US Internal lpolitics and Public reaction

[herwin]

ORIGINAL: moses

Ignoring all the emotional considerations I think the unconditional surrender demand was more a result of the momentum of raising such large military forces.

By the time the war was viewed as clearly lost by the axis powers the allied war machine was just reaching its full potential and could completely dominate the axis. Since these allied forces were created at great expence and could not be maintained in peacetime there was great incentive to use them to decisively defeat all opposition prior to demobalization.

So the Japanese had little negotiating leverage in 1944/45.

The only hope would seem to be for Japan to win a decisive victory early. Say they win Midway big and then realize that they are going to lose the war!!! So they offer peace on very reasonable terms giving back most conquered territory. Of course not much chance of that as imagine the "victory disaese" after them wining a Midway.

My scenario assumes that Japan opens with a declaration of war and runs through the SRA, but doesn't give America as big a reason to come back fast. Germany declares like it actually did. The WPD then decides to go after Germany, but King doesn't have the 'revenge' motivation on his side to keep the Navy strong in the Pacific. Then instead of 70% of war production going to the ETO, it's 90%, and the Pacific is like Burma.

BTW, the Navy war planning was a bit unrealistic, and the engineers running the surface through train was planning to take the eastern mandates whether or not we had the resources to take Truk and Mindanao. So the US Battle Fleet meets the KB off Kwajalein. Care to make any bets on the outcome? And since our hotheads walked into it, rather than the IJN sneak attacking us at Pearl, it's both more final and more embarrassing.

[sven]

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Pearl Harbor cinched it. The US isn't capable of forgiving sneak attacks...

If only we were more magnanimous and gracious like the Axis were reknowned for being.....

[8|]

[DuckofTindalos]

Oh, I'm sorry, did I hear a little fly buzzing around? Did it go buzz-buzz-buzz?

Go back to circling Doggie's empty head...

[Erik Rutins]

Terminus, Sven, this thread is not an invitation to continue your feud. This thread was doing fine in the WITP forum, but was somewhat off-topic for there, so we moved it here. Let's keep the signal to noise ratio where it belongs. You've had your exchange, now get the heck back on topic.

Regards,

- Erik

[sven]

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Terminus, Sven, this thread is not an invitation to continue your feud. This thread was doing fine in the WITP forum, but was somewhat off-topic for there, so we moved it here. Let's keep the signal to noise ratio where it belongs. You've had your exchange, now get the heck back on topic.

Regards,

- Erik

Indeed, as the subject matter is so serious and so likely I will give it all the attention it merits.

We are reaching for Japanese victory scenarios through forcing the US to the table. Had Godzilla been born 15 years earlier and not had a sense of Rage concerning Tokyo *perhaps* they could have razed enough of the US to make a difference. The main hope having to be that we did not somehow get King Kong to lay down his anger at US Army Air Forces and engage Gorzilla in a serious fight through the area west of the Rockies.

My Allied sources tell me that the Japanese were guilty of not properly preparing Gorzilla's Fugu order at a kobe steak house and the rest as they say is, thankfully history.

all the best,
sven

[robpost3]

[X(]wow! Why don'tcha shake the tree a lttle![:D]

I wonder If there was any way to press US into peace talks with Japan?

as long as it was Japan in the hotseat sure![;)]

In our games (If we are lucky) we can press US really hard like:
BBs gone
Hawaii gone
PH under blocade
OZ treatened
Phillipines lost
Lots of other fleet assets lost
Carriers Lost so West Coast is threatened
New Guinea Lost/OZ threatened
India Invaded/jewel in an imperial crown seriously threatened
Etc.

It still would be impossible to launch a land invasion, America can just "button up" and the enemy can beat themselves against either mountain range...

I would like to know Your opinion about this:
Was it ever possible to press US into peace talks ie IF US carriers were lost at Midway, Midway taken, Hawaii threatened?

nah, even with The Crown gone and ANZAC, India, there was no real collateral damage to GNP which IMOO would still out produce bearing in mind that the Axis would need to repair factories in newly occupied territories first to cath up to production numbers, the Allies would be increasing prod., R&D, Canada and the Soviets wouldnt be taking a nap, I dearsay they would prefer Goose Stepping to Sushi bars so the sleeping bear and Nanuck of the north would bear down as well. PH under blockade would waste assists on the Axis side with no effect. NZ would a horrendous ground war, as would Australia, just not enough Grunts on the Axis side...
These would make for some intereseting scenarios...
I remeber playing the sega? or nintendo version of PTO and one of the only ways to slow the AXIS decay was not to waste assets hopping the pond and concetrate closer to home and quell papau new guinea, port morseby etc...quicker...best result was a stalemate and R&D then won the day...
Thanks Rafael nice post took my mind off some things today[8D]

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: treespider
Part of the problem with the original posters questions lies in what the game allows for vs. history. The game looks solely at War in the Pacific and not at World War II in total. Remember were only seeing 30% of American output in the game. If you want to what-if this then what if the Germans had not declared war on the US and what if the United States had decided to turn 70% of it muscle towrds Japan...but that is for another thread...

Very true.

In the early months of the war, the bulk of available resources were poured into the Pacific. The goal was to stabilize the situation there before focusing on Europe. The US limited ability for major offensive until the Essexes were delivered anyway.

After Midway, the situation began to stabilize and resources started flowing into the European campaign. Some aircraft that had been diverted from British orders, such as the LB-30s were returned. Others were withdrawn. By the end of 1942, all B-26s would be withdrawn from the Pacific theater and earmarked for the ETO and MTO.

The US would have put priority on the Pacific until it stabilized. If Japan had been more successful in the early going, winning Midway for example, the build up for the ETO and MTO would have been delayed. Operation Torch (the invasion of Morocco) may not have happened because those resources would have gone to the Pacific.

If the US had lost all it's pre-war carriers early in the war, it's offensive capabilities would have been severely limited for a while, but everything would have gone into reinforcing and holding the line. It's almost certain that Japan would have been stopped somewhere by late 1942, even if the KB hadn't been destroyed and the USN carriers had. At worse, the turning point would have come in early 1943.

US superior production and larger manpower base was going to have an effect eventually.

Bill

[wdolson]

ORIGINAL: Ian R
The Brisbane line was not such a dumb idea. Professionals talk about logistics, etc.

While you could say that if the IJE was able to devote all or most of its resources to an invasion of Australia they would win out after a few years, that is not a real world scenario.

And while the 20 IJA divisions are bogged down down here, the smart strategy for the US would be to make sure enough stuff was sent here to keep those 20 divisions occupied - and cause the IJN to have to devote more resources to supplying them - while they assembled the historical fleet of Essexes, Clevelands, Fletchers et al, and ploughed a path straight through the Marshalls, Marianas, and Carolines back to the Philippines.

Interesting stuff about Australian logistics. I only knew a little of it.

If the Japanese had been dumb enough to invade Australia, it would have given the US somewhere to send troops to fight without endangering the small carrier fleet. A few US divisions along with the Australians could have bogged down the Japanese army in Australia long enough for the Essexes to be ready.

With McArthur locked in his own struggle (I'm sure he would have commanded the army in Australia) and with no need for the Navy there, Nimitz would have been free to execute his Central Pacific strategy. Occupying the Marshalls and Marianas in 1943 and early 1944 along with either Luzon or Formosa would have isolated everything south of there. The bulk of Japan's fighting force and resources would be cut off.

The invasion of Formosa didn't happen in the real war because a Japanese offensive in China had made opening up the Chinese coast impossible. To invade Australia, Japan would have had to strip China, and would not have been able to control as much territory there. With the Allies on Formosa, that would have allowed the Chinese army to be supplied by sea with the capture of one port along the coast. It would have also completed a solid line of airpower from Hawaii to China, completely severing Japan's supply lines.

The war may have been over by late 1944 or early 1945.

Bill

[Williamb]

Basically your making the same argument that the Japanese did during WWII. That if they made war painful enough for the US the US would just give up and let the Japanese keep what they had invaded.
 
 
Its that same kind of denial that created the Kamikazis and caused two A bombs to be dropped. Utter refusal to believe anything but their own propagada.

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Rafael Warsaw
I would like to know Your opinion about this:
Was it ever possible to press US into peace talks ie IF US carriers were lost at Midway, Midway taken, Hawaii threatened?

Possible of course but extremely unlikely after the Pearl Harbor attack and the relative weakness of Japan.

How about OZ? Was it ever possible/considered by OZ Gov. to sign a peace with Japs If OZ was cut? Well we know that it was not possible to really cut OZ for a long time but some events, sometimes even minor, can influence public opinion waaaaay too strong.

Again, I find it difficult to believe OZ would capitulate to an enemy that lacked the power to conquer them. Maybe if they were abandoned by the other Allies but there's no reason to believe that would happen.

How US and OZ Goverments of those times have acted/reacted to public?

Im looking for some serious thought from You.

Ah, we players know that 43 WILL come, US Gov knew it too but sometimes its just imposible to convince a group of people even to something more obvious. This is a weakness of Democracy (which I Love and Cherish). Peace.

These governments were not nearly as constrained by public opinion as we are now. It couldn't be ignored but it could be kept at bay by keeping the people in the dark for years if need be. FDR was revered and trusted. The US would have withstood many more years of hardship on his word alone. He owned the mob and was quite capable at handling the press and the loyal opposition. I don't think the US would have negotiated a settlement with Japan post Pearl Harbor as long as FDR was alive. I don't think they'd have fared any better with Truman. Out of the frying pan and into the fire.

[mdiehl]

One might expect that having the capital burned would result in a determination to fight to the end, but this war ended in a negotiated peace.

There was nothing "negotiated" about it. The UK agreed to US demands to cease stopping and searching American vessels, to stop pressing American sailors, and abided by their agreement, and the UK paid reparations for damage to the Chesapeake. At the time of the agreement, there was only one operational British force in the United States-- in the south -- and it was soundly defeated in an effort to take New Orleans and thereby control the lower Mississippi.

[Rafael Warsaw]

This is how I started this thread:

I wonder If there was any way to press US into peace talks with Japan?

In our games (If we are lucky) we can press US really hard like:
BBs gone
Hawaii gone
PH under blocade
OZ treatened
Phillipines lost
Lots of other fleet assets lost
Carriers Lost so West Coast is threatened
New Guinea Lost/OZ threatened
India Invaded/jewel in an imperial crown seriously threatened
Etc.

And all in about first 3-5 months of the war. A hit after a Hit after a blow.

I would like to know Your opinion about this:
Was it ever possible to press US into peace talks ie IF US carriers were lost at Midway, Midway taken, Hawaii threatened?

How about OZ? Was it ever possible/considered by OZ Gov. to sign a peace with Japs If OZ was cut? Well we know that it was not possible to really cut OZ for a long time but some events, sometimes even minor, can influence public opinion waaaaay too strong.

How US and OZ Goverments of those times have acted/reacted to public?

If the reason I have started this thread is still NOT clear to somebody I can try to write this again by BLOCK LETTERS but it looks like some ppls do not understand a written words so I can even try to use common ICONS.

[mdiehl]

Was it ever possible to press US into peace talks ie IF US carriers were lost at Midway, Midway taken, Hawaii threatened?

No. For the following reasons.

1. Threatening Hawaii would have led quickly to a substantial defeat of the IJNs major CV elements. Japan did not have the logistical capability of sustaining that sort of interdiction, and had they tried the battle readiness of the elements assigned the task would quickly (within weeks) deteriorated to null. So "threaten" was not in the cards. The only choice Japan had in the matter was "invade Hawaii" or "stay away from Hawaii." Invading would likewise have been a disaster for the Japanese, as they did not have the support elements to protect a logistical pipeline to the Hawaiian Islands. The vulnerability of the Japanese support elements endeavoring to sustain a ground force in Hawaii would have been akin to leaving a wad of cash on a distant park bench on a crowded day and hoping that you could run 300 yards in time to catch any person who might take it.

2. Taking Midway would have availed nothing. Most Americans had never heard of Midway and its strategic importance to the US was nil. Americans certainly did not start clamoring Roosevelt for peace on the loss of Guam, Wake, or the Phillippines, so Midway atoll wasn't going to make a rat's behind of a difference.

3. Loss of US CVs at Midway. Under a best case scenario Japan would have lost at least two CVs in that battle anyhow. When you consider the replacement rate of US CVs as opposed to Japanese CVs it becomes apparent that a clean sweep at Midway would not have shifted the strategic balance of power.

I will add that the whole business of "botched timing of declaration of war" is a red herring. Had the Japanese consul delivered a declaration of war before the raid arrived no one in the US would have been less angry. American anger was not about the protocols of war being violated. It was about Japan organizing and launching the attack (which had to set sail weeks before) even as they made pretense of negotiating a solution to the impasse. The only way the "protocols theory" works is if at the time of the Japanese Declaration of War, Strike Force One is in the Marshalls or in Japan.

The implication is that if the simulation envisions ANY form of surprise attack, no negotiated peace should be on the table.

[wyrmmy]

ORIGINAL: Rafael Warsaw

This is how I started this thread:

I wonder If there was any way to press US into peace talks with Japan?

In our games (If we are lucky) we can press US really hard like:
BBs gone
Hawaii gone
PH under blocade
OZ treatened
Phillipines lost
Lots of other fleet assets lost
Carriers Lost so West Coast is threatened
New Guinea Lost/OZ threatened
India Invaded/jewel in an imperial crown seriously threatened
Etc.

And all in about first 3-5 months of the war. A hit after a Hit after a blow.

I would like to know Your opinion about this:
Was it ever possible to press US into peace talks ie IF US carriers were lost at Midway, Midway taken, Hawaii threatened?

How about OZ? Was it ever possible/considered by OZ Gov. to sign a peace with Japs If OZ was cut? Well we know that it was not possible to really cut OZ for a long time but some events, sometimes even minor, can influence public opinion waaaaay too strong.

How US and OZ Goverments of those times have acted/reacted to public?

If the reason I have started this thread is still NOT clear to somebody I can try to write this again by BLOCK LETTERS but it looks like some ppls do not understand a written words so I can even try to use common ICONS.

No. Simple enough?[8D]

[Zap]

mjk428,
You said, FDR "owned the mob" He really did??

[Ian R]

 
"If the Japanese had been dumb enough to invade Australia, it would have given the US somewhere to send troops to fight without endangering the small carrier fleet. A few US divisions along with the Australians could have bogged down the Japanese army in Australia long enough for the Essexes to be ready. "
 
Bill, the other point is that the IJA had a low level of motorisation, lower than the contemporary German or Soviet semi-motorised armies (each very roughly about 20% motorised, otherwise muscle powered).  The Australian army was not fully motorised in the sense that every division had its MT in its TOE, and didn't have the level of MT available in the US army, but compared to the IJA, who still had horses in their TOE, had plenty.
 
Add to that the vast distances to be overcome  - road distances using 2007 roads (which are lots better than the winding two lane highways of 1942) [not direct line as the crow flies]
 
Townsville to Sydney: 2340 km
 
Townsville to Melbourne: 2710 km
 
Townsville to Adelaide: 3214 km
 
Note Sydney to Melbourne is 873 km, but coming from Brisbane you can cut across central NSW along the way.
 
in comparison: [straight line]
 
Bonn to Brest (Fr) 876 km
 
Warsaw to Moscow - 1133 km
 
Cairo to Tripoli - 1744 km
 
Without a properly function railway, and a lot of motor transport they didn't have, the IJA could not have effectively operated away from the coast and its naval support . The scale of forces involved, would not be more than about 10% of those engaged on the eastern front in 1942, and although the action would be concentrated along a small number of transport corridors, the unit frontages would be comparatively huge. The motorised movement of US and Australian infantry would have given the IJA nightmares.

[mjk428]

ORIGINAL: Zap

mjk428,
You said, FDR "owned the mob" He really did??

Well, he was elected four times.

He had tremendous support amongst the poor and working class. He gave regular "Fireside Chats" on the radio, which was how the public got most of their information & entertainment. He took office in '33, so by the end of Jan. '42 he was working on his 10th year as prez. For an 18 year old on his way to "fight japs" he was the only prez he really knew. He could get away with things, like 4 terms, that no other prez had dared to even try before. Whatever else anyone might think of him, he was a master politician.

[Zap]

Ok, you were saying mob, as in, the whole group of Americans. I thought you were saying mob, as in, Mafia. My misunderstanding.

[mjk428]

[:D]

That meaning hadn't occured to me, though it should have.

Yeah, I meant it in "the mob loves Caesar" context.

[sven]

ORIGINAL: Zap

Ok, you were saying mob, as in, the whole group of Americans. I thought you were saying mob, as in, Mafia. My misunderstanding.

the argument could be made if one looks at the incestuous intertwining of the mob and machine politics, especially in places like NY and Chi-town.