Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Social > Off Topic

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-09-2012, 09:47 PM   #51
iamwiz82
Lifer
 
iamwiz82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 30,500
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlatinumRice View Post
the americans would just have surrendered. if the japanese had taken hostage of 40,000 american citizens had would have lost its main base in the pacific. there would have definitively considered of ending the war.
I believe they had more American POWs just from the Philippines. I'm too lazy to research it though.
iamwiz82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 09:47 PM   #52
PlatinumRice
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 241
Default

if they then bombed the panama canal, they would have been in a very bad situation. the japanese could have bombed their cities and they could have done nothing about it.
PlatinumRice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 09:50 PM   #53
PieIsAwesome
Diamond Member
 
PieIsAwesome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,962
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlatinumRice View Post
the americans would just have surrendered. if the japanese had taken hostage of 40,000 american citizens had would have lost its main base in the pacific. there would have definitively considered of ending the war.
Like hell they would have. The only thing America would have accepted was complete and utter Japanese defeat.
__________________
▼A▼A►▼►▼
PieIsAwesome is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 09:50 PM   #54
sdifox
No Lifer
 
sdifox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of Tonto, ON
Posts: 53,691
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlatinumRice View Post
if they then bombed the panama canal, they would have been in a very bad situation. the japanese could have bombed their cities and they could have done nothing about it.

With what??? Do you even understand the distances involved?
__________________
I'm not a f$*#@ing machine! - Rubycon
Ever screw so much you get a blister? - Rubycon
shameless plug
http://primaryaccounting.ca
sdifox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 09:52 PM   #55
iamwiz82
Lifer
 
iamwiz82's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 30,500
Default

If not for tentacle porn and vending machines for used panties... Japan would have persevered.
iamwiz82 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 09:57 PM   #56
Exterous
Lifer
 
Exterous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,878
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Born2bwire View Post
Even more interesting is that the US submarine warfare in the Pacific was the stuff that the Germans dreamed of. It was widely successful.
A lot was due to the neglect the IJN paid to convoy duty and merchant defense in general. In 1943 they finally decided to form a section responsible for merchant marine protection. It's staff? Two junior officers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdifox View Post
There is no way Japan could have won WWII, even if they developed the nuke. They can't reach USA.
Well - they could. Now the matter of getting is light enough...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-400_class_submarine
__________________
"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." -Friedrich Nietzshe

"It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifiling exception, is composed of others" - John Andrew Holmes
Exterous is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:03 PM   #57
Svnla
Lifer
 
Svnla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Southerner 4ever!!!
Posts: 10,422
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nehalem256 View Post
They were outclassed 10-1 in war making potential. There is no way they could have won.

Agree. Same for Germany vs. Russia in the Eastern Front. Russia was able to get more men, more tanks, more weapons after the first few years plus Hitler's many miscalculations/mistakes did not help.
__________________
Rules to live by: 1) Forgive is for suckers, payback w/ extreme prejudice plus interest. 2) Golden Rule = Treat others as others treat you, don't take craps from anyone.
3) Relentless pursuit of a more perfect perfection. 4) I ain't looking for trouble, but if trouble comes knocking, I will be ready, willing, and able for some rocking.

Last edited by Svnla; 11-09-2012 at 10:11 PM.
Svnla is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:03 PM   #58
sdifox
No Lifer
 
sdifox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of Tonto, ON
Posts: 53,691
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exterous View Post
A lot was due to the neglect the IJN paid to convoy duty and merchant defense in general. In 1943 they finally decided to form a section responsible for merchant marine protection. It's staff? Two junior officers.



Well - they could. Now the matter of getting is light enough...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I-400_class_submarine
lulz, they would be hunted down. Wars are won on the back of logistics. And Japan just didn't have the logistics in its favour.
Say they managed to take out San Francisco, so what? That does not a war win. USA doesn't even have to drop the nukes to win the war. It was just the least expensive in terms of American lives.
__________________
I'm not a f$*#@ing machine! - Rubycon
Ever screw so much you get a blister? - Rubycon
shameless plug
http://primaryaccounting.ca
sdifox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:04 PM   #59
Exterous
Lifer
 
Exterous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,878
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PlatinumRice View Post
if they then bombed the panama canal, they would have been in a very bad situation. the japanese could have bombed their cities and they could have done nothing about it.
Nothing they could do about it? First they only built a small handful if I-400s and they could only hold 3 aircraft each. Not exactly an overwhelming force. Furthermore the Aichi M6A was not really built for mixing it up in the air so, once intercepted, it stood little chance.

Its maximum loadout was around 1800lbs. Thats about 8,000lbs too light for an atomic weapon of that era and such a small conventional bomb loadout wasnt going to affect the war really in any way
__________________
"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." -Friedrich Nietzshe

"It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifiling exception, is composed of others" - John Andrew Holmes

Last edited by Exterous; 11-09-2012 at 10:08 PM.
Exterous is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:07 PM   #60
Exterous
Lifer
 
Exterous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,878
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdifox View Post
lulz, they would be hunted down. Wars are won on the back of logistics. And Japan just didn't have the logistics in its favour.
Say they managed to take out San Francisco, so what? That does not a war win. USA doesn't even have to drop the nukes to win the war. It was just the least expensive in terms of American lives.
Hey - I am not saying they could have won the war - just that they had ways to bomb the US. I am also not saying that any type of successful bombing campaign could have been waged

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_balloon

6 deaths from Japanese bombing in Oregon
__________________
"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." -Friedrich Nietzshe

"It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifiling exception, is composed of others" - John Andrew Holmes
Exterous is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:08 PM   #61
sdifox
No Lifer
 
sdifox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of Tonto, ON
Posts: 53,691
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exterous View Post
Hey - I am not saying they could have won the war - just that they had ways to bomb the US. I am also not saying that any type of successful bombing campaign could have been waged

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_balloon

6 deaths from Japanese bombing in Oregon
That is not bombing, that is just harassment.

This is bombing

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firebombing_of_tokyo
__________________
I'm not a f$*#@ing machine! - Rubycon
Ever screw so much you get a blister? - Rubycon
shameless plug
http://primaryaccounting.ca

Last edited by sdifox; 11-09-2012 at 10:12 PM.
sdifox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:14 PM   #62
Exterous
Lifer
 
Exterous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,878
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdifox View Post
That is not bombing, that is just harassment.
What are you talking about? Thats a success rate of about 0.06%!

Joking aside I do find the project rather fascinating for the mere fact that there was any success at all from launching a balloon in Japan, having is make its own, unguided way across the pacific and actually exploding somewhere in the United States
__________________
"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." -Friedrich Nietzshe

"It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifiling exception, is composed of others" - John Andrew Holmes
Exterous is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:18 PM   #63
Exterous
Lifer
 
Exterous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,878
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by sdifox View Post
I think people forget that the firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the Nagasaki atomic bomb. The 'inhumane' claim for the use of atomic weapons completely ingores what was being done to the other Japanese cities without the use of atomic weapons. The same might hold true for the conventional bombing of Dresden as well
__________________
"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." -Friedrich Nietzshe

"It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifiling exception, is composed of others" - John Andrew Holmes
Exterous is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:22 PM   #64
sdifox
No Lifer
 
sdifox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of Tonto, ON
Posts: 53,691
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exterous View Post
I think people forget that the firebombing of Tokyo killed more than the Nagasaki atomic bomb. The 'inhumane' claim for the use of atomic weapons completely ingores what was being done to the other Japanese cities without the use of atomic weapons. The same might hold true for the conventional bombing of Dresden as well
yeah, firebombing is a lot more cruel than nukes. If the nukes were not used, the firebombing would eventually destroy all major Japanese cities.
__________________
I'm not a f$*#@ing machine! - Rubycon
Ever screw so much you get a blister? - Rubycon
shameless plug
http://primaryaccounting.ca
sdifox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:27 PM   #65
benzylic
Golden Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,527
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K1052 View Post
The strike on Pearl would have worked if not for two operational problems and one planing problem. It was still an impressive feat of military operation but futile from a strategic sense.

1) Carrier force not in port. Failure to neutralize the US's most valuable assets.

2) Nagumo canceling the third wave that would have targeted repair yards, drydocks, and oil storage tank farms.

3) Not considering the submarine base to be a primary target.
In 1941 battleships were still considered the most important ships in the US Navy.
benzylic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:40 PM   #66
K1052
Lifer
 
K1052's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SF/Chicago
Posts: 20,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GagHalfrunt View Post
All inconsequential in the long run. The war was not won on the strength of the US being able to compete in the 3 months following Pearl Harbor.

*snip*
Had the attack proceeded as planned the US would have had no effective fighting force in the Pacific after the strike on Pearl. The West coast and Panama canal would have been open to attack with minimal resistance and warning during the first half of 1942. At best this would add several years to the timeframe required to defeat Japan or at worst locked the US out of the Pacific.

1) There would have been a severe shortage of carriers in the Pacific if any at all. The Battle of the Coral Sea and Midway illustrates how paranoid the navy was of loosing any carriers during 1942. Essex was the only carrier commissioned in 1942 with the bulk following in 1943 and 44. Had the Navy lost the ones they had at Pearl or in early 1942 Hawaii, the Aleutians, and Panama would have immediately been vulnerable. The West coast would have obviously been attacked as well with more than a token naval and air force.

2) If the Navy did not have the ability to repair damaged ships for return to west coast yards or to even refuel the ones that could the Pacific Fleet would have ceased to exist operationally. You might be able to tanker in more fuel on a regular basis but given the severe tanker shortage that almost cost the Allies the war in 1942 courtesy the Kriegsmarine I wouldn't have made any bets. The battleships also would not have been readily available for landing support since they had to be patched up/refuled and sent stateside for major repair.

3) There were four subs on the morning of the attack. One of them holds the record for most number of Japanese ships sank by a submarine and put more tonnage on the bottom than most of the ships moored at battleship row. The others were valuable recon platforms.

There would have been a narrow opportunity to compel the US to sue for peace during 1942 had the plan worked. Yamomoto knew full well he was rolling the dice.

Last edited by K1052; 11-09-2012 at 10:46 PM.
K1052 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:43 PM   #67
K1052
Lifer
 
K1052's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SF/Chicago
Posts: 20,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by benzylic View Post
In 1941 battleships were still considered the most important ships in the US Navy.
That's one lesson the Japanese learned ahead of us. Battleships were not much more than expensive (and very vulnerable) mobile artillery except for some of the Guadalcanal campaign when there were no carriers available. The attack on Peal disabused the US Navy immediately of the fantasy of WWI like naval combat.
K1052 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:48 PM   #68
K1052
Lifer
 
K1052's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SF/Chicago
Posts: 20,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exterous View Post
Nothing they could do about it? First they only built a small handful if I-400s and they could only hold 3 aircraft each. Not exactly an overwhelming force. Furthermore the Aichi M6A was not really built for mixing it up in the air so, once intercepted, it stood little chance.

Its maximum loadout was around 1800lbs. Thats about 8,000lbs too light for an atomic weapon of that era and such a small conventional bomb loadout wasnt going to affect the war really in any way
Biological and chemical warfare would have been options. Given what they did to the Chinese I would have considered it a real possibility if Hawaii fell and we didn't make a deal since there would be no way to meaningfully retaliate.
K1052 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 10:55 PM   #69
sdifox
No Lifer
 
sdifox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of Tonto, ON
Posts: 53,691
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K1052 View Post
Biological and chemical warfare would have been options. Given what they did to the Chinese I would have considered it a real possibility if Hawaii fell and we didn't make a deal since there would be no way to meaningfully retaliate.
err, no. USA would never have accepted that. The leadership was chomping at joining the war, it was just the people they had problem convincing. The Pearl Harbor attack provided that impetus.

It would have been far costlier and taken years longer, but Japan would have lost at the end, and probably would have lost 60% of its population in the process.
__________________
I'm not a f$*#@ing machine! - Rubycon
Ever screw so much you get a blister? - Rubycon
shameless plug
http://primaryaccounting.ca

Last edited by sdifox; 11-09-2012 at 10:57 PM.
sdifox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:05 PM   #70
Exterous
Lifer
 
Exterous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,878
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K1052 View Post
Biological and chemical warfare would have been options. Given what they did to the Chinese I would have considered it a real possibility if Hawaii fell and we didn't make a deal since there would be no way to meaningfully retaliate.
Well - the I-400 wasn't ready until '44. I think Hawaii was safe by then

As for invading Hawaii - I really don't think there was much danger there. They struggled to take Wake and, as shown by IJN Navy Captain Kami Shigenori's study, the logistics of supplying an occupied Hawaii would be difficult to say the least (Even without American interference)
__________________
"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." -Friedrich Nietzshe

"It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifiling exception, is composed of others" - John Andrew Holmes
Exterous is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:14 PM   #71
K1052
Lifer
 
K1052's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: SF/Chicago
Posts: 20,311
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Exterous View Post
Well - the I-400 wasn't ready until '44. I think Hawaii was safe by then

As for invading Hawaii - I really don't think there was much danger there. They struggled to take Wake and, as shown by IJN Navy Captain Kami Shigenori's study, the logistics of supplying an occupied Hawaii would be difficult to say the least (Even without American interference)
Probably would have just converted some obsolete subs and sent them on one way trips.

Hawaii wouldn't have to necessarily invaded, just cut off and rendered unusable. Establish an air base on one of the smaller islands to suppress naval traffic.
K1052 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:35 PM   #72
Exterous
Lifer
 
Exterous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Michigan
Posts: 11,878
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K1052 View Post
Probably would have just converted some obsolete subs and sent them on one way trips.

Hawaii wouldn't have to necessarily invaded, just cut off and rendered unusable. Establish an air base on one of the smaller islands to suppress naval traffic.
That airfield still has to 1) Be large enough to fend off attacks from the US and 2) Be supplied 3) completely destroy the other airfields 4) prevent the airfields from being rebuilt 5) prevent reinforcements from arriving [And keep in mind the US reinforcements had much less distance to cover] 6) be defended from the USN. Land based air was not exceptionally effective against surface ships. Maybe if the US carriers were destroyed but then there are going to be a shit ton of ifs involved in this initial plan
if the Japanese decide to risk a logistical nightmare to invade Hawaii
if they decide to pull troops from other theaters
if they decide to commit to a long term drain on their already strained merchant marine
if they send the transports out earlier or set sail earlier and at slower speeds
if they choose to risk the much larger chances of detection with the larger slower fleet
if they choose to bank on guaranteed destruction of the US carrier fleet
if they remain undetected
if they are completely successful in getting the US carriers
if they choose to close with the remaining US fleet after the strike
if they they destroy the airfields
if the fleet stays in the area to prevent counter attack by the USN
if they can prevent reinforcements from arriving by air
if they can remain supplied
__________________
"Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." -Friedrich Nietzshe

"It is well to remember that the entire universe, with one trifiling exception, is composed of others" - John Andrew Holmes
Exterous is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:53 PM   #73
JTsyo
Diamond Member
 
JTsyo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: NJ
Posts: 9,112
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by K1052 View Post
Had the attack proceeded as planned the US would have had no effective fighting force in the Pacific after the strike on Pearl. The West coast and Panama canal would have been open to attack with minimal resistance and warning during the first half of 1942. At best this would add several years to the timeframe required to defeat Japan or at worst locked the US out of the Pacific.

1) There would have been a severe shortage of carriers in the Pacific if any at all. The Battle of the Coral Sea and Midway illustrates how paranoid the navy was of loosing any carriers during 1942. Essex was the only carrier commissioned in 1942 with the bulk following in 1943 and 44. Had the Navy lost the ones they had at Pearl or in early 1942 Hawaii, the Aleutians, and Panama would have immediately been vulnerable. The West coast would have obviously been attacked as well with more than a token naval and air force.
Land based aircraft could have kept the Japanese navy off the west coast until new ships were build. If Germany couldn't defeat Britain, there no way Japan is carrying over enough planes, bombs and fuel to gain air superiority over the US west coast.
JTsyo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:58 PM   #74
sdifox
No Lifer
 
sdifox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: North of Tonto, ON
Posts: 53,691
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JTsyo View Post
Land based aircraft could have kept the Japanese navy off the west coast until new ships were build. If Germany couldn't defeat Britain, there no way Japan is carrying over enough planes, bombs and fuel to gain air superiority over the US west coast.
They didn't have enough fuel to sustain the supply chain, let along mount a campaign.
__________________
I'm not a f$*#@ing machine! - Rubycon
Ever screw so much you get a blister? - Rubycon
shameless plug
http://primaryaccounting.ca
sdifox is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2012, 11:59 PM   #75
Pray To Jesus
Diamond Member
 
Pray To Jesus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,588
Default

Time to load up Civ 2 and see what happens
Pray To Jesus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.