So what? The Japanese army has tanks and artillery. I think that leaves the navy more then just a little out gunned.
| Author | Comment | ||
|---|---|---|---|
Dave Bender |
Navy officers also know, how to use their pistols. | ||
|
Posts: 5510 (16-Nov-2007 15:13:52) |
So what? The Japanese army has tanks and artillery. I think that leaves the navy more then just a little out gunned. |
||
Joshua Kintner |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 192 (16-Nov-2007 17:19:40) |
and "embargoes are ignored, as Japan has enough fuel") - simply "no comment" This assumes of course that the Manchurian steel and coal Gasification industry is up and fully running at the time or near the time that the embargo is imposed, otherwise of course Japan wouldn't be able to simply ignore the oil and scrap steel embargo. Japan could just pull an "Italy", where you take advantage of German technology, then pull a double and go with the Allies instead, of which Britian would probably be willing to negotiate a treaty of some sort with Japan if it allows her to pull her Pacific fleet back and have the Japanese send a little help to deal with the Italians in the Mediterranean. |
||
Dave Bender |
Go with the Allies instead | ||
|
Posts: 5512 (16-Nov-2007 18:22:56) |
That won't work as long as Japan is busy swallowing China. Britain might accept it but the U.S. would not. Historically the Americans made some pretty
strong diplomatic statements concerning the Japanese conquest of China.
Japan will need to fight her own war with China while remaining out of the European conflict. A diplomatic balancing act. Perhaps Japan will sell some of their decrepit WWI era DDs to Britain for use as ASW escorts. Strictly a business deal, not a military alliance. |
||
Joshua Kintner |
|||
|
Registered Member
Posts: 194 (16-Nov-2007 18:49:37) |
That won't work as long as Japan is busy swallowing China. Britain might accept it but the U.S. would not. Historically the Americans made some pretty strong diplomatic statements concerning the Japanese conquest of China. But with the Japanese not attacking Pearl Harbour and other United States installations, and thusly not drawing the United States into the war, it will be a while before the Americans enter into the war, although inevitably it will happen because of German U-boat "atrocities". If the Chinese Nationalist goverment was overthrown and replaced by a Communist goverment, then I could see American relations concerning Japan gobbling up China warming somewhat. |
||
Dave Bender |
KMT replaced by communist government. | ||
|
Posts: 5513 (16-Nov-2007 20:40:11) |
Not a chance unless Stalins Soviet Union intervenes as they did historically in 1945.
|
||
RBH Jr |
|||
|
Posts: 633 (16-Nov-2007 21:41:06) |
Both the KMT and Japan hated the communists. Probably the only thing they could agree on. Which is why the Chinese Communists spent essentially all of WWII hiding in western China while the KMT and Japan slugged it out in the east.Actually the communists "hid out" in western China because they needed to rebuild their forces after being nearly eradicated by the KMT and the "long march" (actually long marches), which were not completed until 1936. By retreating closer to the Soviet Union they were closer to their source of supply & support. As a result when the Japanese invaded China proper in 1937 the communists were in no shape to face them in a conventional battle/war. Instead the communists ran a pretty effective guerrilla campaign against the Japanese until it slowly they were eventually able to deploy some conventional forces against the Japanese. However after the KMT betrayed and them destroyed a communist field army in 1941 the communists ended most of their involvement in the war against the Japanese. From then on they were content to let the KMT weaken itself fighting the Japanese, while they stockpiled strength & supplies for the civil war that would follow victory over the Japanese. |
||
Dolphinstriker |
|||
|
Posts: 1579 (16-Nov-2007 22:10:08) |
By retreating closer to the Soviet Union they were closer to their source of supply & support.The Soviet Union supplied almost nothing to Mao's forces during WW II, and very little afterward. That was because Mao refused to toe the Comintern line decreed by Stalin. Stalin hated Mao because he could not control him as he did other communist factions worldwide, and that was the genesis of the Soviet-Red Chinese schism that existed as long as the Soviet union was in existence. However after the KMT betrayed and them destroyed a communist field army in 1941 the communists ended most of their involvement in the war against the Japanese. From then on they were content to let the KMT weaken itself fighting the Japanese, while they stockpiled strength & supplies for the civil war that would follow victory over the Japanese.The Chinese communists continued their intermittent guerrilla war against the Japanese well into 1944, in order to maintain control of at least some Chinese territory as a political symbol. Once the United States entered the war and demonstrated that Japan was doomed in 1942, the KMT and the Chinese communists, both began looking to the future when they would fight a civil war to determine who controlled China. Neither side gave priority to fighting the Japanese and there was a virtual unwritten truce between the KMT and the Japanese for long periods between 1942 and 1945. Most of the US military aid that was sent to the KMT ended up being used against the communists. |
||
RBH Jr |
|||
|
Posts: 634 (17-Nov-2007 04:05:14) |
The Soviet Union supplied almost nothing to Mao's forces during WW II, and very little afterward. That was because Mao refused to toe the Comintern line decreed by Stalin. Stalin hated Mao because he could not control him as he did other communist factions worldwide, and that was the genesis of the Soviet-Red Chinese schism that existed as long as the Soviet union was in existence. You are confusing later Mao-Stalin tensions with the reality in this period. The Soviets did help the Chinese communists in their most desparate hours after the long marches (epsecially before Mao rose to be the unrivaled leader of the Chinese Communists) even though Mao and Stalin did not always agree on things. |
||
Dolphinstriker |
|||
|
Posts: 1582 (17-Nov-2007 06:24:34) |
You are confusing later Mao-Stalin tensions with the reality in this period. The Soviets did help the Chinese communists in their most desparate hours after the long marches (epsecially before Mao rose to be the unrivaled leader of the Chinese Communists) even though Mao and Stalin did not always agree on things.No, Mao was labeled a "deviationist" by Stalin's Comintern in 1931 for taking a pragmatic approach to land redistribution and the wealthier peasants in Jiangxi Province. This was before the beginning of Mao's "Long March" in 1932, during which he consolidated his power as leader of the main branch of the Chinese Communist Party. From that time forward, Stalin refused to aid Mao or his followers in any way. Stalin was negotiating with Chiang in 1935 for a cooperative effort against the Japanese, even while Chiang was pursuing military operations against Mao's communists; Stalin never once made an issue of the anti-Chinese communist (actually anti-Mao) stance of Chiang Kai Shek. Even as late as 1945, the Soviets cooperated with Chiang's Nationalists forces by handing over to them certain key locations in Manchuria, rather than let Mao's forces take control there. It wasn't until 1947, when it was becoming obvious that the Communist Chinese, led by Mao, were winning the civil war, that Stalin began to mend his fences with the Chinese communists. But Stalin and Mao never completely reconciled their differences. |
||
Eugen Pinak |
|||
|
Posts: 103 (17-Nov-2007 11:22:51) |
Dave Bender wrote: Oh, really? And how many "tanks and artillery" has Army Minister at his home? At his work? In the restaurant he likes to visit? |
||