[Pan_Yan]

Interesting read.

[SampleMan]

The author nonsensically states that Soviet victory was inevitable because of a larger population and more resources, but then disregards both those factors in asserting that Japan could have defeated the U.S.

He has a point in their somewhere, but picked a very poor analogy to wrap it around.

[ealgeone]

This person is bereft of knowledge of history and the US industrial capacity.

Assume the scenario unfolded as described American war production would have stepped up and those resources would have been shifted to the Pacific.

There is an interesting website that allows for this situation but shows US and Japanese carrier/plane production.

Even if Midway would have been lost, we were going to swamp Japan in terms of production.

They were going to lose.

[PGR88]

if all efforts failed the Soviet Army would eventually have crushed the Reich by itself.

I don't agree at all. Yes, the Soviets were prepared to struggle forever, but imagine if Hitler never faced a two-front war? Or imagine that Japan, unengaged with the USA, was able to send 1 million troops into Russian the Russian Far-East, and Stalin faced a two-front war?

[Resolute Conservative]

” Soviet Army would eventually have crushed the Reich by itself”

BS.

If we are re-writing history... if Germany only had one front (the Russian) they would have kicked Stalin’s butt. What killed the Reich was two fronts and a poorly executed winter offensive in Russia.

[Leaning Right]

I have read something along those lines, but the argument was that the decisive US victories in WW II made the country after 1945 complacent, and almost reckless in foreign policy matters.

The thinking here is that our leaders, and the country in general, came to believe that any conflict the US got involved in would inevitably lead to a decisive US victory.

The “nearness” of the US victories in WW II were forgotten. Only the results were remembered. The US won in the past. Therefore it must win in the future.

Imperial Rome suffered from that same line of thinking, and that contributed to Rome's downfall.

[alexander_busek]

First, the history. Although by 1944 the war’s outcome was never in doubt, if all efforts [had] failed[,] the Soviet Army would eventually have crushed the Reich by itself. Victory at that point was a national and industrial effort, and would belong to the countries with the most steel plants and masses of citizens under arms.

Doesn't the author realize that much of the industrial might supporting the Soviet war effort was based in America? I'm sure that there are others here who are far more qualified and who could enumerate all the war goods (armaments and foodstuffs) which the U.S. sent to the U.S.S.R. to be used against the Axis.

Regards,

[norwaypinesavage]

"if all efforts failed the Soviet Army would eventually have crushed the Reich by itself."

Yes, except for the food, clothing, steel, and weapons from the US to Russia. Midway was won by breaking Japan's military code, US ingenuity (The 'sunken' Yorktown was repaired in three days, and sent to play a vital role in the Midway battle(and then sunk 'again')), The US 'Arsenal of Democracy', skilled troops and leaders, and yes, a little bit of luck. It seems the more of the first items, the 'luckier' we got.

[Cry if I Wanna]

Even if Japan had defeated the U.S. overwhelmingly in the Pacific, we would have probably still developed the bomb and used it one way or the other to beat them.

[VTenigma]

We were supporting the Soviet military with transport and equipment, we were supporting the Allies with men, machines, and arms. We were also fighting a war in the Pacific. The author is smoking something if he thinks Japan was going to prevail in the Pacific if we lost Midway, it would have been a devastating setback but with no natural resources, and being surrounded by Chinese, British, Aussie and American forces the outcome would have been the same. Besides, we built the bomb.

[Snickering Hound]

http://www.amazon.com/Shattered-Sword-Untold-Battle-Midway/dp/1574889249/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1433951572&sr=1-1&keywords=shattered+sword&pebp=1433951582499&perid=F7C05CD24A0D40609566

The author really needs to read a few books instead of trying to recollect the Battle of Midway off the top of his head or worse from that awful 76’ Heston movie.

[Timocrat]

Although by 1944 the war’s outcome was never in doubt, if all efforts failed the Soviet Army would eventually have crushed the Reich by itself.

Oh sure. Imagine no "Lend Lease" and no allied bombing of German infrastructure and armament factories. The Germans would still be in Moscow.

[Billthedrill]

There are several topics here requiring comment. Yes, the disparity of industrial power described the eventual winner in both theaters but taken worldwide that would have implied the the United States would eventually have won both of them. This renders decisive strategic considerations such as manpower and logistics nugatory, and I doubt if even the most radical theorist would go that far.

The style of warfare that leads Western cultures to prefer decisive battles is a topic explored in detail by Victor Davis Hanson. To be very brief, it results from the manpower necessary to fight being drawn from the same agricultural and industrial workforce necessary to keep the war going. There never would have been a Rosie The Riveter were this not the case even in the United States, unaffected by direct combat as none of the other participants really were.

The asymmetrical warfare typical of various "liberation" movements is as old as history and not really specific to any one culture - we have Arab romantics insisting that the slashing raiders of the sand are their ticket to conquest but in fact that has never really been the case. What is different about ISIS is twofold: first, that is is not a grass-roots liberation movement but the product of sponsorship and intelligence belonging to national level resources, and second, that its stated intention is to take and hold territory, which brings it back into the Western arena by necessity. In short, they can be reached, but unless the West is determined to establish a firm permanent control of the territory fought over, they'll fade and return, as GWB and 0bama have learned the hard way.

The real difficulty is finding that spot in policy that is somewhere between all-out warfare and complete disengagement, the former because we're not committed to a real empire and probably will never be, the latter because if we don't go to our declared enemies they will certainly come to us.

[redangus]

I think the better analogy is that WWII was a war of set piece battles while the fight against ISIS, and Afghanistan for that matter, are more like the Indian wars of the late 19th century. The strategy should be totally different. And of course it would help if the Iraqis gave a sh*t and didn’t drop their weapons and run with regularity.

[DesertRhino]

“Had Japan annihilated the rest of the Pacific Fleet carriers, it would have taken Midway. With land-based planes on Midway, it would have taken Hawaii. With Hawaii…well, who knows? Maybe San Francisco, maybe Alaska. Maybe pause in the Pacific and knock out the British in India. And then maybe peace, under a new Pax Japania.”

Midway was a turning point for us in a sense because our headlong momentum began there, but a defeat there would have maybe prolonged the war by 6 months at best. Japan was 100% guaranteed defeat the moment the first plane released a bomb over Pearl Harbor. It’s beyond debate.

Read this if you have doubts, “why Japan really lost the war”. Its about the astounding production capacity of the USA then. Japan had no hope, period.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm

[LS]

You all might be interested in my novel, “Halsey’s Bluff” (http://www.amazon.com/Halseys-Bluff-Larry-Schweikart/dp/1605301299/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1433952949&sr=8-1&keywords=Halsey%27s+Bluff) in which the Japanese win the battle of Midway against Halsey (not Spruance in this book). The exciting stuff is what happens next. Endorsed by the Battle of Midway Roundtable (vets).

[Portcall24]

By definition aviation is the most flexible of the military forces. At Midway the aviators used that capability to wander around until they found the target. Not without sacrifice as note by the author. But that same capability today is throttled by the WH and Pentagon. It was also throttled during the Vietnam war. We are once again fighting with “one hand tied behind our back.” Not to mention that the adversary fully understands Competitive Strategies. They sacrifice a few with car bombs or 9/11 and cause us to expend vast amounts of our National Capital in defense. We will continue to be on the wrong end of the fight until we take the fight to them with a level of violence that they will find “eye-opening”. Controlled escalation didn’t work in Vietnam and it won’t work in SWA. We need something on a scale of Hiroshima without the radiation to make them stop and think twice.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

It is truly folly to play the “if” game. The “if” game usually changes one thing and then assumes everything else would have been the same and plays off the logical conclusions based on that. However, once you change one thing, many other things are changed that are in a lot of ways beyond our ability to perceive. I think we would have still won the war in the Pacific, but there’s also the possibility that we would have had to sue for peace after the Japanese took Hawaii. It’s hard to say really.

One thing that is for sure, it’s a good thing that Germany and Japan didn’t have a true alliance where they actively worked together. (I’ll play the if game) If Japan would have taken their million man army sitting in Manchuckuo (what the Japanese called Manchuria) and attacked the Soviets they could have walked into Moscow without opposition as Stalin had diverted all of his forces guarding the border to face the Nazi onslaught.

[MasterGunner01]

If there is one lesson to take from World War 2, America WAS the “Arsenal of Democracy”. America not only supplied its own fighting forces with everything they needed, but equipped its other major allies — Great Britain, Canada, Russia, and France — as well.

America delivered more than 357,000 aircraft; 12 million small arms; 47 billion rounds of small arms ammunition; 11 million tons of artillery ammunition; 1.6 million trucks, tanks, tank chassis; 5777 supply type ships; 107 CVL/CVE carriers; 29 CVB/CV carriers; 8 BB; 1050 LST; 76 CB/CA/CL cruisers; 857 DD/DE; 203 SS.

Compare US aircraft production figures to those of the major combatants and you'll see the numbers that led to victory.

ALLIES
USAAF — 297,199
USN — 60,456
Great Britain — 131,549 [RAF,RN]
Russia — 158,218

AXIS
Germany — 119,871
Italy — 11,508
Japan — 76,320 [IJAF,IJN]

[exit82]

I always thought Midway was God’s way of saying to the Japs that the party was over, and they lost.