IRL how much have Japanese got from conquered territories

[PaxMondo]

Alfred,


" It is therefore a pointless exercise to focus on this particular game abstraction. "
I agree very strongly with this.


" But it is stretching credibility that if only for a different mindset, it was feasible for Japan to have created during the war, a logistical network able to perfectly mimic the game's Magical Highway."

I disagree with the first part here, I think mindset is the determinant of almost everything. But "perfectly mimic the game", that I will easily concede. I am sure that more can be moved in the game than is feasible, if for no other reason that there is essentially no limit on the qty to be moved in a turn, only in how frequently that move will occur.


The reason I state "... I don't require anyone to accept the "Miracle Highway " concept ..." is because of mindset. If the game you are playing is that the mindset of IJ remains historical, which is completely fine, rationale, and ok; then the Miracle Highway would never happen. This means PDU OFF, etc etc etc.


Now, once you say: I want to play PDU ON, you are now saying that in this game there is going to be a change in the mindset of IJ. Good. Now, define that to yourself ... carefully. Depending upon how you do so, resources may or may not be committed to support a whole host of things: invade OZ, Miracle Highway, invade India, crush CHI, ... all of these were not done IRL as much as due to mindset as anything else (IJA/IJN rivarly, IJ didn't go on full war footing until '43 18 months AFTER US, etc etc etc).


All I have ever said is that it could be done. Not that it should. Again, just because it didn't happen doesn't mean it couldn't. Mindset is everything. Pyramids. Ho Chi Minh Trail. Great Wall. Golden Horde. Man on the Moon. Set a mindset, limit becomes a tough word to define.

As for the numbers, nothing to discuss here really. Either you beleive that a million people can be put to work or you don't. If you don't, you don't and nothing will change that. If you do, then the numbers are simple. Your argument would be that a million people could never be put to work <period> as serfs. Fine. My experiences are far different and my reading of history is not could it happen, but there are plenty of examples. That's all.

This discussion is all for nothing anyway. It only matters in a PBEM game, the two sides either agree or there is no game. Can't really see what the fuss is about. I mean you could just as easily say: "the dams didn't get blown and the RR remain with routine local guerilla attacks interupting the flow of goods from Saigon to Shanghai". Its all "what-if" anyway, right? I mean we know the real outcome. [;)]

[adarbrauner]

I stopped questioning the "magic highway" plausibility when I read about the very rich (until today) Lanchow area oil fields whose oil was not transported by pipelines nor by train mainly but rather...what...if not trucks or any other available mean of transportation...

[BullwinkleMogami]

OK on the scale of the game as a Japanese player not going for India why do I care about this?
Japan can win every where and it does not matter if they lose the central pacific

[BullwinkleMogami]

Hi, I don't think production is even an issue. Double, triple Japanese production they still lose the war. If you destroy the IJN (their CV) you capture bases to bomb the industry. All this nonsense about Japan out producing the allies is looking in the wrong direction. If you want to play Japan forget about production. If you are a production genius or a production idiot it will be hard to tell the difference. I don't think I ever spent 10 minutes on production. As Japan you are going to fight and decide the outcome with what you start with. If that is too hard do not play Japan. Does this mean Japan cannot win the game? Yes unless the Allied player is an idiot or you have magic you are going to lose. Why should I bother playing...that is why you bought the game. Anyone can play the Allied side. Can you be Japan?

[IJV]

To be honest, the idea that anything more than a trace amount of 'stuff' could/would be shipped, essentially, overland from Southeast Asia to Japan is so obviously insane that it breaks my brain a little bit trying to think about it. Maybe you'd manage a couple of thousands of tons a day for a while before the infrastructure started to break down from overuse, but in the meantime hope you're ok with paying an order of magnitude more for your whatever once it manages to get where it's going!

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: PaxMondo

ORIGINAL: mind_messing


The greatest "what if" for me is what would have happened if the Japanese had went in with a "liberating" mindset rather than a colonial one.

Or maybe "conquistador" mindset.


I agree, it makes for some interesting what ifs. The catch of course is absent their mindset, the war itself becomes more problematic.

Not by default.

I was thinking more along the lines that the Japanese favours immediately establishing national governments to replace the colonial administration in Vietnam, Malaya and Indonesia. Of course, these governments would be under obligations to the Japanese but even so, this could have been an excellent opportunity on so many levels to give Japan an improved strategic position for the war.

Especially in the case of Indonesia, where Japan could have harnessed the goodwill from pushing out the Dutch to creating an Indonesian state that would have needed close ties with Japan to maintain its independence.

[RangerJoe]

The "Miracle Highway" would not need trucks but enough bullock carts and bullocks. There was enough manpower available and the farmers did not need the bullocks except for planting, harvesting, and so on. Horses could also have been brought from inner Mongolia and used.

Ships were sent loaded from Japan and returned empty while others would go to Japan with a load and leave empty. The good JFB would not allow this to happen if there were available cargoes but in real life it did happen that way.

[spence]

I was thinking more along the lines that the Japanese favours immediately establishing national governments to replace the colonial administration in Vietnam, Malaya and Indonesia. Of course, these governments would be under obligations to the Japanese but even so, this could have been an excellent opportunity on so many levels to give Japan an improved strategic position for the war.

Especially in the case of Indonesia, where Japan could have harnessed the goodwill from pushing out the Dutch to creating an Indonesian state that would have needed close ties with Japan to maintain its independence.

Unfortunately for the various Asian nationalist groups the Japanese behaved quite civilly to start and then reverted to the same sort of behavior they exhibited in China (re: Nanking Massacre), Thailand (more Thais died building the rsilway to Rangoon than POWs), etc. The various Asian nationalities all got to find out that they could be subjects for the colonial powers or they could be slaves for the Japanese. So when it became apparent that the Japanese were losing the various Asian nationalities decided to take their chances with the colonial powers after the Japanese were destroyed. As for Vietnam - the Viet Minh cut their teeth fighting the Japanese first - it wasn't until the Japanese were gone that they went to war with the French and later the US. The Japanese (IJA and IJN) made their bed long before 12/07/41.

[mind_messing]

Unfortunately for the various Asian nationalist groups the Japanese behaved quite civilly to start and then reverted to the same sort of behavior they exhibited in China (re: Nanking Massacre), Thailand (more Thais died building the rsilway to Rangoon than POWs), etc. The various Asian nationalities all got to find out that they could be subjects for the colonial powers or they could be slaves for the Japanese. So when it became apparent that the Japanese were losing the various Asian nationalities decided to take their chances with the colonial powers after the Japanese were destroyed.

I'm well aware that the Japanese were just as bad, if not worse at treating subject peoples as the other colonial powers. I find it a interesting thought exercise if that hadn't been the case, as it completely changes the political and strategic dynamic of the war.

As for Vietnam - the Viet Minh cut their teeth fighting the Japanese first - it wasn't until the Japanese were gone that they went to war with the French and later the US.

That's not true, the Viet Minh were formed to fight the predominantly French colonial regime. The Japanese stood behind the French regime, but in terms of the colonial infrastructure in Vietnam it was French in nature.

The "what if" for me is Japan using a softer touch:

- Sweep out the old regime and put the locals in charge to build goodwill.
- Use that goodwill to get agreements to extract the needed resources for the Japanese war machine.
- Build the rhetoric and propaganda of the war as one of western colonialism trying to re-establish itself in South-East Asia.
- Offer tangible military aid from the IJA to building national armies in the newly liberated nations.

It's always interesting to note the key role that former IJA soldiers played in nearly all immediate post-war conflicts. Defected Japanese trained the Viet Minh and essentially trained and armed the Indonesian independence movement. Indonesia is an especially interesting case study for this, as the Japanese were in talks for to put the nationalists in charge, and they had their own milita.

[spence]

but in terms of the colonial infrastructure in Vietnam it was French in nature.

That of course explains why the OSS gave guns to the Viet Minh.

- Use that goodwill to get agreements to extract the needed resources for the Japanese war machine.

Interesting that the Indonesians incorporated a Japanese word into their own language: Romusha. The individuals who signed up in the initial period of good will towards the Japanese got to help the Japanese in various other countries as well as Indonesia. The word in Indonesian now means 'slave'. Wonder how that happened?

The Japanese employed the "Asia for Asians" propaganda. Their problem was that after a few months of Japanese beneficence the Asians realized that the change of overlords was not for the better.

The good treatment of POWs and others in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 time frame won the Japanese the praise and respect of all the western colonial powers. Pretty sure that that continued during WWI. But the Japanese spent all of the 1920s and 1930s changing that (When a German Nazi gets disgusted by Japanese brutality in Nanking in 1937 you've really got a rough row to hoe with your thesis regarding a different Japanese mindset 4 years later). The Japanese looked on other Asians with the same jaundiced eye that the Nazis looked on Russians and other Slavs (to say nothing of Jews, Gypsies and other non-Nordics).

[GetAssista]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
The "what if" for me is Japan using a softer touch:

- Sweep out the old regime and put the locals in charge to build goodwill.
- Use that goodwill to get agreements to extract the needed resources for the Japanese war machine.
- Build the rhetoric and propaganda of the war as one of western colonialism trying to re-establish itself in South-East Asia.
- Offer tangible military aid from the IJA to building national armies in the newly liberated nations.

I think the logic of the imperial system during wartime will inevitably stir the equilibrium towards a coercive one even if the Japanese administration had some good intentions initially. Any clash of interests between Japanese and locals (on different levels of power) will tend to be resolved from the position of power. Japan needed resources immediately and in vast quantities, it did not have time to wait for the locals to agree to give those resources away essentially for free. Japan had nothing material to offer in exchange for those resources except initial "liberation", and that kind of push is quickly forgotten under the weight of further coercive transactions

[mind_messing]

That of course explains why the OSS gave guns to the Viet Minh.

The Vichy French regime wasn't exactly the most amenable to Allied wishes throughout the war, and we know how it turned out for the OSS in the end...

Interesting that the Indonesians incorporated a Japanese word into their own language: Romusha. The individuals who signed up in the initial period of good will towards the Japanese got to help the Japanese in various other countries as well as Indonesia. The word in Indonesian now means 'slave'. Wonder how that happened?

Sure, but there's no denying that the Japanese were able to mobilize some element of Indonesian nationalism to their own end. The PETA militia was not insubstantial in terms of numbers.

The Japanese employed the "Asia for Asians" propaganda. Their problem was that after a few months of Japanese beneficence the Asians realized that the change of overlords was not for the better.

The good treatment of POWs and others in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 time frame won the Japanese the praise and respect of all the western colonial powers. Pretty sure that that continued during WWI. But the Japanese spent all of the 1920s and 1930s changing that (When a German Nazi gets disgusted by Japanese brutality in Nanking in 1937 you've really got a rough row to hoe with your thesis regarding a different Japanese mindset 4 years later). The Japanese looked on other Asians with the same jaundiced eye that the Nazis looked on Russians and other Slavs (to say nothing of Jews, Gypsies and other non-Nordics).

I'm well aware of how history played out. My original comment was directed to wondering what would have happened if the "Asia for the Asians" was a genuine policy.

The good treatment of POWs and others in the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05 time frame won the Japanese the praise and respect of all the western colonial powers. Pretty sure that that continued during WWI. But the Japanese spent all of the 1920s and 1930s changing that (When a German Nazi gets disgusted by Japanese brutality in Nanking in 1937 you've really got a rough row to hoe with your thesis regarding a different Japanese mindset 4 years later). The Japanese looked on other Asians with the same jaundiced eye that the Nazis looked on Russians and other Slavs (to say nothing of Jews, Gypsies and other non-Nordics).

This is sadly true, but it's a sad fact of history that racial hatred was a major proponent of WW2 for every major combatant.

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
The "what if" for me is Japan using a softer touch:

- Sweep out the old regime and put the locals in charge to build goodwill.
- Use that goodwill to get agreements to extract the needed resources for the Japanese war machine.
- Build the rhetoric and propaganda of the war as one of western colonialism trying to re-establish itself in South-East Asia.
- Offer tangible military aid from the IJA to building national armies in the newly liberated nations.

I think the logic of the imperial system during wartime will inevitably stir the equilibrium towards a coercive one even if the Japanese administration had some good intentions initially. Any clash of interests between Japanese and locals (on different levels of power) will tend to be resolved from the position of power. Japan needed resources immediately and in vast quantities, it did not have time to wait for the locals to agree to give those resources away essentially for free. Japan had nothing material to offer in exchange for those resources except initial "liberation", and that kind of push is quickly forgotten under the weight of further coercive transactions

The resources were already being given away for free under the prior colonial systems.

Japan was in the position to offer an excellent deal to the various national groups - "Give us those resources, we'll give you independence and rifles for you to defend yourself when the western colonists try to smack you back down."

[PetrOs]

I actually think that if that card would have been played, it would have been immensely more complex for allies to win. Forming Indonesia, Phillipines, South China, Manchuko, Vietnam, and with some exceptions Thailand to independent states allied to Japanese cause, armed and motivated to fight the colonialists could have given them much more fighting power in terms of mobilized troops, and also some additional industrial capacity. But the hook would be that it still would not give them the fighting machines like planes, tanks or ships, and those were the problem in the end.

Another missed chance like this was when the Germans marched into USSR in 1941. Many people in the occupied regions were at first greeting the germans as those to free them from Stalin's regime, but after a month or two they turned to partisan war due to the way german/romanian/hungarian/slovak/finnish troops handled the civilians...

[PaxMondo]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

Japan was in the position to offer an excellent deal to the various national groups - "Give us those resources, we'll give you independence and rifles for you to defend yourself when the western colonists try to smack you back down."

I agree with most of this. It is the primary underlying basis of my personal mod.

[anarchyintheuk]

$.02. Position, yes. Reality, no. I like my what ifs based in reality. For the Japanese to behave as they did in China and to think that it's even hypothetical that they could turn around and get everyone in the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere to sit around and sing the 'I'd like to buy the World a Coke' song is fantasy. Someone said it before about leopards changing their spots.

[mind_messing]

ORIGINAL: anarchyintheuk

$.02. Position, yes. Reality, no. I like my what ifs based in reality. For the Japanese to behave as they did in China and to think that it's even hypothetical that they could turn around and get everyone in the Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere to sit around and sing the 'I'd like to buy the World a Coke' song is fantasy. Someone said it before about leopards changing their spots.

There's plenty of precedent within WW2 for nations gulfing the vast distance between respectable conduct and outright brutality.

With the focus of AE in mind, the Bengal Famine springs immediately to mind.

[spence]

With the focus of AE in mind, the Bengal Famine springs immediately to mind.

I haven't read extensively about the Bengal Famine of 1943 (there were apparently several famines and not all when the Brits were in charge). It does seem that the colonial overlords had a role to play in that disaster but exactly how much of a role seems to be in dispute.

But it seems that there are only a few of the same sort of nationalists that started WW2 with the US that dispute the starring role of the Japanese Army in the Nanking Massacre of 1937 (the same ones that say it must have been the Martians who sank the USS Panay and strafed the crew as they abandoned ship). The only thing that is really in dispute about that massacre is the number of dead Chinese created by the IJA in those two weeks.

Sorry but leopards don't change their spots.

[GetAssista]

ORIGINAL: mind_messing

ORIGINAL: GetAssista

ORIGINAL: mind_messing
The "what if" for me is Japan using a softer touch:

- Sweep out the old regime and put the locals in charge to build goodwill.
- Use that goodwill to get agreements to extract the needed resources for the Japanese war machine.
- Build the rhetoric and propaganda of the war as one of western colonialism trying to re-establish itself in South-East Asia.
- Offer tangible military aid from the IJA to building national armies in the newly liberated nations.

I think the logic of the imperial system during wartime will inevitably stir the equilibrium towards a coercive one even if the Japanese administration had some good intentions initially. Any clash of interests between Japanese and locals (on different levels of power) will tend to be resolved from the position of power. Japan needed resources immediately and in vast quantities, it did not have time to wait for the locals to agree to give those resources away essentially for free. Japan had nothing material to offer in exchange for those resources except initial "liberation", and that kind of push is quickly forgotten under the weight of further coercive transactions

The resources were already being given away for free under the prior colonial systems.

Japan was in the position to offer an excellent deal to the various national groups - "Give us those resources, we'll give you independence and rifles for you to defend yourself when the western colonists try to smack you back down."

Nah, it is not an excellent deal. Colonies continue losing something material right away and get only promices in return. They did not get independence, I already stated why. They did not get the rifles either, because those remained largely under Japanese command w/o local self-ruling.
When you are promised change but in fact, there is no change, you can get even more pissed off compared to the initial european colonial equilibrium. Might take some time like a couple of years, but you will get there eventually. And Imperial Japan surely would not accommodate your grievances

[GetAssista]

double post

[mogami]

Empires always drain more then they feed in. In fact ignore the game. Japan expanded a war and for a while claimed an empire. But it lost the empire and the war simply because the empire was more then it could hold. Imagine if Japan had instead of the Tripartite pact said hey France we will guarantee your possionions in Indo China. And hey Holland we will protect your holding. Screw Germany and Italy we are sending troops to reinforce the British in North Africa and our ASW assets will prosecute German U boats in Atlantic. They would have been given everything they sought to take. The game cannot change the state of mind. Or there would be no game. But Japan Allied to the Western Alliance was not impossible and just imagine where they would have been today. But it was impossible and the reason is Japan could not be allied with people they thought inferior and that cannot be put into the game. I don't know how you put that into the game and I am not sure it would make the game better. If you play Japan you are the bad guys. But since it is only a game you do not have to defend that. We pretend there is nothing outside of pure military logic directing our actions. Leave it there. This is only a game. This is only a game.