# Pearl Harbor attack - was it Japan's wisest course of action? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 8, 2016, 9:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187 "2016-12-08T09:33:44Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Dana\_Scully](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5daacb/32.png) [@Dana\_Scully](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dana_Scully)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2016, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/121 "2016-12-16T17:14:59Z")
In a word, no. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2016, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/122 "2016-12-16T18:27:07Z")
> [@mlees](#): > > In December '41, the USN had three carriers in the Pacific (Saratoga, Lexington, Enterprise), and four in the Atlantic (Ranger, Wasp, Yorktown, Hornet). > > They also had eleven Essex class authorized, with five having begun construction (CV-9, CV-10, CV-11, CV-16, CV-17). Immediately after PH, two more fleet carriers were authorized (CV’s 20 & 21). > > Studies had already been completed in the direction of “emergency” war construction/conversion of CVE and CVL’s, and in January of '42, the Navy Department ordered that some Cleveland class cruisers were to be converted on the stocks into CVL’s (the Independence class), and nine of these eventually joined the fleet in late '42 and '43. > > Edit: Le sigh. Too old, too slow. Heh. Just read about the service provided to the US Third Fleet by HMS Victorious, in '43: [wiki link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Victorious_(R38)#Service_with_the_US_Navy) ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2016, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/123 "2016-12-16T18:48:59Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > I don’t think a victorious Germany could have directly threatened US shores in 1945, but it isn’t a stretch to see how that situation would have threatened the US as soon as Hitler consolidated his new empire. Here is an excerpt from Roosevelt’s Navy Day address on October 27, 1941 (5 weeks before Pearl Harbor): > > \*Hitler has often protested that his plans for conquest do not extend across the Atlantic Ocean. But his submarines and raiders prove otherwise. So does the entire design of his new world order. > > For example, I have in my possession a secret map made in Germany by Hitler’s government-by the planners of the new world order. It is a map of South America and a part of Central America, as Hitler proposes to reorganize it. Today in this area there are fourteen separate countries. The geographical experts of Berlin, however, have ruthlessly obliterated all existing boundary lines; and have divided South America into five vassal states, bringing the whole continent under their domination. And they have also so arranged it that the territory of one of these new puppet states includes the Republic of Panama and our great life line-the Panama Canal. > > That is his plan. It will never go into effect. > > This map makes clear the Nazi design not only against South America but against the United States itself. > \* > > . That speech was a “brazen falsehood”. No such map. > **[Roosevelt’s ‘Secret Map’ Speech](https://ihr.org/journal/v06p125_weber.html)** > > Roosevelt’s ‘Secret Map’ Speech > By Mark Weber > > President Franklin Roosevelt was a master of deceit. On at least one occasion, he candidly admitted his readiness to lie to further his goals. During a conversation in May 1942 with Treasury Secretary... ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2016, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/124 "2016-12-16T19:02:09Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I wonder what other choice they had. > > Congratulations - using my Magic Time Travel/Shape Shifting/Espresso Making Transmogrifier, you are now Head Honcho of the Japanese military forces in 1941. You are tasked with successfully concluding a war in the Pacific, to the greater glory of the divine Emperor. Your orders will be obeyed implicitly, and you have the additional advantage of a complete knowledge of what did happen 1941-1945 at no extra charge. > > We await your orders, Your Gloriousity. **TokyoBayer** ’s diplomatic solution would actually work. But let us say they wanted to stay in the Axis. Do not attack the USA. Take out the Dutch East Indies for the Oil, destroy all British power in the Pacific and Indian oceans. Take Australia,\* then supported by the sea\*- move into India. Make our German Allies happy by making a show of force on the border with the USSR. Negotiate with the Generalissimo. Offer a peace treaty in exchange for helping him vs the “Commies”. Keep Manchuria. The USA doesnt enter the war in 1941 or even 1942 (maybe, maybe FDR is able to put enough USA forces in harms way with the Nazis that Congress reluctantly agrees to war, or maybe not- maybe they stop him). GB, tired of war, gets a peace proposal from Hitler, which they accept. Goebbels talks Hitler into lying to the Ukrainians, telling them the Nazis are "Liberators’. (Once Hitler attacked the USSR, this is one of the few "what ifs’ Historians agree would have changed the course of the war). Stalin is left with no allies and no second front and no lend-lease. The USSR collapses. ---
**Author:** ![Corry\_El](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Corry\_El](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corry_El)\ **Post date:** [December 16, 2016, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/125 "2016-12-16T19:42:52Z")
> [@mlees](#): > > Heh. Just read about the service provided to the US Third Fleet by HMS Victorious, in '43: [wiki link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Victorious_(R38)#Service_with_the_US_Navy) Which also gives the clue to the third US fleet carrier to spend some time as the only one available in the South Pacific: Saratoga in early May '43, after Enterprise returned home for overhaul. Essex entered the Pacific that month but wasn’t operational till summer. So for awhile it was two Allied fast carriers in SoPac theater but one was British. It was earlier mentioned that Hornet was lone fleet carrier in the SoPac, after Wasp was sunk in mid September '42 following withdrawal of Enterprise and Saratoga for combat damage repairs; then Enterprise, after Hornet was sunk in late October before Saratoga returned in November. Also that doesn’t count escort carriers which by early 1943 included three of the relatively large, though slow for fleet work, Sangamon Class ships with combat air groups which had seen action in the invasion of Morocco: the USN used them at times in a quasi-fleet role due to the critical shortage of CV’s. When Hornet and Enterprise were sole fleet carriers the only other carriers of any kind in theater were the CVE’s Long Island and Copahee, without air groups and used as an a/c transports. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2016, 10:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/126 "2016-12-18T10:43:39Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > That speech was a “brazen falsehood”. No such map. > > [Roosevelt’s ‘Secret Map’ Speech](http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v06/v06p125_weber.html) Your source is crap. Nevertheless any fool with a little knowledge of history could have determined for themselves that FDR did not actually have Hitler’s grand plan to invade the Western Hemisphere. If he had ever had such a thing, it would be a matter of common knowledge by now. The point is that he and his advisers obviously thought that a Nazi Europe could eventually threaten the US indirectly through South America. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2016, 11:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/127 "2016-12-18T11:18:27Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > Your source is crap. > > Nevertheless any fool with a little knowledge of history could have determined for themselves that FDR did not actually have Hitler’s grand plan to invade the Western Hemisphere. If he had ever had such a thing, it would be a matter of common knowledge by now. > > The point is that he and his advisers obviously thought that a Nazi Europe could eventually threaten the US indirectly through South America. No, the point is that he was instilling fear that the Nazi’s had plans to do that. Based on, as you agree, a lie. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2016, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/128 "2016-12-18T15:48:22Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > No, the point is that he was instilling fear that the Nazi’s had plans to do that. > Based on, as you agree, a lie. No, the point of the thread is whether or not the US would have been at risk if the Nazi’s had been victorious in Europe. The point was whether or not they could have invaded America. FDR lied about Hitler’s written goals because he understood that a Nazi Europe was a direct threat to the United States. He understood how Hitler could go about achieving those goals through a foothold in either Central or South America. Whether or not Adolf ever actually drew up a map is of no consequence. Both sides knew that a Nazi Europe could eventually cross the Atlantic by one means or another. So FDR lied, but he lied because he understood the truth that the Atlantic Ocean was not wide enough to keep the US safe from a Nazi Europe. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2016, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/129 "2016-12-18T16:39:53Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > So FDR lied, but he lied because he understood the truth that the Atlantic Ocean was not wide enough to keep the US safe from a Nazi Europe. Glad you were best buddies with him, so you can set the record straight from first hand knowledge. ---
**Author:** ![nachtmusick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ac91a4/32.png) [@nachtmusick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nachtmusick)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2016, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/130 "2016-12-18T16:50:05Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > Glad you were best buddies with him, so you can set the record straight from first hand knowledge. We weren’t pals, and I’ve admitted he lied about some things. I base a certain amount of my recollections on the historical record. I wasn’t there for all of it. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2016, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/131 "2016-12-18T21:49:22Z")
> [@nachtmusick](#): > > Your source is crap. > > Nevertheless any fool with a little knowledge of history could have determined for themselves that FDR did not actually have Hitler’s grand plan to invade the Western Hemisphere. If he had ever had such a thing, it would be a matter of common knowledge by now. > > The point is that he and his advisers obviously thought that a Nazi Europe could eventually threaten the US indirectly through South America. Get caught with a bad cite, and then call _my_ source crap. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: _“Nevertheless any fool with a little knowledge of history”_ obviously not. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2016, 10:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/132 "2016-12-18T22:35:28Z")
A lot of you guys have played too many video games, where conquest of a territory makes that territory turn from the enemy’s color to yours, and now you have the full value of said territory. The Nazi Empire before Barbarossa, had it not invaded the Soviet Union–would’ve had a terrible time being kept together. The German finances were under tremendous strain. While the annexation/merger of Germany and Austria, and Germany and Czechoslovakia was mostly pretty peaceful, neither country significantly added to the industrial base or natural resource situation of Germany. The annexation/subjugation of Poland and France certainly did, but both countries were pretty war ravaged and not at anywhere near their pre-war economic value (and wouldn’t be until years after WWII itself was over.) Both France and Poland required extensive security forces to keep under the Nazi thumb. Combined the two countries were larger than Germany itself. If Barbarossa had been successful, it’s highly doubtful, first of all, that Germany could’ve held so much territory long term. Germany, even before it invaded the USSR, was in no condition to invade the United States any time in the next ten years, and likely “never”, because it would’ve been maybe similar to the USSR–a hostile power with some satellite states around it, but lacking in the resources to truly wage war on a global scale. The earlier poster is right in pointing out Red Dawn was a fiction, there’s almost no way the USSR could’ve invaded the United States proper at any point during the Cold War. Could they have launched some hare-brained invasion of the harder to defend areas, like Alaska or Hawaii? Sure. Alaska they could probably even hold some territory because its so densely populated, but the strategic/tactical wisdom of such a thing would be questionable. I think people gravely misunderstand how powerful the United States was in WWII, and even in the Cold War (which is inaccurately portrayed as a battle between equal superpowers–while the USSR was a superpower, it was by far the weaker one, but a large nuclear arsenal meant that the United States couldn’t cross certain boundaries with the Soviets.) At one point during WWII the United States had the largest navy in the world–_and in fact it had a larger navy than the entire rest of the world combined_, meaning that literally, the USN’s total tonnage was more than 50% of the world’s total naval tonnage. The United States was the only country with a vast industrial base and almost unlimited access to oil, coal, iron ore and uranium. About the only strategically important thing the U.S. lacked was easy access to the world’s rubber after the fall of Southeast Asia–but by the end of the war synthetic rubber production had increased **20,218%** , a feat that was also unique to the U.S. vast industrial, educational and resource base. The U.S. was the only power to have an atomic bomb in World War II, and speculative fiction aside–there was virtually no realistic path to any other power having the bomb before the United States–and frankly much before 1950. The real life Soviet bomb project started in 1943 and ran to 1949 before first successful device, and was largely possible because the war ended and the Soviets could invest massive resources into it–something at-war Nazi Germany or even at-war Russia would’ve been unable to do. The United States was able to invest insane resources into the Manhattan project while fighting two massive wars on opposite sides of the world, while also supplying in several key areas more than half of certain war materials to key allies. U.S. GDP was by far the largest in the world, even Germany + USSR had a smaller GDP combined than the United States at this point in history. But most importantly, the U.S. economy was _not disrupted by warfare at all_, all of the American factories could work at maximum efficiency, they were never bombed, their logistics links were never disrupted, they did not have to use slave labor due to shortage of fighting men in the military leading to conscription of almost all men (able and not) age 18-65. Lots of natural resources Germany needed had to come to it via sea, and those routes were constantly under attack. Even if Germany had successfully conquered the USSR, it would have been **decades** before the USSR was anything like its former self–and the Nazi Empire would be footing the bill for the reconstruction ( and again, unlikely to be able to actually hold so much land for so long). The idea that Germany could’ve rebuilt Russia and sailed west across the Atlantic is absurd–it’d literally be until the 1960s before we could even imagine such a thing, and by then nuclear stockpiles would make a conventional invasion unlikely. But even still, probably hard to carry out. With all the advantages that the United States had, that I mentioned above–we still could not have invaded Germany in WWII without the staging grounds of Britain. It’s just too hard to move that large a force across the seas, and too risky. What would we have done if we ran into bad weather, after a 3,000 mile crossing, on our planned landing date? Circle around for days (weeks?) until it cleared up? Because the German Navy was so weak, we could, over time, transport a vast number of soldiers across the Atlantic Ocean, so instead of a 3,000 mile seaborne invasion we were conducting a 25 mile one–and it was still the largest, most expensive, most complex military operation in the history of the world, and if things had gone even a little shit it would’ve failed. Overlord involved 6,000 naval vessels, 10,000 air craft, 2 million men, and bewilderingly complex support operation. While Operation Barbarossa involved more raw men, it was genuinely less complex due to being a land-based invasion with land links to the German industrial heartland. The idea of conducting such an operation from a base in Europe, crossing 3,000 miles of the Atlantic Ocean, and landing in the continental United States (or even just a nearby weaker country like Mexico) is laughably insane. That’s assuming Germany had all the advantages we had (like an enemy with virtually no surface navy, reliant entirely on submarines, which could inflict casualties but not truly stop anything), in some pseudo-real world alt history where Germany has just vanquished the USSR, the idea of them turning around in any realistic time frame and sailing West, against the full might of the U.S. Navy is laughable–the Germans would lose entire divisions worth of men in sunk naval transport vessels. Not to mention Germany simply didn’t have the boats, they’d have to build them–which would have taken ages, because again, it would have taken _decades_ to rebuild their conquered territories. German industrial might and the areas immediately around Germany where some degree of heavy industry was preserved just simply didn’t cut it–in real World War II they weren’t even able to keep a semi-proper navy on the seas, the idea of them building a force that could invade the United States across the Atlantic ocean is frankly one of the most absurd things I’ve ever heard. If we compare also Nazi Germany to the real history Soviet Union, the Soviet’s were only able to keep the Warsaw Pact states under the thumb because of a) already extant local communist parties that were often sympathetic to the idea of a global communist empire (local Nazis were nowhere near as strong outside of a few outliers like Austria and Romania) and b) because the Soviets were willing to spend a shit ton of money on keeping them under the thumb. Pretty much any historian you ask will tell you the Warsaw Pact countries were a net drain to the USSR–not a net positive, they were losing on the deal, other than from a strictly strategic perspective (kept their enemies away from their own borders, by creating a large buffer zone.) German annexed/satellite states would’ve been very similar in an alt-history where Germany beats the USSR (and in this scenario I imagine Britain remains independent, because the ability for Germany to successfully invade Britain is also basically entirely impossible.) As for America’s leaders–none seriously thought Japan or Germany were _ever_ going to invade the United States. What FDR believed, was that the United States had an emerging international role in the world, and a Europe dominated by Nazi Germany and a Far East dominated by Imperial Japan was extremely detrimental to America’s geopolitical interests. But that’s not an argument you make to the American people, they need to be sold on an existential threat–hell, George W. Bush made allusions to an existential threat in the aftermath of 9/11, to justify the things he did, and we all know that’s a bunch of bullshit. FDR also plain didn’t want to see a world where Europe was lead by fascists, he was willing to spend blood and treasure to see France, the Low Countries, and Britain free from tyranny–but after the experience of World War I, a war that was sold to the people as a liberal democratic moral imperative, the American people were not up for another such war. We lost over 100,000 men in World War I for what many Americans saw as absolutely no reason whatsoever, it was widely perceived the war would’ve ended without our involvement, but we lost thousands of young men because of Wilson’s internationalist moralizing. FDR couldn’t sell the people on war with Germany or Japan based solely on helping allies or helping America’s “long term geopolitical interests”, but when Japan attacked us and Germany then declared war against us, he no longer had to sell the American people on war. He did have to sell them on the Europe first strategy, and him and his other top political allies helped to do so by framing it as an existential threat. But anyone who has seriously studied the history can discern between Roosevelt’s propaganda and the actual geopolitical realities of the time. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2016, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/133 "2016-12-19T17:39:48Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > The German finances were under tremendous strain. While the annexation/merger of Germany and Austria, and Germany and Czechoslovakia was mostly pretty peaceful, neither country significantly added to the industrial base or natural resource situation of Germany. > > Germany, even before it invaded the USSR, was in no condition to invade the United States any time in the next ten years, and likely “never”, because it would’ve been maybe similar to the USSR–a hostile power with some satellite states around it, but lacking in the resources to truly wage war on a global scale. > The U.S. was the only power to have an atomic bomb in World War II, and speculative fiction aside–there was virtually no realistic path to any other power having the bomb before the United States–and frankly much before 1950. The real life Soviet bomb project started in 1943 and ran to 1949 before first successful device, and was largely possible because the war ended and the Soviets could invest massive resources into it–something at-war Nazi Germany or even at-war Russia would’ve been unable to do. The United States was able to invest insane resources into the Manhattan project while fighting two massive wars on opposite sides of the world, while also supplying in several key areas more than half of certain war materials to key allies. > With all the advantages that the United States had, that I mentioned above–we still could not have invaded Germany in WWII without the staging grounds of Britain. It’s just too hard to move that large a force across the seas, and too risky. What would we have done if we ran into bad weather, after a 3,000 mile crossing, on our planned landing date? Circle around for days (weeks?) until it cleared up? Because the German Navy was so weak, we could, over time, transport a vast number of soldiers across the Atlantic Ocean, so instead of a 3,000 mile seaborne invasion we were conducting a 25 mile one–and it was still the largest, most expensive, most complex military operation in the history of the world, and if things had gone even a little shit it would’ve failed. > > . Largely good points but some quibbles. The Skoda tank works certainly helped: > **[Panzer 38(t)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panzer_38(t))** > > The Panzerkampfwagen 38(t), originally known as the ČKD LT vz. 38, was a tank designed during the 1930s, which saw extensive service during World War II. Developed in Czechoslovakia by ČKD, the type was adopted by Nazi Germany following the annexation of Czechoslovakia. With the German Army and other Axis forces, the type saw service in the invasions of Poland, France and the USSR. Production ended in 1942, when its main armament was deemed inadequate. In all, over 1,400 Pz. 38(t)s we The (t) s... True. Again true, but Largely possible due mostly to Russian spies and American traitors. Not only could the USA have invaded the Axis powers without GB as a staging area- \*we did. \* We invaded North Africa and from there Sicily and from there Italy, and we could have hit the South of France and Yugoslavia. ---
**Author:** ![Johanna](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johanna/32/8318_2.png) [@Johanna](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johanna)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2016, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/134 "2016-12-19T21:52:17Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Get caught with a bad cite, and then call _my_ source crap. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: Your source definitely crap, but it is additionally far worse than crap. It’s the [Institute for Historical Review](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Historical_Review), a Holocaust-denying anti-Semitic organization that has ties to neo-Nazi groups and is rated a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. I’m frankly disgusted that you would actually advocate any of their crap. Want to reconsider? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [December 19, 2016, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/135 "2016-12-19T22:02:45Z")
> [@Johanna](#): > > Your source definitely crap, but it is additionally far worse than crap. It’s the [Institute for Historical Review](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institute_for_Historical_Review), a Holocaust-denying anti-Semitic organization that has ties to neo-Nazi groups and is rated a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center. I’m frankly disgusted that you would actually advocate any of their crap. > > Want to reconsider? Yes, and if I was using them to promulgate Holocaust denial or Antisemitism, you’d be right. But the map\* was \*made up by FDR. Even a blind squirrel can find a nut. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/136 "2016-12-20T04:59:13Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > you are now Head Honcho of the Japanese military forces in 1941. You are tasked with successfully concluding a war in the Pacific, to the greater glory of the divine Emperor. Your orders will be obeyed implicitly, and you have the additional advantage of a complete knowledge of what did happen 1941-1945 at no extra charge. Option II If you don’t want to join the Allies, then you punt. Execute about 60% of your generals by putting them all in a large room with equal number of [Strike North Faction](http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Strike-North_Faction) and [Strike South Faction](http://en.citizendium.org/wiki/Strike-South_Faction). Let them carry their _katana_, lock the doors and tell them to sort it out themselves. Then shoot any survivors. Seriously, there wasn’t a military solution in 1941. Not with the ultra-nationalists in charge of the military, specifically the IJA. They were too detached from reality. However, if you had the knowledge of the future, you kill the field generals, all of the colonels, and most of the majors then pull out of Indochina and China. This allows you to resume purchases of oil and other resources from the US and you stay out of war. You also keep a huge corp of personal guards for the inevitable backlash. Make sure your life insurance policies are paid up and never sleep in the same bed for more than one night in a row. Your life expectancy will be measured in days, rather than weeks or months, let alone years, but maybe your successor will stand a chance. Chiang Kai-shek isn’t really going to ever accept the loss of Manchuria, but your successors can keep a hostile border going for decades, similar to Pakistan and India. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 6:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/137 "2016-12-20T06:58:44Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I wonder what other choice they had. > > Congratulations - using my Magic Time Travel/Shape Shifting/Espresso Making Transmogrifier, you are now Head Honcho of the Japanese military forces in 1941. You are tasked with successfully concluding a war in the Pacific, to the greater glory of the divine Emperor. Your orders will be obeyed implicitly, and you have the additional advantage of a complete knowledge of what did happen 1941-1945 at no extra charge. > > We await your orders, Your Gloriousity. > > Regards, > Shodan What about an actual invasion of Hawai? Would that have been a viable option? How well was It defended? The Japanese would probably not have been able to hold on to it for years but the blow to the US would have set back the rebuilding of the fleet enormously. It might have been used as a bit of barter even, after the taking of south east Asia, to maybe actually broker a peace treaty. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/138 "2016-12-20T11:37:27Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > What about an actual invasion of Hawai? Would that have been a viable option? > How well was It defended? > > The Japanese would probably not have been able to hold on to it for years but the blow to the US would have set back the rebuilding of the fleet enormously. > > It might have been used as a bit of barter even, after the taking of south east Asia, to maybe actually broker a peace treaty. Nope, it would have been impossible. > [@](#): > > [It’s utter nonsense.](http://www.combinedfleet.com/pearlops.htm) That site goes into the reasons in detail. The Japanese were able to make a raid on Hawaii, but it would have been impossible to have actually invaded. Likewise, the Japanese could not have destroyed the oil tank farms, the dry dock facilities or the submarine bases. For the former, the Japanese planes did use armor piercing rounds so they would not have been able to simply machine gun the tanks. They didn’t have enough munitions to take out the farm. For the latter two, the carriers simply didn’t have enough munitions. It really takes land based planes or a far greater force than what they brought. ---
**Author:** ![Latro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a87d85/32.png) [@Latro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Latro)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/139 "2016-12-20T12:34:01Z")
The article takes a win at Midway as a basis, by which time the island was heavily reinforced and Japan had incurred considerable losses. My ‘what if’ is about 1941. What if the Japanese had come with a full invasion force. They would have had the time for good planning and the element of surprise. ---
**Author:** ![Corry\_El](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Corry\_El](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corry_El)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2016, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187/140 "2016-12-20T15:20:58Z")
> [@Latro](#): > > The article takes a win at Midway as a basis, by which time the island was heavily reinforced and Japan had incurred considerable losses. > > My ‘what if’ is about 1941. What if the Japanese had come with a full invasion force. They would have had the time for good planning and the element of surprise. Technically possible to do at first, or it can’t be conclusively shown it wasn’t. But, not possible to do while also conquering in the other places the Japanese did on the same schedule. That’s the logistical constraint, as opposed to total lack of logistical capability to support, initially, an invasion of Hawaii. And, the practical purpose of the war was to secure an oil supply for the Japanese fleet in particular (though the whole economy to some degree also) before the IJN’s ~6.5mil oil ton stockpile was exhausted. Around 4.8mil was used in the first year of the actual war, so there was enough to support even a campaign as far off as Hawaii, for awhile, enough tankers also, but seizing Hawaii didn’t get the oil to continue past that, and lack of oil would eventually cause failure if it took a long time\*. That’s the basic problem. It would be also have been quite possible for such an invasion would fail, either a direct, immediate attempt to invade Oahu, or more likely gaining a lodgement elsewhere in the Hawaiian Islands (which were virtually undefended except Oahu), at least a sheltered anchorage as a forward base and capture undefended US Army airfields on neighboring islandsm, but then fail to choke off US resupply to Oahu to ever take it, or the Japanese having their own supply line to the Marshalls choked off. And before tallying US capabilities after the actual PH raid, we must consider that the Japanese could not count on that particular level of success in the raid. It could have less, though also more if perhaps some of the US carriers were caught there. But it couldn’t be counted on. Nor would surprise be as likely with an invasion force approaching the islands separately from the fast carrier group, or else the plan would have to leave more time in between for the US defenses to recover. But, strong statements that US forces in the HI in 1941 would have crushed such an attempt must rely on assuming some level of readiness and immediate capability. We don’t know that. The (larger than at PH) US sub force and US Army bomber force (about equal after the initial Japanese raids both places) in the Philippines were quite ineffective in that campaign. The US carrier force was effective by mid-1942 but worked out some significant issues in the interim (just one example ‘USN Wildcat fighters had armor and self sealing fuel tanks but Zeroes didn’t’, in Dec '41 neither did, or some not all F4F-3’s were fitted with do-it-yourself seat armor, but no self sealing tanks). US cruiser/DD’s struggled for a long time to match Japanese ones in night combat. US old BB’s weren’t tested v IJN till radar fire control refits had completely changed their capability. US Army coast defenses: never seriously tested in combat. The US divisions on Oahu: 25th Infantry Division didn’t enter combat till the Guadalcanal campaign, 24th not till 1944. And so on. However the Japanese couldn’t plan based on assuming a surprising lack of capability of their opponents, and US forces in HI might have performed better than in PI. But if it was 100% obvious the US defenses in Hawaii were sufficient to doom any Japanese invasion, then presumably it was foolish to greatly strengthen them thereafter as happened (way past replacing what was lost in the PH raid). Some of that was bureaucratic inertia (eg. making two of USS Arizona’s turrets into coast defense emplacements, a project not completed til 1945 by which time it was obviously superfluous), but probably not all of it. So the basic question is why the Japanese would do this, and while the answer isn’t because it was absolutely impossible as a military operation, there’s no good answer IMO why they would. \*there were around 600,000 tons (4.5mil _barrels_) of oil stored on Oahu, but that wouldn’t change the big picture for Japan even on the extremely optimistic assumption it could be captured intact. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pearl-harbor-attack-was-it-japans-wisest-course-of-action/774187.md?page=8)