Replies

Nice essay on your part and it neatly sums up the Far East strategic situation as the Japanese saw it. I really don't have that much to add, but will throw out a few things anyway.

In one sense, the Japanese were crazy. Your comparison to French doctrine of World War 1 could not be more on point. The French deluded themselves into believing that an offensive spirit, or elan could somehow overcome the physical laws of nature; that being no amount of elan will keep a machine gun bullet from killing a soldier. The Japanese thought exactly the same thing, only they called it seisin. If you really want to laugh at the French, you can point out that their tactical thought was no different than the Zulus who fought the British, believing that their witch doctors had magic spells that made their shields of grass and wattle impervious to British bullets.

Despite having the lessons of the Zulu wars and World War 1 to ponder, the Japanese plowed ahead in their belief that a warrior ethos was more than enough compensation for technological and industrial inferiority. Yeah, that was just plain crazy.

For the rest, it was a simple miscalculation of just how powerful the United States really was. Even Yamamoto did not realize just how many ships and planes the United States was going to crank out once it got fired up.

The real question of a "what if," which violates Henkster's Law, is whether the Japanese could have attempted to seize lightly defended British and Dutch colonies without attacking the Philippines, and triggering a war with the United States. Interesting question, but no, that wasn't how the Japanese were wired.

I was a late to this dance, not reading Homer's threads regularly until about D-Day. So, I was unfamiliar with "henkster's law," which you mention frequently and explain less often.

My curiosity finally got the better of me earlier today, so I tried a google search and hit paydirt immediately. It has made you famous! Or something...

I have a question for you, and I don’t think it violates Henkster’s Law. It’s not a “what if?” it’s a “did we?”

We’ll call it the George C. Patton Question:

Did we have sufficient power, even without using the A-bombs that were about ready, to kick the Russians back beyond the Crimea and Ukraine if we wanted to?

The Russians had millions of men on the line, and a gazillion tanks, I know, but we had one incredible blooded, veteran force, at its full capabilities. In my opinion it was the most powerful military force in history, bar none. And our country wasn’t even close to fully mobilized. We could have done a whole lot more if we would have had to.

Not that our leaders would have, if for no other reason than a reasonable fear that the Soviets might join forces with Japan in Asia, and extend the war indefinitely.

But could we have done it?

I’ll tell you right up front that I believe we could have kicked their tails in that short window of time before they got The Bomb.

If I remember right, Patton thought so too. And he wanted to do it.