Hypothetical Dec 7th

[Lecivius]

Yeah, I knew about how cold decimated the German army(People in charge REALLY need to read history). But I was of the impression the Siberian troops were what allowed the Russians to counterattack so strongly, as opposed to just local counter attacks and a defensive winter.

Anywho, 'nuff said.

[TulliusDetritus]

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

But I was of the impression the Siberian troops were what allowed the Russians to counterattack so strongly, as opposed to just local counter attacks and a defensive winter.

As I said they were only a part of the reserves. The counter-offensive was in fact a sort of fiasco because all the fronts were ordered to attack. Uncle Joe's orders; Zhukov wanted a concentrated attack around Moscow. Zhukov was right by the way (you can't be strong everywhere). But the boss is the boss [:D]

Yes, enough said [:)]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Lecivius

ORIGINAL: warspite1

The Germans fell short at Moscow in December 1941. So what actually changes in this scenario you propose? Well the Japanese attacking could mean the transfer of ‘Siberian’ troops to the west may not have happened. That said, the effect these troops had on the Battle for Moscow has, according to some recent sources, been over exaggerated.

Interesting. I'm not disputing you at all, but I have never seen or heard this. what sources did you get this from, if I may ask?

warspite1

Hi Lecivius. This shouldn't be so hard to find - as my main reading is naval warfare - and so there are only a few books this info could have come from [&:]. But frustratingly I have checked my Glantz and Fritz books to no avail (may be in there but I can't see it - although Glantz touches on this).

Anyway, please see attached link. I think this gives a very detailed account (without colossal amounts of reading) as to what the state of play was in terms of nos., training etc.

The huge nos. of troops employed says more about the Soviet ability to raise these units (and which was woefully neglected by German intelligence) rather than a very large number of 8ft Siberians [:)] that presented themselves before Moscow just in time for tea and medals.

http://www.operationbarbarossa.net/the- ... n-1941-42/

[witpqs]

Yes, Warspite, that is surely a myth. Only 1 in 10 Siberians was 8 ft tall! [:D]

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: witpqs

Yes, Warspite, that is surely a myth. Only 1 in 10 Siberians was 8 ft tall! [:D]

warspite1

[:)] Well I seem to get accused of all sorts on this forum, so what's a little Siberian exaggeration [:D]

[wdolson]

I do know Siberian Forest Cats tend to be bigger than the average moggy. We have two that are around 6 1/2 months old and the heavier one is pushing 8 pounds. They're both female and will probably be about 15 pounds when fully grown. The males get up around 20 pounds.

Bill

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: RisingSun

If Japan manage to get or captured Indo-China, I doubt if USA would goto war with the Japanese. If they attacked Hong Kong or the Philippines, they would.

warspite1

Sorry I appear to have missed this post yesterday.

- But the Japanese did move into French Indo-China - its what caused Roosevelt to freeze Japanese assets and circa 80% of her oil requirement.

- If Japan attacked the Philippines then yes, as she was controlled by the US and had substantial military assets there, then I think an American declaration was likely to follow [;)]

- Not sure why you give special status to Hong Kong though. The US did not intervene when France fell, neither when it looked like Britain could be invaded - why do you think an attack on this small colonial outpost would get the peoples of America gung-ho for a piece of Japan on Britain's behalf?

[Rising-Sun]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: RisingSun

If Japan manage to get or captured Indo-China, I doubt if USA would goto war with the Japanese. If they attacked Hong Kong or the Philippines, they would.

warspite1

Sorry I appear to have missed this post yesterday.

- But the Japanese did move into French Indo-China - its what caused Roosevelt to freeze Japanese assets and circa 80% of her oil requirement.

- If Japan attacked the Philippines then yes, as she was controlled by the US and had substantial military assets there, then I think an American declaration was likely to follow [;)]

- Not sure why you give special status to Hong Kong though. The US did not intervene when France fell, neither when it looked like Britain could be invaded - why do you think an attack on this small colonial outpost would get the peoples of America gung-ho for a piece of Japan on Britain's behalf?

Cause they can be a problems if they manage to take Palembang, shipping crude oils, planes or even submarines is right in that shipping lane. Philippines consider to be too close and as a threat too. Yeah they knew that USA freeze the Japan's oil and steel imports, they knew it was going to happen, so they go ahead to seize these resources through out the Dutch East Indies.

I would have done the same thing if I was Japan myself. After the long terrible wars with China, just doesn't end.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: RisingSun

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: RisingSun

If Japan manage to get or captured Indo-China, I doubt if USA would goto war with the Japanese. If they attacked Hong Kong or the Philippines, they would.

warspite1

Sorry I appear to have missed this post yesterday.

- But the Japanese did move into French Indo-China - its what caused Roosevelt to freeze Japanese assets and circa 80% of her oil requirement.

- If Japan attacked the Philippines then yes, as she was controlled by the US and had substantial military assets there, then I think an American declaration was likely to follow [;)]

- Not sure why you give special status to Hong Kong though. The US did not intervene when France fell, neither when it looked like Britain could be invaded - why do you think an attack on this small colonial outpost would get the peoples of America gung-ho for a piece of Japan on Britain's behalf?

Cause they can be a problems if they manage to take Palembang, shipping crude oils, planes or even submarines is right in that shipping lane. Philippines consider to be too close and as a threat too. Yeah they knew that USA freeze the Japan's oil and steel imports, they knew it was going to happen, so they go ahead to seize these resources through out the Dutch East Indies.

I would have done the same thing if I was Japan myself. After the long terrible wars with China, just doesn't end.

warspite1

Ah so you mean the Dutch East Indies - not Hong Kong?

[Rising-Sun]

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: RisingSun

ORIGINAL: warspite1


warspite1

Sorry I appear to have missed this post yesterday.

- But the Japanese did move into French Indo-China - its what caused Roosevelt to freeze Japanese assets and circa 80% of her oil requirement.

- If Japan attacked the Philippines then yes, as she was controlled by the US and had substantial military assets there, then I think an American declaration was likely to follow [;)]

- Not sure why you give special status to Hong Kong though. The US did not intervene when France fell, neither when it looked like Britain could be invaded - why do you think an attack on this small colonial outpost would get the peoples of America gung-ho for a piece of Japan on Britain's behalf?

Cause they can be a problems if they manage to take Palembang, shipping crude oils, planes or even submarines is right in that shipping lane. Philippines consider to be too close and as a threat too. Yeah they knew that USA freeze the Japan's oil and steel imports, they knew it was going to happen, so they go ahead to seize these resources through out the Dutch East Indies.

I would have done the same thing if I was Japan myself. After the long terrible wars with China, just doesn't end.

warspite1

Ah so you mean the Dutch East Indies - not Hong Kong?

Hmm no I meant Hong Kong, then later Singapore will have to be taken as well. Think about it, this the reasons they left the League of Nations and they didn't like the ways thing turn out for Japan or least they treat them badly or taken advantage of. China was having civil problems with their own people, but not just China, it is Communist too. So this the reasons why Japan took Korea and onward. China and Japan, they cant never get along and been very, very long years since the conflict.

[oldman45]

After reading through this I have a couple of questions;

None of the posts have mentioned Australia, would Japan have ignored them with no US presence?

If the IJN is looking for the decisive battle to make sure the US is not a threat, could they have used Austrailia to bait the US fleet?

I know that Japan was sure the US would go to war if/when they attacked into the DEI, without the increases to the defences of PI would they still believe that?

Ok thanks for a great thread.

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: oldman45

After reading through this I have a couple of questions;

None of the posts have mentioned Australia, would Japan have ignored them with no US presence?

If the IJN is looking for the decisive battle to make sure the US is not a threat, could they have used Austrailia to bait the US fleet?

I know that Japan was sure the US would go to war if/when they attacked into the DEI, without the increases to the defences of PI would they still believe that?

Ok thanks for a great thread.

warspite1

Hi oldman45, in order to have a stab at providing an opinion can you confirm which of the various scenarios you are thinking of please? i.e. is this Big B's scenario whereby the US have not reinforced and the Japanese have brought the US into the war by attacking the Philippines?

Thanks

[Rising-Sun]

ORIGINAL: oldman45

After reading through this I have a couple of questions;

None of the posts have mentioned Australia, would Japan have ignored them with no US presence?

If the IJN is looking for the decisive battle to make sure the US is not a threat, could they have used Austrailia to bait the US fleet?

I know that Japan was sure the US would go to war if/when they attacked into the DEI, without the increases to the defences of PI would they still believe that?

Ok thanks for a great thread.

I doubt if Japan would taken Australia, they didn't want to expand that far, beside they got what they needed in Dutch East Indies. But however they did hit the ports in Darwin and yes maybe lure out the ships and sink it.

[oldman45]

Well it was more a combination of the posts, if the US did not reinforce the PI, would Japan still consider the US a threat to their plans? If Japan did invade the PI, I think it would have a similar effect on the US as long as it was a surprise attack. The general population would become inflamed and it would be no problem for the President to get a declaration of war.

Like others had posted, without a direct attack on the US by the Japanese, I think it would have been impossible for the US to go to war.

Since I wasn't paying attention that closely this really was a response to Warspite1 question. I hope I covered it.

[warspite1]

I'm sure there was a discussion on Australia here some years ago (probably been more than one) but I can't find it (them).

I think the consensus is that the Japanese did not have the manpower or the logistical support required for an invasion of Australia and the follow up supply of the divisions landed. The army were too bogged down in China and in any case were not interested in any operation that made the navy look good. The faintly ridiculous way they went about trying to seize back Guadalcanal is perhaps instructive.

But of course, I suspect all those discussions were carried out with the real war as a background. What about this scenario where the Japanese have not attacked the US and simply gone straight for Malaya/NEI/Burma.
Would this have changed things? The Japanese limitations remain, but now there is no US presence in Australia. With troops fighting in the Middle East, what exactly have the Australians got at home to counter even 3-4 Japanese divisions?

Of course that assumes that the Australians and Kiwis are not pulled out of the Western Desert immediately that Malaya looks to be in trouble. I have not checked the position in the Western Desert at this time but we are talking December 1941 so I suspect its around the time of Operation Crusader. If so this would give the British some breathing space to remove some of these ANZAC divisions.

An interesting one to be explored. Who has a deep knowledge of Australian military in WWII and specifically, what would have been in the country in December 1941 - either ready or more likely in training?

[Orm]

Would it be possible to mobilize a force in South Africa and send it to Australia? Or would that be politically impossible?

[Rising-Sun]

ORIGINAL: oldman45

Well it was more a combination of the posts, if the US did not reinforce the PI, would Japan still consider the US a threat to their plans? If Japan did invade the PI, I think it would have a similar effect on the US as long as it was a surprise attack. The general population would become inflamed and it would be no problem for the President to get a declaration of war.

Like others had posted, without a direct attack on the US by the Japanese, I think it would have been impossible for the US to go to war.

Since I wasn't paying attention that closely this really was a response to Warspite1 question. I hope I covered it.

The reasons to take out Hong Kong and the Philippines, is that their long range bombers are in range to Japan. They didn't want that to happen and those bases need to be taken. For Singapore, it was strategic location.

Like warspite1 mention about manpower and logics, he is correct about Australia.

ORIGINAL: Orm

Would it be possible to mobilize a force in South Africa and send it to Australia? Or would that be politically impossible?

Anything is possible, just need the transports and supplies to do it. Infact, really want to do that? Is it worth it??

[warspite1]

ORIGINAL: Orm

Would it be possible to mobilize a force in South Africa and send it to Australia? Or would that be politically impossible?

warspite1

The South Africans were split between those of British descent and those of Dutch. The latter were generally no friends of the British. Largely for this reason South Africa was only ever to field two infantry divisions (a third was disbanded as it never came up to full strength).

In December 1941 the 2nd Division had just joined the 1st in North Africa and so there were no troops available from this source for any reinforcement of Australia. I assume both were involved in Crusader (although may have been too early for the 2nd which had not long arrived in the Western Desert).

That said, in addition to a) a lack of troops there was also b) a limitation on deployment. There was an agreement that the troops who signed up were limited to fighting in Africa. (When the South African leader Jan Smuts tried to raise two armoured divisions later in the war for fighting in Italy, he could only raise enough volunteers for one).

If Australia and New Zealand were attacked they needed their men back.

[Buckrock]

ORIGINAL: warspite1
But of course, I suspect all those discussions were carried out with the real war as a background. What about this scenario where the Japanese have not attacked the US and simply gone straight for Malaya/NEI/Burma.

Would this have changed things? The Japanese limitations remain, but now there is no US presence in Australia. With troops fighting in the Middle East, what exactly have the Australians got at home to counter even 3-4 Japanese divisions?

The Australians had 250,000 CMF troops already mobilised by early 1942. Two AIF divisions plus army support units from the Middle East could have
been on Australian soil by March '42 (most arrived by that date historically). The Roosevelt Administration would have almost certainly started
sending US-built aircraft and other "lend lease" war material to Australia by then and made sure they were carried by US flagged merchants and
escorted by US warships.

So when is this invasion of Australia launched? And what do the Japanese think when, as they begin an invasion that will tie up an enormous amount
of shipping, extend an already over extended SLOC and put a sizeable IJA force at the end of it, Roosevelt orders the US Pacific to put to sea for
manuevers in undisclosed waters and B-17s begin to shift to bases unknown. Do they pretend nothing will come of it and just carry on?

Could the Japanese really just ignore the Elephant in the Pacific?

[oldman45]

I don't think the Japanese would consider an invasion of Australia, but I do think they would perhaps go into the Solomons to cut off Australia. Would the US allow this? Would Australia declare war on Japan after the UK declares war?