored.
And even if Japan had captured India (unlikely) or knocked it out of the war effort (possible), just how was Japan going to arm and supply the sub contienent? The IJN did not hane enough ships as it was, and with no easy way of getting materials from India to Japan, just what exactly were they going to do? Send the material on schooners? In fact, the evidence is there that without the CBI distraction for the US war effort, several vitally needed air groups (bomb, fighter and transport) would have been available to pile it on the Japanese in the SW pacific.
On the same point of Italy and North Africa; I'd like to see what your strategy for the war would have been. The fall of North Africa would have opened up oil, shipping lines and bases of operation for the Axis forces. The Atlantic would have been more extensively covered by Axis forces, and more resources would have been available (air and land) for operations against the Soviet Union.
Events showed that the Brits were up to the task in defeating the Germans without US help in N Africa. I would even venture to say that the Brits could have even seized Siciliy. But then, Germany wasnt in the least effected by its loss.
More importantly to the naval aspect of things, the Italian Navy would have then been allowed free roam in the oceans and opened a whole new vault of problems in the Allied shipping.
It wouldnt have happened because the germans really had no logistical capability to defeat the Allies in Egypt, and the Japanese never had the logistical capability to sustain operations in the Indian Ocean. And if this was going to occur in this scenario, Japan had to do this all by summer of 1942. probablity "zero"
There's something seriously wrong with your outlook if you believe that the Allies could have simply abandoned the CBI, North Africa and Italy and still achieved total victory. Do you honestly believe that if North Africa and Italy had fallen to the Axis, then Overlord would have been possible?
1) Overlord would never take place because the US was not in the fight against Germany.
2) The UK had the power and capability to defeat Germany by itself in N Africa and maintain naval supremecy throughout the Med.
3) CBI was a side show. It was the US and ANZAC forces in the SW pacific that ripped the guts out of the Japanese war power, allowing the USN to steamroller across the Central pacific almost at will.
Only an absolute assh*le would ask this question in the first place, but an even larger retard would try to demote the efforts of the nations involved as meaningless because the U.S could, apparently, have done it all on their own.
No matter how much turd flies from your fingers while you type, it's obvious to anyone with sense that the Commonwealth and Soviet Union combined could have achieved eventual victory against an over-stretched Third Reich. Look beyond World War II, and see time and time again the collapse of seemingly invincible structures and powers.
But the facts dont support your theory. The war in Europe (without the US) was not going to be fought on an unlimited duration of time. Either Russia wins the whole enchilada for you, or they sign an armistice with Germany and then thats the end of the war.
And then just look at the power of the Commonwealth, it's industrial wealth and manpower. The Germans and Japanese combined did not have the strength to project their power in all directions.
The Commonwealth in WW2 was highly dependant on US industrial capacity. The Germans had plenty of industrial power to control contiental Europe against a UK and USSR threat. Japan never did and was hopelessly outclassed by 1943.
The U.S.A made World War II a hell of a lot easier for total victory for the Allies - their contribution to the war effort will never be forgotten , but they did NOT save Europe. They helped Britain and her Commonwealth achieve total victory in Western Europe.
But no one has come up with a shred of evidence that the commonwealth could have defeated Germany before the Russians were on the Rhine.
But this won't convince, because Germany was invincible - British victories in North Africa, BoB and Atlantic can be ignored so you can bolster your argument.
Those three arena's were vital for Britain to survive, not for Germany to be defeated.
Stop trying to bolster yourself with the Stars and Stripes, sys. National pride is okay, but when you're using your nations flag to hide the fact you're lacking isn't even funny.
hey, show me where I said that the US could have defeated germany by itself. But the fact does remain, without US involvement in the fight in Europe, the coomonwealt could not have defeated Germany by itself. The end result for continetal Europe is still one of two options. Speak Russian or German.