# Question regarding the attack on Pearl Harbor **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 19, 2013, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628 "2013-08-19T10:26:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 2:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/141 "2013-08-30T02:04:06Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > But \*the distance \*was. And that is entirely my point, _and only my point._ If it was impossible for one side to traverse the distance _for reasons of distance,_ then the same condition existed for the other side to _traverse the same distance._ That is all. > > Anyone who claims that the Japanese could not attack the West Coast \*for reasons of distance \*needs to consider that the Americans were planning on attacking in the other direction, _with distance was not a factor_, although many other things were. If that was your point, then you don’t have a point. It would be impossible for me to buy my own private jet. It would not be impossible for Bill Gates to do it. People and nations have different capabilities. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/142 "2013-08-30T02:15:04Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > These are the best examples of large-scale irregular warfare in WWII, and in every case above, the results were meager-to-counterproductive unless conducted in the immediate vicinity of large, active conventional armies. A putative American partisan movement would have similarly been a romantic irritant to the Japanese unless working closely with large-scale regular forces.s. And, would we not expect them to be working closely with large-scale regular forces? Where the hell do you think the US Army would be? 😕 Defending Chicago? ---
**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:** [August 30, 2013, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/143 "2013-08-30T02:43:10Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > **The Japanese were thinking short term** , as you apparently are, not in terms of actually- winning the war. Here is a point which we both agree. However, the Japanese believed that the method they had selected would have won them the war. > [@Musicat](#): > > Therefore, if one side considered the distance to be surmountable, perhaps the other side could handle it, too. Conversely, perhaps it was too far for either side; we’ll never know. I’ll respond more to your argument in the quote below, but you are incorrect in saying that “we’ll never know.” We know. See below. > [@Musicat](#): > > But \*the distance \*was. And that is entirely my point, _and only my point._ If it was impossible for one side to traverse the distance _for reasons of distance,_ then the same condition existed for the other side to _traverse the same distance._ That is all. > > Anyone who claims that the Japanese could not attack the West Coast \*for reasons of distance \*needs to consider that the Americans were planning on attacking in the other direction, _with distance was not a factor_, although many other things were. Others have responded really well, so I won’t rehash all of their points, but will add several more. The distance was not even the same. At the start of the war, the closest US military base in the Philippines to Japan (Kyushu) was 1,500 miles. The closest Japanese military base to the West coast was 5,300 miles. PI fell and early efforts had to be staged out of Hawaii, which was still much closer to the areas of fighting than the West Coast would have been. The US started out the war with 10 times greater industrial output than Japan. The US population was larger, it was building more ships than Japan could and Japan was already tied up fighting and occupying (parts of) China. The two sides were not equal and Japan would never, ever be able to invade the US. ---
**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:** [August 30, 2013, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/144 "2013-08-30T02:49:18Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > And, would we not expect them to be working closely with large-scale regular forces? Where the hell do you think the US Army would be? 😕 Defending Chicago? Yup, that was exactly what I was addressing, the scenario posed by **Musicat** as follows: > [@Musicat](#): > > Next, if Japan tried to invade the West Coast, and US troops weren’t available, don’t you think most US citizens would take matters into their own hands a la Minutemen? People fighting for their own land have a vested interest, even to the point of defensive absurdity. Read for comprehension. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 3:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/145 "2013-08-30T03:22:24Z")
> [@TokyoBayer](#): > > Yup, that was exactly what I was addressing, the scenario posed by **Musicat** as follows: > > Read for comprehension. Same back at you. I was _agreeing with you_. Here’s my post _"True, but the amount of 5th column and guerrilla activity would have been so intense that the Japanese would have been completely unable to secure their supply lines. "_ You may be continuing your argument with **Musicat** in your head, but you were replying to MY posts. My posts agreed with you that “Minutemen” wouldn’t last a day as front line troops. But yes, they would be valuable as 5th column and guerrilla forces. If you must argue with someone in your head, reply to them there, OK?😛 ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/146 "2013-08-30T03:41:45Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Nope, no rubber, no oil, nothing. Just the only method of winning the war. Based upon your experience playing wargames. The reality is that Japan had to secure sources of oil and rubber or its economy was going to collapse. Attacking Siberia would gain nothing for Japan. Before you say ‘but the Axis would have won the war’ your basic assumptions are based on fiction. That Milton Bradley, GDW, Avalon Hill, SPI or whatever game designer allows for an action to be possible within the confines of a game has nothing to do with what actually was possible. That a game allows for such actions reveals flaws in the game, not possibilities in reality. For example, take a look at your idea that Japan would be able to do among other things “push into India”. It may seem very plausible when pushing counters around on a map, but a look at what happened in reality when Japan tried doing this in [Operation U-Go](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_U-Go) is illustrative. They starved to death. > [@](#): > > Mutaguchi continued to order fresh attacks, but by late June it was clear that the starving and disease-ridden Japanese formations were in no state to obey. When he realised that none of his formations were obeying his orders for a renewed attack, Mutaguchi finally ordered the offensive to be broken off on 3 July. The Japanese, reduced in many cases to a rabble, fell back to the Chindwin river, abandoning their artillery, transport, and soldiers too sick to walk. > > … > > The Japanese suffered 60,643 casualties, including 13,376 dead.[2] Most of these losses were the result of starvation, disease and exhaustion. ---
**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:** [August 30, 2013, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/147 "2013-08-30T03:55:24Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Same back at you. I was _agreeing with you_. Here’s my post _"True, but the amount of 5th column and guerrilla activity would have been so intense that the Japanese would have been completely unable to secure their supply lines. "_ > > You may be continuing your argument with **Musicat** in your head, but you were replying to MY posts. My posts agreed with you that “Minutemen” wouldn’t last a day as front line troops. But yes, they would be valuable as 5th column and guerrilla forces. > > If you must argue with someone in your head, reply to them there, OK?😛 As **Sailboat** points out, unsupported, it would not work as you claim. If you are going to change the scenario to have the US army there, well, then they wouldn’t need the irregulars there, now would they? ---
**Author:** ![Melbourne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b5e925/32.png) [@Melbourne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Melbourne)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/148 "2013-08-30T03:59:29Z")
> [@Daylate](#): > > I was almost 12 years old on Dec. 7, 1941, and vividly remember that time. I don’t remember any sort of hint in the big newspapers that were available in the area (the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and the Globe-Democrat) and the local paper, the Alton Evening Telegraph, of the possibility of invasion of the mainland U.S. A lot of absolute hatred of the Japanese, and a really rabid thirst for revenge, but no invasion talk of any kind. My Dad was in university in Michigan at the time, and the guns from the ROTC Artillery unit were shipped out to the West Coast (entrained) on Dec. 7. That was a Sunday - so that seems to indicate a certain level of urgency. The breechblocks (which were stored securely) followed on the Monday, which Dad took to indicate an equivilant level of disorganisation. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 4:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/149 "2013-08-30T04:01:23Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > And, would we not expect them to be working closely with large-scale regular forces? Where the hell do you think the US Army would be? 😕 Defending Chicago? Uh. the claim was made that US force weren’t available. But more to the point, large scale US regular ground forces would render partisan activity trivial. In reality, the war was won overwhelmingly by regular forces. 1. no regular forces = irregular forces ineffective/defeated or 2. regular forces = irregular forces a minor factor Only under Hollywood circumstances would 5th column and guerrilla activity be a decisive factor. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 4:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/150 "2013-08-30T04:14:01Z")
> [@Dissonance](#): > > Based upon your experience playing wargames. The reality is that Japan had to secure sources of oil and rubber or its economy was going to collapse. Attacking Siberia would gain nothing for Japan. Before you say ‘but the Axis would have won the war’ your basic assumptions are based on fiction. T And, you note I said they had to take control of the DEI, etc, first for the oil, etc- and just put pressure on Siberia? Yeah, “just wargames”. :dubious:Sure A&A, but also College vs College played on a super computer. The US military, and in fact every military in the world since the late 1800’s has depended on wargames to show how things might go. Wargames show what could have been. Sure, the Japanese didn’t- which makes it fiction. So? :dubious:We’re discussing what _could have happened,_ Alt-hist. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 4:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/151 "2013-08-30T04:19:56Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Uh. the claim was made that US force weren’t available. But more to the point, large scale US regular ground forces would render partisan activity trivial. In reality, the war was won overwhelmingly by regular forces. > > 1. no regular forces = irregular forces ineffective/defeated > or > 2. regular forces = irregular forces a minor factor > > Only under Hollywood circumstances would 5th column and guerrilla activity be a decisive factor. Not by me. Are you arguing with \*\*Musicat \*\*in your head also? Just Hollywood, eh? "By the middle of 1943 partisan resistance to the Germans and their allies had grown from the dimensions of a mere nuisance to those of a major factor in the general situation. In many parts of occupied Europe the enemy was suffering losses at the hands of partisans that he could ill afford. Nowhere were these losses heavier than in Jugoslavia.” Basil Risbridger Davidson MC a lieutenant-colonel awarded the Military Cross and twice mentioned in dispatches. "\*From December 1939, he was a Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) / MI-6 D Section (sabotage) officer sent to Budapest to establish a news service as cover. In April 1941, with the Nazi invasion, he fled to Belgrade, Yugoslavia. In May, he was captured by Italian forces and was later released as part of a prisoner exchange.[1] From late 1942 to mid-1943, he was chief of the Special Operations Executive (SOE) Yugoslav Section in Cairo, Egypt, where he was James Klugmann’s supervisor. He parachuted into Bosnia on 16 August 1943, and spent the following months serving as a liaison with the Partisans, as he would describe in his 1946 book, Partisan Picture. Davidson moved east into Srem and the Fruška Gora. He was nearly captured or killed several times. SOE higher-ups sent him to Hungary to try to organize a rebel movement there, but Davidson found that the conditions weren’t ripe and crossed back over the Danube into the Fruska Gora. The Germans encircled the Fruška Gora in June 1944 in a last attempt to liquidate the Partisans there, but Davidson and the others made a narrow escape. After the Soviets moved into Yugoslavia, Davidson was airlifted out. Davidson had enormous appreciation for the Partisans and Tito. From January 1945 Davidson was liaison officer with partisans in Liguria and Genoa, Italy. - Yep, just Hollywood. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/152 "2013-08-30T04:24:33Z")
> [@TokyoBayer](#): > > As **Sailboat** points out, unsupported, it would not work as you claim. If you are going to change the scenario to have the US army there, well, then they wouldn’t need the irregulars there, now would they? As I claim? Still continuing your argument with \*\*Musicat \*\*? You do see I have a different username, right? It was Musicat that claimed no US regulars. Not me. _Read for comprehension_ yourself. I am not changing the scenario, who are you debating with? Again- My posts agreed with you that “Minutemen” wouldn’t last a day as front line troops. But yes, they would be valuable as 5th column and guerrilla forces. _Need_? No, but as was said, they’d be valuable. ---
**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:** [August 30, 2013, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/153 "2013-08-30T04:29:07Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > And, you note I said they had to take control of the DEI, etc, first for the oil, etc- and just put pressure on Siberia? > > Yeah, “just wargames”. :dubious:Sure A&A, but also College vs College played on a super computer. > > The US military, and in fact every military in the world since the late 1800’s has depended on wargames to show how things might go. Wargames show what could have been. > > Sure, the Japanese didn’t- which makes it fiction. So? :dubious:We’re discussing what _could have happened,_ Alt-hist. Not all of the necessarily artificial constraints and allowances in war games are created equal. Alt-history changes the scenario sufficiently enough to make it interesting, not to present a learning or fact finding mission as is done with the military. (Or, as is often the case, to confirm one’s bias.) The objection is not that you weren’t having fun, it was that you were attempting to drag the results into a thread about history. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 4:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/154 "2013-08-30T04:54:59Z")
> [@Dissonance](#): > > The reality is that Japan had to secure sources of oil and rubber or its economy was going to collapse. Attacking Siberia would gain nothing for Japan. Rubber would have been an issue, but Siberia has more than enough petroleum, iron, and other metals deposits to have supported their industry. And, with Siberia secured, it is possible that Japan could have negotiated with the Dutch, (either the government in exile or the Nazi dominated government), to purchase rubber. The Japanese defeat by the Soviets at Khalkhin Gol resulted in the Japanese leadership who favored a Siberian invasion losing face and having to let the advocates for a South facing war determine their intended conquests, but prior to Khalkhin Gol, the North facing party was in ascension. A Siberian conquest would not have been a wasted effort. ---
**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:** [August 30, 2013, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/155 "2013-08-30T15:04:56Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > As I claim? Still continuing your argument with \*\*Musicat \*\*? You do see I have a different username, right? It was Musicat that claimed no US regulars. Not me. _Read for comprehension_ yourself. I am not changing the scenario, who are you debating with? You are claiming that irregulars would be useful if the army were there. Right? That is you, correct? You are claiming this, are you not? However, if there are regulars around, the Japanese could not have landed, established a beachhold and gotten anywhere that would require logistics. > [@tomndebb](#): > > Rubber would have been an issue, but Siberia has more than enough petroleum, iron, and other metals deposits to have supported their industry. And, with Siberia secured, it is possible that Japan could have negotiated with the Dutch, (either the government in exile or the Nazi dominated government), to purchase rubber. > > The Japanese defeat by the Soviets at Khalkhin Gol resulted in the Japanese leadership who favored a Siberian invasion losing face and having to let the advocates for a South facing war determine their intended conquests, but prior to Khalkhin Gol, the North facing party was in ascension. A Siberian conquest would not have been a wasted effort. Nope. In 1941, Siberia only produced a fraction of the petroleum which Japan’s navy and industry required. They had to invade DEI, there was no other choice. Even had there been petroleum, the Soviet army would have decimated the IJA, which was based on light infantry and lightly armored small tanks. Stalin had kept The Soviet Far Eastern reserves – 15 infantry divisions, 3 cavalry divisions, 1,700 tanks, and 1,500 aircraft were kept there until it was clear that Japan was going south. As there was not enough petroleum, attacking Siberia would have been completely nuts. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/156 "2013-08-30T15:20:05Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Not by me. Are you arguing with \*\*Musicat \*\*in your head also? I don’t understand what you’re getting at. I don’t care who started the claim. I was responding to the claim, whoever made it, and refuting it. If I quoted you because the part I quoted was related to what I was refuting, just clarify your position. You seem to be impressed by the irregular forces. If your position is that they would be trivial in effectiveness, you are in agreement with me (and John Keegan); if you are arguing otherwise, my post is relevant to you, whether or not it is to **Musicat** ’s posting. > [@DrDeth](#): > > Just Hollywood, eh? > > "By the middle of 1943 partisan resistance to the Germans and their allies had grown from the dimensions of a mere nuisance to those of a major factor in the general situation. In many parts of occupied Europe the enemy was suffering losses at the hands of partisans that he could ill afford. Nowhere were these losses heavier than in Jugoslavia.” > Basil Risbridger Davidson MC a lieutenant-colonel awarded the Military Cross and twice mentioned in dispatches. > > "\*From December 1939, he was a Secret Intelligence Service (SIS) / MI-6 D Section (sabotage) officer sent to Budapest to establish a news service as cover. In April 1941, with the Nazi invasion, he fled to Belgrade, Yugoslavia. In May, he was captured by Italian forces and was later released as part of a prisoner exchange.[1] > From late 1942 to mid-1943, he was chief of the Special Operations Executive (SOE) Yugoslav Section in Cairo, Egypt, where he was James Klugmann’s supervisor. He parachuted into Bosnia on 16 August 1943, and spent the following months serving as a liaison with the Partisans, as he would describe in his 1946 book, Partisan Picture. Davidson moved east into Srem and the Fruška Gora. He was nearly captured or killed several times. SOE higher-ups sent him to Hungary to try to organize a rebel movement there, but Davidson found that the conditions weren’t ripe and crossed back over the Danube into the Fruska Gora. The Germans encircled the Fruška Gora in June 1944 in a last attempt to liquidate the Partisans there, but Davidson and the others made a narrow escape. After the Soviets moved into Yugoslavia, Davidson was airlifted out. Davidson had enormous appreciation for the Partisans and Tito. > From January 1945 Davidson was liaison officer with partisans in Liguria and Genoa, Italy. > > - > > Yep, just Hollywood. :rolleyes: Yeah, that sounds Hollywood to me. Daring escapes! Capture! Impressed by the partisans! None of that tell us the partisans were militarily effective. The statement “In many parts of occupied Europe the enemy was suffering losses at the hands of partisans that he could ill afford” is very vague and unquantified; the very sort of claim advanced by propaganda and by intelligence officers writing their memoirs. Truth is, the partisan movements did do measurable damage – but much of that was to _anti_-partisan units that would not have existed except to suppress partisans, and were not militarily useful for other duty. Hell, the Special Operations Executive mentioned in that quoted passage eventually tried to discourage the partisans because the damage to human life was out of proportion to the relatively modest military effect (on second- and third-string units in backwater areas). Partisans did not kill war-winning numbers of Germans. I’m guessing that since you did not answer me, you have NOT, in fact, read the books I mentioned? Resistance and partisan movements have been re-appraised in recent years and, underneath the veneer of inflated claims, romanticism, and braggadocio, we are seeing they were less effective – in many cases, a LOT less effective – than previously claimed. Don’t take my word for it, read the two books I mentioned upthread. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/157 "2013-08-30T19:14:41Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > Yeah, that sounds Hollywood to me. Daring escapes! Capture! Impressed by the partisans! > > None of that tell us the partisans were militarily effective. . OK, well you do have Keegan, altho you have no cite from him. On that hand Keegan was never in the actual military, and has been greatly criticized by other famous Military Historians who actually served in the Military such as Sir Michael Eliot Howard, OM, CH, CBE, MC, FBA, who founded the Department of War Studies for Kings College & Christopher Bassford . And I quoted a real life hero, the guy who spent WWII actually working with the partisans and being highly decorated and awarded for doing so. And Lt Col Basil Risbridger Davidson MC did tell us exactly that = “_the partisans were militarily effective”._ On the other hand, you can’t even give a cite from a armchair tacticians, one who spent not a day in the military. But somehow, wargames are fantasy, eh? ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/158 "2013-08-30T20:32:31Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Sure, the Japanese didn’t- which makes it fiction. So? :dubious:We’re discussing what _could have happened,_ Alt-hist. You’re talking about things that couldn’t have happened. There’s alt.hist that is based around the possible and the plausible, and alt.history that is based upon the fantastical. “Because I could do it in a wargame” doesn’t mean it could actually have happened. Sure, freed from the constraints of reality and logistics Japan could march right into India conquering it with ease. The reality is they stopped in Burma in 1942 because it wasn’t practical to march into India. When they tried in 1944, they ran into the same problem that had been projected in 1942: it was impossible to supply their forces. Half of their army starved to death or exhaustion. Just to note, this wasn’t the first time Japan put troops where they couldn’t even keep them fed, the abbreviation “ga-to” for Guadalcanal became a rather dark pun, as the ideographs can also be taken to mean ‘starvation island’. > [@DrDeth](#): > > And, you note I said they had to take control of the DEI, etc, first for the oil, etc- and just put pressure on Siberia? Again, the problem is your basing this on the fantastical. Japan could not attack north and south at the same time; they did not have the resources for it. The idea that Japan could take the DEI and British colonies without drawing war with the US - indeed you claim it would have _delayed_ US entry into the war for more than a year - is a very, very thin one. Japan didn’t think it was possible, or at a minimum exposed them to unacceptable risk of being cut off from access to them at a moments notice due to the location of the Philippine islands right astride from the sea lanes. They were right to think so, in one of the few things done right the [US Asiatic Fleet](http://pwencycl.kgbudge.com/U/s/US_Asiatic_Fleet.htm) had dispersed from Manila Bay in response to one of the war warnings sent out to US Pacific forces. Note where they dispersed to and were headed for: Tarakan and Balikpapan, Borneo, Dutch East Indies. One destroyer squadron was laying over in the DEI on its way to Singapore where it was to join up with British Force Z. Attacking the DEI and British colonies would have meant attacking the US Navy. Ironically, want to know how I’m so familiar with US deployments on the outbreak of war? Wargames, [War in the Pacific Admiral’s Edition](http://www.matrixgames.com/products/351/details/War.in.the.Pacific.-.Admiral's.Edition) and its earlier incarnations and Victory Game’s [Pacific War](http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/5622/pacific-war). > [@DrDeth](#): > > OK, well you do have Keegan, altho you have no cite from him. On that hand Keegan was never in the actual military, and has been greatly criticized by other famous Military Historians who actually served in the Military such as Sir Michael Eliot Howard, OM, CH, CBE, MC, FBA, who founded the Department of War Studies for Kings College & Christopher Bassford . And I quoted a real life hero, the guy who spent WWII actually working with the partisans and being highly decorated and awarded for doing so. Yeah, damn that Keegan for developing tuberculosis at the age of 13. Clearly that discredits him as a historian as much as it disqualified him from military service. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [August 30, 2013, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/159 "2013-08-30T20:54:15Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > Rubber would have been an issue, but Siberia has more than enough petroleum, iron, and other metals deposits to have supported their industry. As **TokyoBayer** said, not in 1941. It’s my understanding that the oil reserves in East Siberia and the Sakhalin Islands hadn’t been identified in 1941. Siberia is also a very large place; oil that was being produced in the Urals in 1941 wasn’t of any use to Japan. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2013, 3:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628/160 "2013-08-31T03:11:30Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > The Japanese defeat by the Soviets at Khalkhin Gol resulted in the Japanese leadership who favored a Siberian invasion losing face and having to let the advocates for a South facing war determine their intended conquests, but prior to Khalkhin Gol, the North facing party was in ascension. Probably Japan’s biggest problem was that it didn’t have a leadership. Japan sort of had a loose federation of three governments. The army would make one set of plans, the navy would make another, and the civilian government would make another. They were all theoretically subordinate to the absolute rule of the Emperor - but he wasn’t supposed to actually use his power. So the army, the navy, and the civilian government would get together and essentially negotiate over what Japan would do. Getting back to your post, the army had been the major force in China which was a land war. When that bogged down, the army pushed for a “northern” strategy that would keep the war under their control. The navy however wanted a “southern” strategy because that would be a naval war. So the issue wasn’t decided so much over the economic or strategic merits of the two possible target regions as it was by the political maneuvering of the two rival services. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/question-regarding-the-attack-on-pearl-harbor/666628.md?page=9)