Wars and ConflictsΒ permalink
Midway - What if ?
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by Mr Pedant (U2464726) on Wednesday, 28th December 2005
I was very interested to read Erik Lindsays post in the 'remarkable victories' thread. I hadn't realised how much the odds were stacked against the Americans.
So this led me to wonder what the upshot of a convincing Japanese victory would have been.
American industrial output was staggering and the allies quickly came up with new planes and other technologies.
So had the Japanese won, how might they have taken advantage of their temporary naval superiority ?
I imagine they'd have tried to take Hawaii, key Australian ports, maybe a raid on the Panama canal to temporarily hold and destroy it. Perhaps even the Falklands and Madagascar?
I'd be interested in peoples thoughts so I can learn more about the background to this crucial engagement.
Regards. -
Message 2
Posted by arnaldalmaric (U1756653) on Wednesday, 28th December 2005
Mr Pedant, hi,
If the Japanese had won at Midway then the first thing (in my opinion) they'd have done was try to make a peace treaty with the USA and Britain. The Japanese when you examine the reasons they made war had a very good grasp on reality.
Could they have made peace, under their terms, well, quite possibly. Even at this stage of the war the Japanese Military were expressing severe doubts about their ability to hang onto their conquests in the Pacific whilst still keeping their eye on the main enemy, China and Russia.
The Japanese (in my view) actually had a coherent and realistic strategy. Defeat the British Empire and the USA quickly, force them to the table, negotiate.
The Japanese were (in my view) much more interested in the mainland of the China and IndoChina and a protective zone in Yakutsk rather than the Pacific Islands.
My two pence,
Cheers AA.
As an aside Midway is one of the big three pivotal battles fought by the Allies on there own in my opinion. Stalingrad and El Alamein being the others.
Cheers AA. -
Message 3
Posted by desertfox (U2819982) on Wednesday, 28th December 2005
The Japanese would never have made an attack on the US mainland as they would have lost. Simple as that, I agree about South East Asia being the main target, as had the Germans took the Suez they
they could have pincered India. -
Message 4
Posted by Grumpyfred (U2228930) on Wednesday, 28th December 2005
See my plot just posted.
Fred -
Message 5
Posted by Erik Lindsay (U231970) on Wednesday, 28th December 2005
Mr Pedant, hi,
If the Japanese had won at Midway then the first thing (in my opinion) they'd have done was try to make a peace treaty with the USA and Britain. The Japanese when you examine the reasons they made war had a very good grasp on reality.
Could they have made peace, under their terms, well, quite possibly. Β
that's what the Japanese may have wanted and what they dreamed about; certainly it was what Yamamoto had in mind when he initiated the war. However, based on conversations with American military men who lived during and fought in the Pacific war, IMO there is no way the US would have negotiated a peace with Japan even if the US had been beaten at Midway.
We'll never know, of course, but IMO the Japanese didn't really understand the meaning of all-out war and weren't really prepared to tangle with an enemy like the US. -
Message 6
Posted by Richie (U1238064) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
Mr Pedant, hi,
If the Japanese had won at Midway then the first thing (in my opinion) they'd have done was try to make a peace treaty with the USA and Britain. The Japanese when you examine the reasons they made war had a very good grasp on reality.
Could they have made peace, under their terms, well, quite possibly. Even at this stage of the war the Japanese Military were expressing severe doubts about their ability to hang onto their conquests in the Pacific whilst still keeping their eye on the main enemy, China and Russia.
The Japanese (in my view) actually had a coherent and realistic strategy. Defeat the British Empire and the USA quickly, force them to the table, negotiate.
The Japanese were (in my view) much more interested in the mainland of the China and IndoChina and a protective zone in Yakutsk rather than the Pacific Islands.
My two pence,
Cheers AA.
As an aside Midway is one of the big three pivotal battles fought by the Allies on there own in my opinion. Stalingrad and El Alamein being the others.
Cheers AA.Β
Hi Arnald,
Your post is my view entirely. If the Japanese had succeeded then their hand in negoitating would be vastly stronger, and they could well have managed to secure an acceptable peace treaty with the Americans. Of course, if the Americans decided to remain on a war footing then the end result would still have been the same albeit after a longer war -
Message 7
Posted by Turnwrest (U2188092) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
The Americans would have been hard pushed to take much of an initiative (except by moving land forces and land-based aircraft to Australia and Assam) before 1943 - the carriers at Midway were the mainstay of operations until the Essex class were ready, and Midway (Sand Island and East Island) are the outliers of the Hawaiian archipelago, so the Japanese could have island-hopped down the chain, depriving the US Navy of its main Pacific base outside the continental US> That would complicate logistics no end. Additionally, I'm convinced that it would have strengthened the hand of Adm. King and other "Pacific first" thinkers, so delaying Torch, which could have given Rommel time and space to recover from Alamein.
-
Message 8
Posted by Lord Ball (U1767246) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
If as suggested the Japs made peace with UK and USA, wouldn't the European Theatre have been decided much quicker? Also, what could have stopped the USA, UK and possibly France not wanting their territories in Asia back from the Japanese. By the end of the war, the allies were superior to Japan in all aspects of the armed forces regardless of the effects of the war on the Japanese Military. I can't imagine America, after defeating Germany, not going after her territories again.
-
Message 9
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
If as suggested the Japs made peace with UK and USA, wouldn't the European Theatre have been decided much quicker? Also, what could have stopped the USA, UK and possibly France not wanting their territories in Asia back from the Japanese. By the end of the war, the allies were superior to Japan in all aspects of the armed forces regardless of the effects of the war on the Japanese Military. I can't imagine America, after defeating Germany, not going after her territories again.Β
same with the british empire(may the sun never set on her ^_^), if japan had had a succesful peace treaty, we'd have given germany a "damn good thrashing" and then attacked the japanese empire for having the temerity to try wound the british lion. it would have been a prestige matter as much as anything -
Message 10
Posted by Lord Ball (U1767246) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
Yes, but the reason I didn't mention Britain was the presumption of an Atlee Government that was not up for taking old territories and also the possible lack of will from people who had fought the Germans for 4-6 years (4 being the shortest amount of time for the war to last in my view)
-
Message 11
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
the war could quite easily have lasted about a month, if we had immediatly attacked upon opening of hostilities
-
Message 12
Posted by Lord Ball (U1767246) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
On that terrain though? Going through Burma in one month with a lot of fighting going on is approaching impossible.
-
Message 13
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
i meant with the german-thats what i thought you meant........crossed wires methinks
-
Message 14
Posted by Lord Ball (U1767246) on Thursday, 29th December 2005
Nah, It was Japan I was talking about. The General Election was scheduled by Churchill to be immediately after the war with Germany ended so theorectically he would not have been PM if hostilities opened against Japan.
-
Message 15
Posted by Erik Lindsay (U231970) on Friday, 30th December 2005
The Americans would have been hard pushed to take much of an initiative (except by moving land forces and land-based aircraft to Australia and Assam) before 1943 - the carriers at Midway were the mainstay of operations until the Essex class were ready, and Midway (Sand Island and East Island) are the outliers of the Hawaiian archipelago, so the Japanese could have island-hopped down the chain, depriving the US Navy of its main Pacific base outside the continental US> That would complicate logistics no end. Additionally, I'm convinced that it would have strengthened the hand of Adm. King and other "Pacific first" thinkers, so delaying Torch, which could have given Rommel time and space to recover from Alamein.Β
A victory at Midway would have given Japanese forces several alternatives to undertake in the hope of forcing a negotiated peace favourable to Japan.
They may have attempted to take Hawaii, but I seriously doubt if they could have done so. It would have taken several months to build up adequate supplies, equipment, and troops to attempt such an invasion and we must not forget that Japan's supply lines would have been enormously overextended. America's would have been long also, but they had a huge advantage...first of all, they had a huge merchant fleet and Japan's submariners had been carefully trained to ignore merchant vessels and concentrate solely on warships - a restriction they obeyed throughout the war. US subs were not hampered by such orders and would have made life pretty miserable for the Japanese merchant fleet attempting to reinforce their troops and fleet at Midway...remember, the US still held Hawaii. I honestly do not believe they could have taken the islands, although they might have tried.
IMO the Japanese would have made an attempt to block the Panama Canal and I don't know how that might have worked out. Certainly the US was aware that such an attempt would probably be made and would have made every effort to stop it. And the US would have had land-based air to support naval vessels.
We have to remember 3 things:
1) The Japanese army and navy were constantly at odds. I know that armies and navies of all countries are continually bickering, but where Japan was concerned, it was more than bickering -- it was all-out war. A Japanese Admiral wouldn't dream of giving an order to an army major...if he did, the major could ignore it with impunity -- and the army brass would probably have been very angry with the Admiral for attempting such an outrageous thing. Cooperation between the two branches of the service was almost unheard-of. The Japanese fiasco at Guadalcanal is a prime e.g. of how NOT to conduct a campaign and is a pretty good indicator of how they'd have handled an Hawaiian invasion.
2) The Japanese army had trained for years for war with Russia and was not prepared for island-invasions. A huge portion of the army was tied down in China and much of the rest was in Burm/India and scattered along the Bismarck Archipelago and the Solomons Chain. I don't think the army had either the will or the personnel to mount the kind of mass invasion that taking Hawaii would entail. The Japanese Marines were good fighters, but there simply was not enough of them.
3). Japanese industry, at its best, would never have been able to keep up with the US once it got rolling, and in the months it would have taken to mount an invasion of Hawaii, I think the US would have loaded the islands with defences that Japan never could have breached.
I do agree that the ''Germany-First'' agreement would probably have gone down the drain, at least for the first year or so. That would probably have had the most profound effect on the overall progress of the war. It may have given Russia an opportunity to wind up with greater control of Europe than it had in fact, but I think overall, the allies would have been victorious. -
Message 16
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Monday, 2nd January 2006
same with the british empire(may the sun never set on her ^_^), if japan had had a succesful peace treaty, we'd have given germany a "damn good thrashing" and then attacked the japanese empire for having the temerity to try wound the british lion. it would have been a prestige matter as much as anythingΒ
Mel !!....MEL !!....is that you Mel ???? -
Message 17
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Tuesday, 3rd January 2006
same with the british empire(may the sun never set on her ^_^), if japan had had a succesful peace treaty, we'd have given germany a "damn good thrashing" and then attacked the japanese empire for having the temerity to try wound the british lion. it would have been a prestige matter as much as anythingΒ
Mel !!....MEL !!....is that you Mel ????Β
mel?..............................................no, not really -
Message 18
Posted by Lord Ball (U1767246) on Tuesday, 3rd January 2006
Expat's just trying to rattle his sabre of weak steel, marduk. Ignore him.
-
Message 19
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Tuesday, 3rd January 2006
Lord Ball,
Your Lordship, I left a pair of quality mens gloves in a London public toilet last year. Would you be so kind as to ask your fellow south London public toilet attendants if they came across them?
Thank you your Highness. -
Message 20
Posted by Lord Ball (U1767246) on Wednesday, 4th January 2006
1. Lords never get called your Highess.
2. I will not adhere to your fantasies of London Public toilet attendants and yourself. Besides, I don't live in London or work there. -
Message 21
Posted by Lt_Henson (U2436367) on Wednesday, 4th January 2006
Someone mentioned bombing the US mainland,
highly improbable but I can see your way of thinking.
They only sneaked about, demonstated by Pearl Harbour, the only attack ever mounted was by a seaplane launched off a Submarine deck to drop 4 incendiary bombs in yellostone forest etc to start forest fires. 3 failed to start and the fourth was quickly put out. Nice statement for the pilot, only person ever to have dropped bombs on mainland USA during war AND being able to live and tell the tale. -
Message 22
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Wednesday, 4th January 2006
Expat's just trying to rattle his sabre of weak steel, marduk. Ignore him.Β
sabre's are easy to rattle, you should try a 44 inch claymore! i can barely lift it let alone rattle it!! -
Message 23
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Wednesday, 4th January 2006
-
Message 24
Posted by expat32 (U2025313) on Wednesday, 4th January 2006
1. Lords never get called your Highess.
2. I will not adhere to your fantasies of London Public toilet attendants and yourself. Besides, I don't live in London or work there.Β
I would deny it if I were you.... -
Message 25
Posted by marduk-slayer of tiamat (U2258525) on Wednesday, 4th January 2006
i thought lords got called..........my lord
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.