Could Japan have beaten America in WWII?

>>2650818
No. Next question

Not a chance. At worst they could potentially disrupt shit on the west coast for a bit, but that's pretty much it.

>>2650818
No. The best they could hope for was to bankrupt America and kill the desire back home to a draw.

Why did they do it then?

Best case scenario was getting the Americans to leave them alone

>>2650818
Depends on how you define 'beat'. But in all cases, extremely unlikely. It is theoretically possible they could have 'beaten' the U.S. a la the way the Vietnamese did 30ish years later, by being too tough and bloody and expensive to take down to be worth completely annihilating. But that strategy would still leave them to have to give significant concessions before the U.S. tired. It also is completely incompatible with the Pearl Harbor first strike, which complicates their necessary invasions of the DEI and the Philippines.

>>2650818
They definitely couldve shaken shit up, like with their planned biological weapon attacks and to-the-death nationalism, I feel like if they'd been smarter they could have produced a draw (though that's the best case scenario. Even for an island, Japan's Navy was no where near America's)

>>2651115
They hoped to take out the US fleet early and hard enough to scare the US to the table and lift the oil embargo.

It was a gamble and it didn't work.

>>2650833
>>2650836
>>2651070
t. Amerisharts who lost a war to rice farmers two decades later.

USA would be completely fucked without nukes. The Soviet Union and Britain would need to help their fat asses.

>>2651133
Firstly, Rice farmers backed by the Soviets.

Secondly, requiring aid from our allies isn't exactly losing the war. There's a reason Japan was lining up a surrender before the nukes ever fell.

As said, the best Japan could've hoped for was to draw out the US for as long as possible until the people back home no longer wanted to fight (the same that happened in Vietnam.)

Now fuck off you weeb shitter.

>>2651133
Nukes were just time and body efficient we would have won regardless. Nukes help prevent a possible Connie northern Japan from happening

>>2651164
The incredible waste of manpower of the IJA and IJN makes me fucking sick. Instead of using their heads, all they did was banzai again and again. Kuribayashi had the right idea.

>Unable to complete this heavy task for our country
>Arrows and bullets all spent, so sad we fall.

>But unless I smite the enemy,
>My body cannot rot in the field.
>Yea, I shall be born again seven times
>And grasp the sword in my hand.

>When ugly weeds cover this island,
>My sole thought shall be the Imperial Land.

File: american military history.jpg (899KB, 1237x3696px) Image search: [Google]

899KB, 1237x3696px

>>2651164
>>2651176
t. delusional mart sharters

>>2651181
>be a stupid gook
>beat up couple failed states and dying empires
>think that you're now a real great power
>pick a fight against a nation with 100 times industrial capacity compared to yours and actually educated population instead of inbred rice farmers
>wonder why you get your arse kicked

>>2650818
There was no way they would have "beaten America". The only reason for their success was that they were facing island countries and China which had very weak armies and tanks/planes from the immediate post-WWI era! As such, they didn't need to advance much technologically to beat their enemies and so they didn't. Hitler and the nazis had to constantly evolve their fighting machines to keep the upper hand on Britain, the United States, and the Soviet Union and so the arms race between those four countries made their armies far superior to that of Japan. The only way Japan would been even somewhat successful is if they didn't attack the US, but eventually the US would get involved no matter what. We weren't about to let the UK fall. And as soon as Japan expanded into Australia, New Zealand, or India they would face immediate retaliate from the US and UK and ultimately fall.

Remember this: the M4 Sherman tank, a tank widely regarded as weak and flammable albeit mechanically efficient in Germany was completely invincible to everything the Japanese could throw at them, even in 1945. And if you are going to say anything about the IJN, the industrial capacity of the United States stood well over that of Japan's. They could build much more ships in the same time so eventually their Navy would be superior even if a battle like Midway wouldn't happen. Also, we had tactical bombers, again something the Japanese didn't have since there was no use for them against island people armed with AA guns from 1917.

No. Far less close than Germany vs USSR.

Neither Axis power had a snowball's chance in hell of actually invading the US. A draw was unlikely for Germany and near impossible for Japan.

To win the Axis really needed a neutral US and a knock out blow to the USSR.

File: 1487614294197.jpg (267KB, 800x560px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 800x560px

>>2651199
ayy lmao

>>2651133
Now *this* is how you b8.

>>2651133
>(1975)-(1945)
>30 years
>"two decades later"

And you shit on OUR education system...

File: IMG_2617.png (307KB, 604x603px) Image search: [Google]

307KB, 604x603px

>>2651211

>>2651202
Why bother even mentioning IJN when it was outmatched in battleships, carriers, cruisers, destroyers, escort ships, auxiliary crafts, or in other words, pretty much all things that weren't battlecruisers and even then that was only because USN never completed any of those.

Their war strategy was literally "hurt America to the point where they give up because if they have any real fighting spirit we're boned".

>>2651176

>. Nukes help prevent a possible Connie northern Japan from happening
This shit again. The Soviets had no navy worth mentioning to support an invasion. If things go on longer, they'll almost certainly invade Japanese holdings in northeastern China and Korea, which would have other post-war effects, but they don't have the capacity to even take Hokkaido, let alone anywhere else.

>>2651243
>And even then that was only because USN never completed any of those.
The Alaska class, while internally designated as "Large cruisers" were basically battlecruisers. Then again, I don't think either the Alaska or Guam actually ever fought a naval engagement.

File: kenb.jpg (37KB, 843x601px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 843x601px

>>2650818
if they had this guy

People always talk about how the Japanese would fight to there last man thanks to there nationalism, are there any countries that would do that today? America feels like it could feasibly be invaded by someone, and every town or city that got invaded would revolt against there invaders. Of course that could just be my nationalism giving me false hope for my people

>>2651133
This is quite good bait.

File: 3b3.gif (698KB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

698KB, 500x281px

>>2651345
>America feels like it could feasibly be invaded by someone
Completely ignoring the likelihood that such an attempt (or more specifically, a hypothetical *successful* attempt) would probably lead to nuclear war, the logistics of invading and occupying the US makes any sort of invasion not only pointless, but practically impossible.

>>2651191
Why are you so buttmad?

>>2651478
Just let him live in his Red Dawn/Homefront fantasies where USA isn't a nuclear power with the largest navy in the world surrounded by 2 massive moats.

>>2651126

Ironically, they could have done that by ignoring Pearl Harbor and just seizing the European colonies.

>>2651601
Except they couldn't have.

>>2651601
The US embargo was more or less going to eventually grind their war machine to a halt plus the US may have eventually gone to war with enough European pressure.

>>2651614
>gone to war with enough European pressure.
Funny enough it was the US who put pressure on Britain and Netherlands to follow up with embargoes on Japan, and the US got the European countries to do that by forging a defensive pact.

>>2651609
>>2651614
Not him, but the reason that the Japanese attacked was to seize what's not Indonesia and the oil therein; thinking that the U.S. would interfere with that. That's where they got their oil for the duration of the war. They very well could have and did in fact do, since the attack on the Dutch East Indies was already in motion when the bombers hit Pearl.

>>2651633
Again, the Dutch refused to sell oil to Japan only because the US promised to enter a war against Japan if Japan moved against the Dutch. You should stop forming interpretations without the aid of any facts.

Were they going to beat the Americans to the a-bomb? Then no.

File: bait.jpg (55KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 500x500px

>>2651133

>>2650818
Why not ask the Japanese of WWII?

Someone at the table asked a Japanese admiral why, with the Pacific Fleet devastated at Pearl Harbor and the mainland U.S. forces in what Japan had to know was a pathetic state of unreadiness, Japan had not simply invaded the West Coast.
Commander Menard would never forget the crafty look on the Japanese commander's face as he frankly answered the question.
'You are right,' he told the Americans. 'We did indeed know much about your preparedness. We knew that probably every second home in your country contained firearms. We knew that your country actually had state championships for private citizens shooting military rifles. We were not fools to set foot in such quicksand.'

File: 1408675362761.png (62KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 500x500px

>>2651631
>>2651633
Thanks for the info anon, got anywhere I can easily read up on this? Always looking to learn more.

>>2651639
FDR promised to attack Japan if the Japanese attacked, but Congress didn't. It was not 100% clear that he could have actually followed through and protected the Dutch. And even if he did, we now have a fundamentally different war on our hands.s What hope (and it's a slim hope) the Japanese have is based on tiring out the Americans, of letting the home front force the U.S. to peace.There's going to be a fundamentally different reaction in the U.S. itself over losses in a war to protect a Dutch colony than there is to get back the filthy, backstabbing nips for what is perceived as an unprovoked attack.

Plus, assuming you wrote >>2651609, they very well could have attacked the DEI directly without attacking Pearl (and the Philippines) first. It might or might not have been a good idea, but it was definitely a possible one.

>>2651661
I'd actually recommend Power at Sea, volume 2, by Lisle Rose. It's not directly about the pre-war tensions between the U.S. and Japan, being more of an overview of naval power ,strategy, and war in general from the close of WW1 to the close of WW2, but it goes a LOT into the various political machinations between great naval powers and what they did, when and why.

File: power.jpg (130KB, 1515x935px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1515x935px

>>2651700
Thanks anon, I'll be sure to give it a read when I get the chance.

>>2651654
Did Japanese troop and supply ships even have the operational range to get to the U.S. west coast?

>>2651700
>they very well could have attacked the DEI directly without attacking Pearl (and the Philippines) first. It might or might not have been a good idea, but it was definitely a possible one.
They decided against it because it's a dumb fucking move to leave the US forces sitting in the Philippines which can easily interdict and defeat any attempts to supply an invasion thousands of miles away from Japan.
Unlike you, the Japs knew the facts and circumstances they were working against, and they knew that to do anything in the SEA they had to subjugate the Philippines first.

>>2651654
>pathetic state of unreadiness
You are so ignorant it hurts to read your posts. The very fact that the PacFleet was at Pearl Harbor for a year meant the US was at heightened readiness for war against Japan. US had 100 B-17 bombers to send to Philippines, and all island bases were being supplied with aircraft and munitions.
In 1941 the US was deeply into rearmament of the scale Japan could only dream of.

File: Goalposts.jpg (24KB, 256x202px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 256x202px

>>2651740
Please learn to read before you participate in discussions like this. Specifically, learn the difference between "can" and "should". Furthermore, it is far from clear that the U.S. forces in the Philippines can substantially interfere with the DEI operation, nor is it clear that shooting at a bunch of obsolescent battleships in Pearl Harbor would actually help with that sort of thing, which is, after all, what the thread was about.

>>2651765
> it is far from clear that the U.S. forces in the Philippines can substantially interfere with the DEI operation
This is amazingly the dumbest post in this thread full of dumb posts.

>>2650818
All these threads where people ask "Could [combatant who lost] have won??" are so fucking stupid.
If they could have won, they would have.
They didn't win.
End of fucking story.

>>2651723
Had they known better, they could have taken out the entire 7th fleet, taken Hawaii, and used it as a refueling stop.

>>2651748
That was a quote, dipshit.

>>2650818

No.

I hate to say this, but Japan was still a developing country that got a little too big for its britches.

>>2651787
>have to use nukes like a coward instead of fighting honorabu battles

>>2651345

Dude, invading and occupying the continental United States due to geography alone is impossible.

>>2651863
This, yanks should had done the honorable thing and starve japs to death instead of using cowardly weapons like nukes.

File: 5200264-popeye.jpg (21KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 320x320px

>>2651322
Popeye would beat that little twink's ass.

>>2651863
Without specifying any a-historical conditions, the question "Could [losing party] have won?" is moot and already has an answer.
Change the prompt, then the question makes more sense.
Could the Japanese have won if the US hadn't nuked them?
No.

File: shelbyfoote.jpg (155KB, 256x400px) Image search: [Google]

155KB, 256x400px

>>2651787
I agree with the sentiment that these threads are stupid, but that doesn't mean all such questions in this format aren't worth discussing as they could help the questioner gain a better understanding on the topic. For instance:
>Could the Union have won the Battle of Bull Run?
>Maybe, if they hadn't made tactical errors here, here, and here etc.

>>2651783
They had what? 100ish strategic bombers (not tactical land or naval bombers) and one cruiser. What fighters they had could not cover the B-17s as far out as somewhere like the DEI or to somewhere like Hainan, so they'd be pretty much useless. Nor would they work quickly, it's not like these weapons are instant kill buttons. A carrier force could easily protect itself from that sort of attack, if the bomber force even found the invaders, which is far from certain.

And it's not like the invasion of the Philippines required a lot of time once the intitial preparations had been done. Historically, the DEI was hit a day after the Philippines invasion started. If the Japanese did it the other way around, exactly how much damage do you think they could do? But do go on, dazzle us with your brilliance.

>>2651817
Considering how much trouble they had invading Wake Island, which was both closer to their own nodes of support and far more lightly defended, I have grave doubts they could have taken Hawaii.

>>2650818
Negative. Japan face only 10% of war effort from EUA and have a long list of problems.

>compare theWWII with Vitnam war
No, just no.

>>2651132
the (((US))) was already going to war with Imperial Japan to enforce (((their))) East Asia tariffs. Pearl Harbour was nothing but a preemptive strike against the mobilizing (((American))) invasion force.

>>2652300
t. Hiroshima Nagasaki-chan

>>2651932
There was nothing there. They made the wrong strategy; hit and run. They should have dedicated more planes to make more hits, and to hit the ships that were not docked.

This is '41; the American War Machine has not even begun to be cranked up. There was nothing there but targets of opportunity.

As always, in war, strategy > tactics.

>>2652335
>There was nothing there
That is completely incorrect. http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/Guard-US/ch6.htm

>The War Department's stand also reflected the fact that Oahu, in comparison with other overseas bases or with the continental United States itself, was already well provided with defenses, and especially with the means for resisting invasion. It had a full infantry division, a heavy concentration of coast defense guns, and from 1938 onward the more or less constant protection of the United States Fleet.

> They should have dedicated more planes to make more hits, and to hit the ships that were not docked.
None of that will help you actually conquer the island and use it as a base, even if it was successful.

>As always, in war, strategy > tactics.
You clearly have no idea what either of those words mean.

>>2651115
they had a plan called the tanaka memorial

>In order to take over the world, you need to take over Asia
remember shintoism was a religion where the japanese literally thought they were minor gods, and the emperor was a god. one of the emperors decreed that japan should take over the would in like the 12 century or something. it was something on their mind for a long time
>In order to take over Asia, you need to take over China
for the manpower
>In order to take over China, you need to take over Manchuria and Mongolia
for the coal and other resources
>If we succeed in conquering China, the rest of the Asiatic countries and the South Sea countries will fear us and surrender to us.
that will give them oil, rubber, and more raw materials.

their next move would have been america to take over their production, then they could take over the world. reminder that japan was literally crazy.

look up the tanaka memorial
>>2651128
no they thought they could actually win

>>2651130
>to-the-death nationalism
it wasnt nationalism, it was religion. they believed if they died, they would become warrior ghosts (shintoism thought is that the dead are ghosts who do everything normies do, but are invisible). and would be enshrined in a tomb that even the emperor visited and bowed to.

>>2651132
no they actually wanted to conquer them. it was part of the master plan.

look up hakkō ichiu

>>2651345
their religion, not nationalism, even though they were intertwined it was their religion (devotion to the emperor and belief of an afterlie) that made them willing to die before surrendering

>>2651133

The US only "lost" Vietnam due to changes in Cold War policy (shift from brinksmanship to detente under Nixon) and an unwillingness to commit genocide.

Make no mistake, the US was willing to commit genocide in Japan to end WW2. Had the nukes not worked, the main island would have been completely firebombed before V-day, which would have resulted in a bloody march to Tokyo. Northern Japan would face an even worse enemy: Communist Russian and Chinese soldiers out for revenge. It would have been a total bloodbath and Japan would have been split like Korea was in real life.

>>2651932
>They had what? 100ish strategic bombers (not tactical land or naval bombers) and one cruiser.
Two cruisers (one in Borneo) and one cruiser from the Pacific Fleet in the area. And, most importantly, most of the US's modern submarines. All the Salmons and Sargos, and most of the Porpoises.

>>2650818
This was actually tested in real life and it turns out nope.

The American industry was unbeatable. Japan would have had to have very limited victory conditions to be able to declare victory.

I dont believe it was "impossible" but you would have to change so many factors that make it just about impossible.

If the Japs in 1942 had cracked allied signals, triple their money and the most competent commander and politican appropriately allocated they still wouldnt be able to win.

>>2652864
http://www.navsource.org/Naval/usf06.htm

I'm counting 25 submarines in and around the Philippines. If you think that can stop the IJN, you're insane, especially with all the air power they can bring to focus in the area.

Plus, it's not like the historical invasion overran all the submarine pens right away. Manila didn't fall until until the 24th of December in any event, which is more than enough time to sortie with the submarines if the U.S. wants to do that, surprise attack or no surprise attack.

ITT: one guy baiting as hard as he can while everyone else falls for it

>>2650818
They would have to have won every single battle for two years.

>all these posts equating Japan/Pearl Harbor as some serious attempt by an otherwise legitimate Japanese army

If the Japs didn't have so much into China and other lands around that they invaded - and only focused 100% on the USA - shit would have been FAR FAR different.

>>2651133
Different situations. Rice farmers were not spread out like the Japanese empire. Said rice farmers also got aid from others and did not face the full might of industrial strength.

>>2653781
If the Japs didn't attack somewhere like China to open up all those primary resources they didn't have in Japan proper, you'd free up a bunch of manpower, to be sure, but at the cost of making the Japanese even more laughably under-equipped than they were already. Good bye things like planes and artillery pieces that I'm pretty sure they're going to neeed.

>>2650818
The american navy was so bloated and unnecessarily strong that japan stood bo chance
The one thing that all americans can agree on is don't tred on me and japan tried to tred and got fucked up

>>2653781
Except to focus on the USA they would still have to spread themselves over islands.

File: 1490360831479.jpg (103KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1024x768px

>>2650818
Yes, but it would not have been easy.

I recommend the book "Rising Sun Victorious" for explanations how.

>>2651507
One guess. Starts with J and ends with E.

File: kamikaze-pilot.jpg (117KB, 1320x743px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 1320x743px

Assuming the Eastern Front goes better than OTL, if the Japanese played their cards right they could have drawn an armistice by annexing much of east asia, Philippines,Solomon islands, and marshal islands.

Let us assume that during pearl harbor the Japanese commit more bombers than OTL and destroy 3-4 carriers, all 8 destroyers stationed there, as well as navy repair yards, oil tank farms, submarine base, and the old headquarters building. Of course this means Yamamoto receives better intelligence and does not underestimate the US.

Japan has to win some pretty decisive battles to completely demoralize the US after Pearl Harbor.

Now the Japanese have more time, they can occupy and fortify more of the Islands they had and build more carriers.

Now the Japanese have win four battles decisively.

Instead of splitting their naval forces they could have ganged up and destroyed the concentrated US forces in both Coral Sea and Midway. That is, instead of actual dispersal, the Japanese only feign it and attack in concentrated columns. If this is done, and the Japanese sink ALL the aircraft carriers, then the US is in deep shit. Had this battles resulted in a crushing defeat for the US, then the next crucial battle in the Philippine sea would not have been so overwhelming for the Japanese and have a more equal carrier to carrier ratio with the US, also committing Yamato there would also help the chances for a victory. Changing the naval codes and committing better intelligence would also improve their chances.

Some other things that could be done like committing more men in Guadalcanal and making it a grave for the US marines, or occupying Siberia with the northern china and manchuria armies. Cutting off lend-lease shipments to Vladivostok and occupying it. Air raids in Hawaii, biological warfare in the US.

basically making the US shart in mart, and Roosevelt to get a heart attack.

>>2650818
Not in anything that resembles the world War two we know.

>>2655600
>thinking Japan could fight the ussr, China, and the United states all at once and some how magically win.

Really short of just magically winning everything the japs could never win, the Japanese would have been mad to use chemical weapons the allies had far more and would not hesitate to use them if they were employed against them.
The Japanese some how magically sink the Pacific fleet twice over, well guess the Atlantic fleet will need to transfer over assets.
Japan was way out of its league, they would need to have United with China and pacified them entirely and then built a larger fleet with the resources and industry, they would also need to win the hearts and minds of the Chinese to increase their manpower instead of depleting it dealing with guerilla actions.
They would need to invest into better equipment, and find a way to get oil without antagonizing the west.
And lastly they would need to keep the Siberian rump state propped up to keep vladistock out of the hands of the ussr which is a major change to the end of the Russian civil war.
So much needs to change that it would be an entirely different war and the Japan in question would look nothing like the one we knew.

>>2650818
>>2651322

Jap originally design Katana because he want to reduce population of Japan.

This is why Katana useless in modern age
Katana need two hands to operate and reduce population
Modern Jap has figured out to treduce population with one hand, by sit in bedroom and masturbate hikkimori and not get girlfriend because he ugly Jap

Jap originally design Katana so strike fear into western heart

Now, he just make porn video, and loud squeel of ugly Jap woman give weaboo westener fear fear that his mother can hear porn play

Katana most pointless weapon in world, most pointless other than 'Penis shrinking ray' shot at Jap who dick already so small. Why you keep brag on your fucking shit weapon? Nobody impressed.

File: wewewew.png (92KB, 355x354px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 355x354px

>implying japan had a chance

>>2651222
Yeah that's definitely what happened good one, god i hate this fucking board

>>2655600
>Let us assume that during pearl harbor the Japanese commit more bombers than OTL and destroy 3-4 carriers
How? Carrier space is very limited.

>and destroy 3-4 carriers
There were only 2 carriers assigned to be based in Pearl, and neither of them were there, as they were delivering aircraft to Wake and Midway so the number of bombers the Japanese have is irrelevant to destroying them.

>all 8 destroyers stationed there
I hope you mean battleships. Not that any of the BB at Pearl were particularly important, being obsolescant vessels too slow to keep up with the pace of Pacific operations.

> as well as navy repair yards, oil tank farms, submarine base, and the old headquarters building. Of course this means Yamamoto receives better intelligence and does not underestimate the US.
And a couple of Lancasters perhaps, because it turns out, tiny CVP torpedo bombers are crap at destroying port facilities.

>Japan has to win some pretty decisive battles to completely demoralize the US after Pearl Harbor.
Clearly, things like the Phillipines and Coral Sea and Guam weren't enough, and in fact made no noticeable impact on American morale. What exactly would be enough?

> Had this battles resulted in a crushing defeat for the US, then the next crucial battle in the Philippine sea

Philippine Sea was in 1944, when the U.S. had spat enough Essex class vessels out to outweigh the entire IJN's carrier air force, even if every single pre-war carrier was destroyed (and given that only 2 of them survived in Pacific service up to that point, they're not really that important).

You are completely retarded. Please kill yourself. If you're not honorabu enough for sudoku, at least refrain from posting in threads like this.

>>2655600
>3-4 carriers
There were only 3 carriers in the Pacific and one of them was undergoing modernization and maintenance for about a year. Which means only two carriers in December had Pearl as their homeport.
Japan was never going to knock out more than 2 carriers if they had been there at Pearl.
This is why some officers had some misgivings about the Pearl Harbor attack. Japan knew only two carriers at most would be there. But no one truly tried to challenge the plan even with that knowledge.

>>2656061
t. american LARPing as 50 cent army

>>2651243
>Why bother even mentioning IJN when it was outmatched in battleships, carriers, cruisers, destroyers, escort ships, auxiliary crafts, or in other words, pretty much all things that weren't battlecruisers and even then that was only because USN never completed any of those.
Well technically the Pacific Fleet was outmatched by the Japanese Navy for most of if not all of 1942. Yes there was the Atlantic fleet but they were a non-factor due to other priorities.

>>2650818

Unlike the faggots here on /his/ I actually do read history books and yes the Japanese could have beaten the US and forced them to the negotiating table as planned. The war with America was a gamble for Japan and could have gone either way but luck wasn't on Japan's side and they lost.

>>2657079
Please, elaborate on how this is possible. With your sources. I could use a good laugh.

>>2652368
I did not say Hawaii was defenseless.

I said the Japs could have taken Hawaii, and destroyed the entire 7th fleet, if they had perfect knowledge to know it was possible.

>>2657106
>I did not say Hawaii was defenseless.
Hawaii being defeneseless is more or less a pre-requisite for the next bit.

>I said the Japs could have taken Hawaii, and destroyed the entire 7th fleet, if they had perfect knowledge to know it was possible.
How the fuck is this going to be possible? Say yes, we wave a magic wand, and the Japanese know EVERYTHING, down to where the last box of ammunition is stored, about American defenses. They then need to assemble an invasion force, project it at least 3,900 km if they're going from somewhere in the Marshalls, and way the fuck farther if this force is being assembled further back, say in Japan proper. They then need to assault a rather heavily fortified island, a process that could take weeks if not months, all the while attempting to resupply from this absurd distance. All the meanwhile, you need to keep this invasion force hidden and prevent the Americans from reinforcing.

Raiding an island and bombing it is several orders of magnitude easier than sticking around and invading it with ground troops and holding it. There is no fucking way that the Japanese could have invaded Hawaii and taken it for themselves absent no defenses at all. I mean for fuck's sake, look at this, even if it's just wiki.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Wake_Island

It took them over two weeks, multiple attempts, and considerable damage just to overrun tiny Wake Island. Which is closer to their center of power, flatter, and defended by about 22 times as many troops. Sealion had a better chance to work.

>>2657183
Correction, I meant to say defended by about 1/22 as many troops, not that Wake's garrison is 22 times the size of Pearl's garrison.

>>2657086

>thread
>retards shit posting with out sources
>asks for them from dissenting voice
>kek

No I'm not gonna to my library and pull out my books to indulge a bunch of shit posters.

Despite having an economy smaller than Brazil's, the Japanese at that point were the worst enemy America had ever encountered.

Yamamoto was right about Americans, the American public wouldn't stand for a bloody and prolonged war. Towards the end, despite being at war for only 4 years, Americans were exhausted and wanted the war to end. There were riots over material shortages which translated to race riots, and riots broke out over high-casualties in operations like Tarawa. One of the reasons by the A-bombs were dropped was because the US gov knew that an invasion of the home islands, while successful, would have been bloody and would have destroyed political and military careers.

>>2657192
>No I'm not gonna to my library and pull out my books to indulge a bunch of shit posters.

Or in other words; you are pulling shit out of your ass and hope that no one will question whatever shit you happen to post.

>>2657192
I've been sourcing my stuff, and if you want to see some particular point more finely detailed, I'll be happy to provide it.

>Yamamoto was right about Americans, the American public wouldn't stand for a bloody and prolonged war.
Except for them in fact doing so.

>owards the end, despite being at war for only 4 years, Americans were exhausted and wanted the war to end.
Yes, this is actually normal for a society. But they were also continually increasing war production and enlistment in the military, which means that resistance to the war effort wasn't nearly close to being a material factor.

>here were riots over material shortages which translated to race riots, and riots broke out over high-casualties in operations like Tarawa.
Bullshit. Name one riot over material shortages, or any riot over what happened at Tarawa. There were race riots, but that was because of American race relations, and they would continue (and intensify) as the war was over.

>One of the reasons by the A-bombs were dropped was because the US gov knew that an invasion of the home islands, while successful, would have been bloody and would have destroyed political and military careers.
Really? Whose career seemed to be threatened by such an action?

>>2657207

t. average /his/ poster

>>2657233

The amount of mental-gymnastics in this post is cringeworthy

>Except for them in fact doing so.

The war dragged not because the American public wanted it to but because the US government wanted to see it to the end.

>Yes, this is actually normal for a society. But they were also continually increasing war production and enlistment in the military, which means that resistance to the war effort wasn't nearly close to being a material factor.

America wasn't even affected majorly by the war and yet Americans were ready to call quits only after four years, which is nothing. Yamamoto was spot on with his observations that Americans were incapable of dealing with the hardship brought on by war.

>Bullshit. Name one riot over material shortages, or any riot over what happened at Tarawa.

Why don't you open an actual book on the domestic effects of the war instead of watching shit on the History Channel and getting all your info on history from video games

>>2657469
>The war dragged not because the American public wanted it to but because the US government wanted to see it to the end.
No they didn't. Prove that.

>merica wasn't even affected majorly by the war and yet Americans were ready to call quits only after four years, which is nothing
No they didn't. Prove that.

>Why don't you open an actual book on the domestic effects of the war instead of watching shit on the History Channel and getting all your info on history from video games
Because they didn't. Prove your fucking point you fucking jackass liar.

>>2657485
>US government wanted to see it [WW2] to the end.
>No they didn't. Prove that.
>prove that the us gov wanted to see ww2 to the end
....not that guy but are you srs?

>>2657485

>spouts history memes and propaganda
>prove your point faggot

It's like trying to argue with a North Korean party-member that their political system is shit and that there are better systems out there.

File: 1478301390771.jpg (467KB, 2400x2400px) Image search: [Google]

467KB, 2400x2400px

No seriously. What were we supposed to do if they released the dirty bomb?

>>2657521
Yes, I would like proof that the "American public" did not in fact want war, and that the gov't was dragging an unwilling populace along.. It seems to have been a very popular war, and at the very least, if things were so bad, you wouldn't see FDR re-elected in the middle of it.

Or, you could just respond to a fragment of it and pretend that's everything I said, that's good too.

>>2657528
Where have I sprouted memes or propaganda? You've made several factual claims, and supported none of them. Let's go with a simple, easy one. Back in >>2657192, you claimed, and I quote

> and riots broke out over high-casualties in operations like Tarawa
Let's see what riot or riots you're talking about. As far as I'm aware, no such riots occurred, and your steadfast refusal to support any of your claims with anything, even a blogpost, is stupid as all hell.

>>2650833
Thread should have ended here.

>>2657567

You are spouting memes and propaganda. The fact that you have absolutely no knowledge of domestic life in wartime shows that the only knowledge you have about the war is from popular media's mythologization of the era. I'm willing to bet money that you've never even read a history book covering the war save the textbooks from grade school.

>>2657183
You apparently have no idea how lucky the US was that the Japs broke off the attack on Pearl Harbor.

None at all.

>>2657588
>You are spouting memes and propaganda. The fact that you have absolutely no knowledge of domestic life in wartime shows that the only knowledge you have about the war is from popular media's mythologization of the era.
I have asked you to source a specific claim about the domestic life during the war, that there was a riot or multiple riots over Tarawa, or a similar battle. Please provide such information, because I am going to stand here and blare to the world that no such riot ever happened, and you're a lying weeb, mounting a bizarre ad hominem to cover your utter paucity of an argument.

>I'm willing to bet money that you've never even read a history book covering the war save the textbooks from grade school.
You'd lose that bet. In fact, I've cited to one in this very thread.

>>2657604
Ok, explain to me how 6 carriers and attendant vessels are going to invade and occupy Pearl Harbor had they hung around. That is the claim, not that they could have sunk ships, but that they, and I quote

>I said the Japs could have taken Hawaii

Because to most of us, that's not really what a carrier force does. That's the job of an invasion force, and they use different ships for that sort of thing.

>>2657606

Fussell's Wartime and Dower's War Without Mercy.

You don't know shit about domestic life in wartime. You're just a typical shit poster talking out of their ass and performing mental gymnastics to support your bias. Get your ass back to /pol/

>>2657645
>Fussell's Wartime and Dower's War Without Mercy.
Anyone can name a pair of books. I'll just say that there were no riots over Tarawa, and that's correct because neither Guarding the United States and Its Outposts ( Stetson Conn,
Rose C. Engelman, Byron Fairchild) and The Path to Victory (Douglas Porch) mention anything about it. Show me that it says what you're saying it does. A page cite, a scan, anything to show you're not just naming books at random and hoping I'll go away.

>You don't know shit about domestic life in wartime. You're just a typical shit poster talking out of their ass and performing mental gymnastics to support your bias. Get your ass back to /pol/
When have I performed a single bit of mental gymnastics? You've made a variety of claims, and absolutely refused to support any of them, the closest coming to it being this post where you've named a pair of books and not even a page note to support your point, over something that was as visible as a fucking riot, which should be easy to find information about. I, in turn, have doubted your word, in large part because you much prefer to attack my character than support your actual arguments.

>>2657645
By the way, I looked at google books for those books.

https://books.google.com/books?id=6sqzi1rH-ccC&q=Tarawa#v=snippet&q=Tarawa&f=false

There are 7 instances where "Tarawa" is mentioned, on pages 8, 12, 13 , 140, 146, 273, and 309 where he's citing to another book. The only one of those that even references what's going on in the Home Front is the page 12, where an unnamed mother writes to Nimitz to say "You killed my son at Tarawa", and a Time magazine correspondent wrote about how messy it was. Nothing about riots, or any civil disturbances.

For #2, War without Mercy, we have 5 mentions of Tarawa.
https://books.google.com/books?id=8himI4wNnxEC&q=Tarawa#v=snippet&q=Tarawa&f=false

One is a citation on page 397, but we get actual mentions on pages 35, 68, 71, and 91. They talk about Japanese unwillingness to surrender and allied unwillingness to accept surrender, a marine battlecry to take no prisoners, the execution of prisoners, and lice respectively. Again, no mention of riots or any other civil disturbances.

I realize my methodology is hardly exact, but I think it's fairly good given that I'm trying to do this in the frame of a 4chan discussion. Nothing in your books seem to actually support your point. Please do so.

>>2656061
Wasn't this orginally some butthurt gook blasting Japs on /sp/ or /int/?

>>2651133
I know America is usually the country with a woeful knowledge of history, so what country do you think this poster is from?

Russia maybe?

>>2650818
If everything had gone perfectly for them, yes.

Of course, if your plan revolves around everything going perfectly for you, it's probably a bad plan.

File: 1491525898308.jpg (36KB, 480x476px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 480x476px

>>2650818
The fucking JAPANESE knew they couldn't defeat America, their whole war strategy revolved around making these weak barbarians sick from the bloodshed of war and seek an early peace before they began to out-produce Japan.

I don't even think they could have defeated China honestly.

>>2657106
Japs had no chance to take Hawaii nor did they have a plan for a 2nd strike. They hightailed it out after 1 strike because they knew just how dangerous it was to hang around and wait for subs and bombers to locate the KB.

>>2650818
I've read that Americans fought with one hand tied behind their back. And it's true. How many bombs reached United States? Two?

>>2653781
So you'd have more manpower doing what exactly? Sitting on some fucking Pacific islands grimacing at the incoming Americans?

This board sucks.

>>2658184
*sigh*

Exactly the opposite was true. They could have hunted down and destroyed the 7th fleet, invaded and held Hawaii, and then asked us wtf we were going to do about it.

Hawaii would be Japanese territory today, as would the Philippines, Guam, Samoa, etc.

>>2658219
Leaving aside the retardedness of your post in generalk, the 7th fleet did not exist in Dec 1941.

>>2658219
>We're just going to sit around and invade with the 0 ground troops we have up against an entire American division.
>Or we can sit around in the vicinity getting sniped at by submarines until the Americans just directly fly Catalinas and B-17s in from the West Coast to sink us all.

You really are retarded, aren't you?

>>2658236
There were also 300+ aircraft stationed in Hawaii about ~50 were operational right away and more would become operational as they are repaired. There was no chance the Japs don't lose the KB if they hung around, let alone take Hawaii. What a joke.

>>2658241
I thought they didn't have pilots/crew for all of them right away, and didn't get as such until like Aprilish of 42. But then again, the last time I read through in detail about what was available in Pearl when was some time ago, so I could easily be misremembering.

Could the japs have done anything with the Aleutian islands other then unite the American people against them for invading proper American soil? Would the operational range of Japanese planes allow them to strike the west coast provided they can keep it supplied.

>>2658228
Exactly. Had the Japs prepared a more robust and sustained attack, the 7th fleet would have never existed.

You kind of suck at thought exercises by the way.

>>2658241
Gee, do you think a more robust and sustained attack might have included disabling them?

Fucking concrete thinking autists trying to do alt history.

Not even once.

>>2658458
Not him, but it's pretty clear what he's going for is that the 400ish planes left to the Kudo Bitai are going to have a hell of a time fighting off near equal numbers of land based planes, and in fact will be at an enormous disadvantage. Plus, the U.S. can directly fly in certain types of reinforcements, which is a luxury that the Japanese do not have. And it's hard as fuck to disable airfields and keep them disabled, and CVP bombers are not great for that kind of task, owing to small bomb loads.

So it's far, far more likely that hanging around and continuing the bombardment will hurt the Japanese rather than the Americans. And this, of course, will do absolutely jack shit to invading and occupying Hawaii.

File: file.jpg (10KB, 195x195px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 195x195px

Japan's actual plan for defeating the United States was kind of,
Retarded.
So Japan was aware that the United States possessed a massive industrial capacity they could never hope to match, and therefore Japan could never hope to wage a long term war against the US. Their entire plan hinged upon quickly seizing European colonial possessions and establishing a Pacific Empire while simultaneously crippling the US fleet at Pearl Harbor. So when the Americans actually came into southeast Asia ready to fuck Japan's face they would be forced to battle a bloody island hopping war. Japan kind of hoped to bleed America into a surrender like they did with Russia.

File: Yare Yare.jpg (146KB, 960x758px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 960x758px

When you realize Germany was the one holding back Italy and Japan...

>>2657183
You're right but Hawaii wasn't really heavily fortified.

>>2658907
>You're right but Hawaii wasn't really heavily fortified.
There were two army divisions on Hawaii, which was about 1/10 of the entire forces Japan could commit to its entire southern offensives.

>>2658907
It really was in fact heavily fortified.

http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/Guard-US/ch6.htm

>>2657604
Anon stop reading paranoia newspapers from the 1940s.

>>2653853
o fugg

seben libes for my emberor


bazinga ;-DDD

>>2650818
The only reason the Japs even got as far as they did was because logistics in the pacific was a nightmare.

>>2654141
still very confused, jeweREE?

>>2660813
Pretty sure it's

[spoiler]Japanese[/spoiler]

>>2651133
It would have taken a couple more weeks of firebombing but the results are the same when mass starvation kicks in.

>>2650818
No. That's why Americans provoked them.

>>2660932
Their own navy wanted to justify their existence so they could keep their budget.

>>2660932

I like how you lie so easily, taking some historical truth, and twisting it.

>>2660936
The same navy who didn't want to let Yamato sail for fear of what would happen if it sunk. Meanwhile Roosevelt wanted a wart and couldn't get unless something drastic and heinous like for example, Pearl Harbour

>>2660947
I bet you like me even more now :^), still doesn't cahnge the fact that I am right

>>2660953
>Meanwhile Roosevelt wanted a wart
I don't think anyone wants warts.

File: remove rice.gif (4MB, 480x270px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 480x270px

>>2650818
No

Posting Muhreens now

File: Marine and his Dog.jpg (52KB, 500x406px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 500x406px

The real reason the japs lost was because they never deployed tactical doges

>>2659012
Yeah but it's not like the IJA didn't outfight or out-think bigger forces during its six month rampage. The Philippines and Malaya campaigns, for example. Not even a IJAboo or anything, just saying.

>>2659076
You know, I read through that and couldn't find anything about significant fortifications. What it seemed to say was that the fortifications the Americans were hoping on was the fleet (bottled up and sunk), aircraft (destroyed on the ground), and anti-aircraft artillery (which proved useless).

I'm Hawaiian, born and raised, and we were taught in school that the US hadn't taken Hawaii's defense seriously which is part of why the surprise attack was tactically so successful. And that had the Japanese attempted an invasion Oahu was not prepared. So far I haven't seen anything to challenge that.

>>2662032
There was an ENTIRE DIVISION of troops. A division, by the way, is 12-20,000 men. Again, I direct you to the invasion of Wake Island, which had a garrison of 449 personnel, a lot of whom were things like "construction personnel".

It is colossally easier to bomb a location than it is to invade and occupy it, especially over water. Britain was making successful air raids over German cities in 1943, do you think they could have occupied Cologne and Dusseldorf then? Could Hitler have moved and taken over London simply because he was able to buzz it with stukas? And those are across distances of dozens to hundreds of kilometers, not close to 4,000. If the Japanese had attempted an invasion of Oahu, they'd have been shot to ribbons, even if the addition of dozens of troopships and how much that would slow them down, or the necessity of carrying a large resupply train and keeping it going didn't blow the whole operation, as it's a lot easier to hide 28 ships than hundreds to thousands, and THAT'S assuming that they had enough tankers to supply it, which while I haven't researched, I'm betting they didn't. (Over 1/4 of the historical force that attacked Pearl Harbor were tankers, and troopships usually have shorter ranges than things like carriers and cruisers.)

File: Marine holding wounded baby in Saipan.jpg (392KB, 800x953px) Image search: [Google]

392KB, 800x953px

>>2651133
At least our military record isn't as embarrassing as the Russians or Chinese

If you have to defeat your enemies by literally burying them under the mountain of your soldiers corpses, I'd find it difficult to take pride in it

File: American Man Not Impressed with Japanese Defenses.jpg (57KB, 560x560px) Image search: [Google]

57KB, 560x560px

>>2662067
Man Wake Island, took the Japs two tries to take it and they lost 820 troops to the Marine's and island personnel's 52

Gotta say dude, they may lose but they sure as shit make you pay for it, I remember hearing that the Marines were ready to go down to the last man

>>2662067
>There was an ENTIRE DIVISION of troops. A division, by the way, is 12-20,000 men. Again, I direct you to the invasion of Wake Island, which had a garrison of 449 personnel, a lot of whom were things like "construction personnel".

Yeah and the Japanese captured scores of divisions at Coregidor, Bataan and Singapore. Wake sounds like the exception judging from that.

>>2662112
You have several problems with that reasoning.

Firstly, in Singapore and the Phillipenes, you have predominantly local troops with a thin leavening of Europeans or Americans who actually have things like up to date weapons.

Secondly, Wake, as opposed to the others, is very far away from Japanese strongholds and mustering points. It's really, really fucking hard to launch an invasion against any sort of beach defense. Look up Tarawa when the Americans tried to do it, and when they had overwhelming advantages in just about everything, and it was still an ugly, bloody mess.

Thirdly, both of those campaigns took months. And the Japanese can't afford to stick around for months. They don't have any land based air to support, only about 400 carrier planes. The U.S. is fully capable of flying more airplanes in if necessary, as things like B-17s and PBY-5s can make the trip. If they don't win this battle quickly, they stand at good risk of losing the entire carrier fleet, as you do not want to take on land based planes with carrier planes if you can possibly help it.

Fourthly, there's a big difference in fighting over an area that is geographically large and leaves holes for attackers to maneuver into; which happened a lot in the Malaya campaign and I think happened a lot in the Phillipines campaign (not sure); there were also things like the capturing of local ports with the first waves to bring in heavier artillery and other equipment. That won't be possible attempting to invade Hawaii; you're thousands of kilometers away from your ports, and the islands are geographically tiny next to something like Malaya, there are less holes to creep through.

>>2662226
>I could oppressing colored folks back home and instead I'm stuck humping this machine gun through a jungle.
>Thanks a bunch, Tojo.

You just KNOW that's what he's thinking.

File: Marine Tanker.jpg (184KB, 739x600px) Image search: [Google]

184KB, 739x600px

>>2662236
No, it's probably something along the lines of

>my feet hurt

File: Marine with a Jap MG in Saipan.jpg (203KB, 1600x1220px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1600x1220px

This one may be a seabee and not a Marine, I'm not entirely sure

File: Marines advance in Kwajalein.jpg (104KB, 965x772px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 965x772px

To keep the discussion alive, what could of the Marines of the 2nd Division (along with the help of soldiers from the 27th Infantry Division) have done to minimize the casualties they took?

1,009 Marines and Soldiers is a fuck load of people over three days, not to mention the 4,690 the japs lost

>>2662289
Wait, are you talking about Tarawa, or about Kwajalein? Because your pic says Tarawa, and that was the 4th division, and I don't remember enough about the battles to remember exact casualty counts, but both seem more or less right.

In either case though, we're talking about beach line defenses, focused on shooting people who are hopping off the boats and onto the beaches. This puts the Japanese defenders in relatively highly positions for both sides; they can shoot at your men when they're most vulnerable, but they're not taking best advantage of whatever natural features of cover you have from the overwhelming American indirect fire advantages. If you want to lose less men, the obvious solution is to bombard for longer and harder when they're in a relatively vulnerable position to it. This will, however, take more time.

To be honest though, doing that kind of thing is "cheating" a bit. It presupposes a more advanced tactical set that only came into existence from lessons learned in Tarawa. It's like saying that the Soviets could have thrown back Barbarossa easily, if only they had thought to do a defense in depth so they wouldn't get millions of troops swallowed up in weeks when the Germans came blitzing along.

Do you have any pictures of British forces on the Pacific front?

File: Marines during the New Guinea Campaign.jpg (37KB, 500x350px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 500x350px

>>2662334
Disregard the pic, Im just dumping

>It presupposes a more advanced tactical set that only came into existence from lessons learned in Tarawa

Very good point, I guess a better question would've been how could've the US minimized casualties at Peleliu, well after the lessons at Tarawa, Kwajalein and Eniwetok were learned

Well, I kind of answered my own question since the Japanese also learned lessons after the Marshall Island Campaign and Saipan, Peleliu got buttoned the fuck down and they didn't resort to doing one last banzai charge like in Saipan

>>2662334
Pic says Kwajalein* Now I'm getting confused too, dammit.

File: Autralian Soldiers of the 39th Battalion in formation after Kokoda Track Campaign.jpg (77KB, 450x265px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 450x265px

>>2662337
I only have like to Aussie pics, would like to get more on English fighting in the Pacific

I wonder if there are any pictures of that unit of Mexicans that fought in the Phillipines

>>2651128
>It is theoretically possible they could have 'beaten' the U.S. a la the way the Vietnamese did 30ish years later

The Vietnamese were supported by the Russians and Chinese, the Japanese would be all alone and even if the U.S. stopped bombing them, they'd eventually revert to cavemen from the lack of resources in Japan.

>>2651133
>The Soviet Union would need to help their fat asses.

The U.S. literally had to give the Soviets a navy so they could invade Sakhalin Island.

File: Marines fire on Japanese positions during Battle of Peleliu.jpg (53KB, 500x348px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 500x348px

>>2662394
Also consider the political climate of the two conflicts

Unlike Vietnam, the US wasn't in the business of winning hearts and minds of the Japanese

>>2662302
>>2662392
>>2662414
>>2662417
>>2662426
>>2662476
>>2662490
I wonder what they thought of the Japanese.

File: Marines standing over Japanese Dead on Peleliu.jpg (191KB, 950x685px) Image search: [Google]

191KB, 950x685px

>>2662501
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82Qxmhc6j8U

Burgy really describes it well

>>2662032
>Yeah but it's not like the IJA didn't outfight or out-think bigger forces during its six month rampage
IJA had overwhelming superiority in force in both campaigns when you factor in force multipliers.

>>2662501
They were brainwashed to despise them on an emotional racial level. Illogical nonsense that leaves out that America provoked the war.

See >>2662520

America pushed Japan into war, used nuclear weapons on Japan (making America the only nation in history to commit this atrocity), and its people still think of Japanese as subhuman and in the wrong.

America was literally starting a fight with Japan saying Japan had no right in China while the US was sailing its warships in Chinese waters and enforcing unequal treaties. America wanted Japan to give up territory in east Asia while the US colonized the Philippines and other islands.

The hypocrisy of it all is what's most galling.

>>2662613
>America pushed Japan into war
Are you a different weeb than the one that got BTFO earlier, or are you the same one back for more?

Protip, an embargo is hardly pushing someone into war, especially when that embargo was triggered by a Japanese invasion of somewhere in an atmosphere tense over a second Japanese expansionary war.

File: Fucking Jap Shits.jpg (179KB, 796x883px) Image search: [Google]

179KB, 796x883px

>>2662613
Japs had it coming and you know it, I didn't know deciding to not sell your oil to a country that was raping another was pushing them to war and even if it was, the jap had it coming

fuckin' weeb

File: US Navy Corpsman at work in Saipan.jpg (81KB, 800x500px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 800x500px

Navy Corpsmen, the unsung heroes of the Pacific War

>>2662663
Why aren't flamethrowers still used?

File: 40th Infantry Division in Malaybalay, Phillippines 1945.jpg (298KB, 1766x1080px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 1766x1080px

The US Army fought in most of the major campaigns of the Pacific War with the Marines, they led the offensive on the Phillipines almost single handedly

>>2662702
Is that caption true?

>>2662716
Yeah, not to diminish the Marines in any way but apparently a lot more Army units were involved and did a lot more of the fighting. Marines got the credit due to a superb propaganda corps.

File: 'Alamo Scouts' in New Guinea.jpg (182KB, 900x709px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 900x709px

>>2662710
After 'Nam I think there was an Accord in NATO to ban the use of fire weapons

I guess there are ethical problems with using fire weapons but they sure as shit are effective

File: Soldiers standing over Japanese Dead.jpg (2MB, 2200x2631px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2200x2631px

>>2662718
Yes, the jap in the back is the one he killed before getting hit by a sniper

>>2662727
As a Marine, we have one hell of a PR group that goes back to WWI

We gave the Japs a good ass kicking but the truth is that the Army did just as many, more if you count the European theater, amphibious operations and kicked just as much ass

Credit given where credit is due and what not

>>2658496
Turns out unattended aircraft on the ground aren't hard to destroy.

File: US Army Sgt. Angelo Spiro Klonis in Saipan.jpg (255KB, 736x824px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 736x824px

One of my favorite Pacific War pics, just look at this smug fucker

TENNO HEIKA BANZAAAIIIII!

>>2662761
By ground forces, sure. But Kudo Bitai had none with them. And it turns out that if you hang around the area, they won't be unattended once the surprise wears off.

>>2662771
I suppose being an American in the 40s was something to be smug about.

>>2659076
Do any of you read what you link to?

In January 1938 Colonel Markham had pointed out how easy it would be for carrier-based planes to approach Pearl Harbor from the northeast. Screened by the heavy cloud cap almost continuously present over the main Koolau Range, they could cross Oahu and deliver a surprise attack on the naval base and its surrounding installations almost without warning.

>>2659134

Yes, it's paranoia that causes me to see things more clearly than you. Paranoia, deep destroyer!

>>2660947
Did the Americans provoke the Germans by flagging British ships, yes or no?

>>2662067
Yep there was around 40,000 army troops on Hawaii and that's not counting one and part of a second marine defense battalion and the thousands of navy personnel who could be used as infantry like they were during the Philippines campaign.

>>2662067
It's weird; we keep talking about Pearl Harbor, and you keep autistiming over to Wake Island.

>>2662777
Turns out you can drop bombs and strafe them too.

Clearly you have never served any country in any capacity.

>>2662803
Wake Island proved no US bases could be taken. Like at Guam, the Philippines, etc.

>>2662780
Yes, it was vulnerable to air assault. It was far less vulnerable to invasion by land forces, which is of course what the post chain was about. These are two separate things, you realize.

>>2662794
To be fair though, I wouldn't bet on a navy sailor tossed a rifle doing anywhere near as good of a job as an infantryman than say, an infantryman.

>>2662816
>It was far less vulnerable to invasion by land forces,
That was never proven. The link provided gave no evidence to support that assertion. That's what his post is about, you realize.

File: US Army during Aleutian Campagin.jpg (159KB, 783x600px) Image search: [Google]

159KB, 783x600px

One of the more obscure campaigns of the war, the Aleutian Islands Campaign was overshadowed by the Victories in Guadalcanal and Midway

>>2662803
I keep pointing out that invading an island with any sort of ground defenses is hard, especially when said island is a REALLY long fucking way away from your own bases. You keep ignoring that, for some reason.

>We
Adorable.

>>2662811
Which is why the entirety of the RAF was destroyed on the ground by Germany in the early days of the Battle of Britain when the Germans had air superiority. Oh wait, no, that's not what happened, even though they had far more firepower than the tiny carrier force did.

It actually isn't all that easy to destroy airfields from the sky with WW2 planes, which is why when you did see it starting to happen, it was with absolutely colossal raids being constantly launched by bombers carrying 6-10 tons of explosives each, instead of a few hundred guys who can carry a 250 pound bomb each. Have fun dodging flak!

>>2662833
>That was never proven. The link provided gave no evidence to support that assertion. That's what his post is about, you realize.

Well, other than the fucking size of the garrison at the island, which is something to think about, and how the Japanese were unable to subdue formations of that size in anything less than campaigns involving months, and that hanging around Hawaii unsupported like that for months is a fucking retarded idea.

I'm pretty sure this was obvious, but I guess not.

>>2662816
One Japanese account described the sailors in the Philippines as suicide squads attempting to draw fire lel.

>>2662882
How's that exactly?

Although now that you mention it I do recall reading that the US sailors in the Philippines had no khakis or anything camouflaged so they literally wore their white uniforms in the field.

File: Gen. Douglas McArthur lands in Leyte.jpg (542KB, 1600x1199px) Image search: [Google]

542KB, 1600x1199px

And thats all I got, could use some more US Army Pacific pics

File: The_Battle_of_Bataan_A_Complete_History,_2d_ed._-_Donald_J._Young.png (62KB, 540x152px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 540x152px

>>2662890

>>2663023
That's kind of funny, in a horrible way.

>>2663023
>see undisciplined sailors having a ciggie in the war zone
>they're just sitting there like lambs to the slaughter
>telling jokes

This must be a trick! The white Ameripiggu is cunning...

Japan had 1/10th the GNP of the USA.

Japan's economy was on a war footing and conquering new resources. USA's economy was in a crippling depression.

>>2662775
All they had to do was flank far right in Guadalcanal to win

>>2651133
>Auss poster

Fuck off, you people shit up every thread with your bullshit, take your garbage back to /pol/

File: 133547466531.jpg (21KB, 384x395px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 384x395px

>>2663023
I swear I'm never going to understand Yanks.

>>2652896
I kek'd

File: 1487648939008.png (53KB, 325x326px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 325x326px

>>2650818
if they had invented anime earlier then yes

>>2662613
You do know one of the earliest Japanese strategies was to wait out the American Occupation in the Philippines.

>>2662236
More like I hope I don't get diarrhea.

>>2651133

America didn't lose the Vietnam War

>>2662112
Because only the American and British Divisions were equipped well.
Phillipinos and other natives were not. They were not just judged poorly due to training but also equipment for a reason after all.

>>2663158
We dont' have enough capacity for self-reflection to even understand ourselves

We'll always love our anglo cousins though

File: Wmexico.jpg (95KB, 753x600px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 753x600px

>>2662385
Apparently Mexicans fought with the P-47 in the Phillipines?

>>2664348
>Phillipines
In the Pacific I mean.

>>2651191
>"SQUAD BROKEN"
kek /v/ pls go