Skip Pearl Harbor

[corbulo]

If Japan had just attacked British and Dutch possessions in Far East, would USA have gone to war. FDR was repared to ask Congress for a declaration of war against Japan, but I am not sure it would have passed. Any comments? Is it possible to give WitP a scenario of this type?

[Jason629]

If you look at the "New Alternate Strategy" thread below you will find a lot of this type discussion.

[mogami]

Originally posted by corbulo
If Japan had just attacked British and Dutch possessions in Far East, would USA have gone to war. FDR was repared to ask Congress for a declaration of war against Japan, but I am not sure it would have passed. Any comments? Is it possible to give WitP a scenario of this type?

The first reaction would be Yamamoto commiting sucide in protest.
(the PH strike was the only way he would remain as CinC Combined fleet-refusing it would have been a massive loss of face to Navy)

Then lend lease sent to Pacific as well as Atlantic with US escorts
(USN was already following orders to sink U-boats-Nov 41)

Possible further 'sale' of 'old' USN ships in exchange for bases in South Pacific (allowing US buildup)

Both Japan and the US knew there was going to be a war.
The timing of it represented Japan realizing the longer they waited the worse the odds. (look at 1940 US naval builds)
How long of a delay are you asking for before fighting US?

[Jason629]

No such thing as the DEI gambit my man....your just chasin windmills.....the USN and the IJN were going to scrap.....If you really think about it...the sooner the better for the IJN.

[mogami]

Greetings. First requirement for commencing of hostility is one or both combatants has to fail a reality check and forget just what it is they are starting.

This often follows a long period of bellicose noise over issues of inflated importance.

During the noisy period one side actually starts to believe it own trash talk. ('Hell 1 of us'n can lick 10 of dem')
believes stupid reason ("the dominos will fall if we don't act now")
and of course the final straw ('they started it"/"they forced us")

Often the lack of honest communication can bring apart the very situation the bellicosity was intended to prevent.
(American Civil War)

After much destruction death and treasure wasted the vanquished finds it can in fact survive in the world without what ever it went to war over and the winner wonders just what it has accomplished. (The loser has started every war in History) (Wars do not start with the first shot) the great war lasted from around 1912-200? What we call WW1 and WW2 were only the loudest longest bloodist campaigns of the Great War.

Todays ally might be tomorrows enemy (versy visy)

Wars are won or lost before the first bomb drops.

Someone should compile a list of wars fought over nothing or as a result of simple wooden headedness.

Wargames are not about why wars were fought.

[TIMJOT]

Originally posted by Jason629
No such thing as the DEI gambit my man....your just chasin windmills.....the USN and the IJN were going to scrap.....If you really think about it...the sooner the better for the IJN.

Sorry Jason its "NOT" a myth my man......The true myth is "The Great War with the US was Inevitable Myth". Propagated by a defeated enemy, who wished to escape culpability for their actions. Its the ole "Hey if war was inevitable; then its really not are fault now is it?" ; line of reasoning.

But hey, dont take my word for it. Read.....

"Empires in the Balance" (Wilmont)
"The Pacific Campaign (Van Der Vatt)
"Javelin or the Barrier" (Wilmont)
"Infamy" (Toland)
"Roosevelt and Churchill" (Sorry I forgot)


QUOTE: Wilmont;

"It was generally agreed that their was no alternative to war , but there was fundemental disagreement on the sencondary question of whom Japan should fight". "The Japanese agonized for months over the choices open to them". "September 1941 saw these various conflicts settled as the Japanese military command decided upon war with Britain, Netherlands and the US,
even though there was very considerable body of opinion, led by Admiral Osami Nagano, Chief of the Naval General Staff, opposed going to war with the Americans. There was no disputing the need to go to war with Britain and the Netherlands - these two countries had colonial territories that Japan had to secure if she was to be self sufficient -but Nagano and like-minded colleagues could point to American public's isolationist sentiment, traditional anti-imperialist feelings and the resistance to President Roosevelts policy of support for Britain as reason enough not to become embroiled in a war with the United States. To many Japanese commanders it seemed more than a little unlikely that Roosevelt would be able to convince his countryment of the need for war with Japan in defense of Southeast Asia, unless the Japanese themselves provided the pretext by attacking American territory. For the American President to maneuver his country into war in defence of British and Dutch possessions in Southeast Asia seemed inconcievable." Nagano and those who doubted the wisdom of precipitating a war with the United States lost this strategic arguement, which was indeed the critical one as far as the Japanese were concerned."


I submit to you; that those who dought there was serious and justifiable debate for the DEI gambit as you put it. Are the true Don Quixote's
:p

[Jason629]

I am taking it as my personal responsibility to "stir things up"...in that endeavor......I will be forced to take somewhat illogical viewpoints on occaision.

[Ranger-75]

Add
"Japan's War" by Edwin P. Hoyt - most of the book is devoted to the events that preceeded the US and Japanese fighting.

and
"Victory at Sea" by James F. Dunnigan - some interesting sections on Japan's collective lack of clear thinking.

Doubt is spelled doubt not dought:D

Mogami, that was nicely put... your "list" would only include most of the wars fought. Like,,, the war of 1812. Now there was a well thought out strategic plan.

[TIMJOT]

Originally posted by Ranger-75
Add
"Japan's War" by Edwin P. Hoyt - most of the book is devoted to the events that preceeded the US and Japanese fighting.

and
"Victory at Sea" by James F. Dunnigan - some interesting sections on Japan's collective lack of clear thinking.

Doubt is spelled doubt not dought:D

Mogami, that was nicely put... your "list" would only include most of the wars fought. Like,,, the war of 1812. Now there was a well thought out strategic plan.

Thanks for the spell check, My spelling is bad, but my typing is appalling.