Japanese Invasion US mainland

[lwd]

But US production wasn't a single event it was a continuous process and there was the Atlantic fleet as well. They not only have to sink the existing fleet they have to stop or seriously slow down the production. With out any way to do this discussing something that requires it as a precondition seems problematic.

[RF]

Agreed. Interdicting production is unlikely, the ships would have to be sunk as soon as they came into service, so sinkings at least keep pace with production. This as I have said is very much in the realms of military fantasy and I take it that you don't disagree with that; the premise was the conditions for a successful Jap invasion of the American coast....

[lwd]

Then of course there are things like coastal batteries, aircraft devoted to continental defence (IJN CVs don't have much staying power as they are likely to suffer severe aircraft attrition), and army units. The Japanese would have particular problems with counter attacks from armored units. Then there's the question of where they would land. Most of the Oregon coast is right out as is a good portion of both the Washington and California coast. Those that aren't had a pretty decent road net beyond the range of Japanse naval guns that would allow the US defenders considerable strategic mobility.

However in order to get to this point the Japanse would need to have inflicted some considerable damage on the US. What is this damage and how does it affect the landing?

[RF]

These are all problems that would have to be overcome, and given that the IJN would only be able to sink the US Navy ships at sea, then as I have already said on this and other threads such an invasion cannot occur in isolation but in conjunction with the US suffering major military threats to its homeland from other directions and other enemies. In that context I have specified Britain being already defeated and Germany able to co-operate directly with the Japanese and Mexican participation in the Axis.

[lwd]

I still don't see how this could happen and you simply need more details for any reasonable discussion to take place. How for instance are the Germans going to coordinate with the Japanese? How are either of them going to be able to help the Mexicans? If the US fleet has been destroyed what sort of losses have the Japanese and Germans taken?

[RF]

This is a theoretical hypothesis and to outline it with brevity I have stuck to generalisations at the strategic level. It wasn't my intention to write a complete alternative version of WW2 at the tactical level, which would require a novel length narrative, but to illustrate in simple terms how an alternative outcome might have developed. The detail can be argued over great depth; my preamble for the scenario would be close collaboration between Germany and Japan and the availability of allies such as Mexico as this would be the means of Axis victory. The reality is there was no close collaboration between Hitler and Tojo, and Mexico declared war on Germany, Italy and Japan on 31st May 1942.

[lwd]

... It wasn't my intention to write a complete alternative version of WW2 at the tactical level, which would require a novel length narrative, but to illustrate in simple terms how an alternative outcome might have developed.

I simply don't see how it does that. This what if requires multiple PODs and pretty much everything breaking for the axis and does not allow for allied counter reactions. In the real world the axis powers reached their peak at about the time the war began and were no where near strong enough to seriously threaten the continental US. If the war is delayed they get relativly weaker the same pretty well holds if the war occurs earlier. Perhpas if WWI doesn't occur but now we are so far off the real time line that it becomes very problematic.

The detail can be argued over great depth; my preamble for the scenario would be close collaboration between Germany and Japan and the availability of allies such as Mexico as this would be the means of Axis victory. The reality is there was no close collaboration between Hitler and Tojo, and Mexico declared war on Germany, Italy and Japan on 31st May 1942.

Mexico isn't enough. Now if Britain and the Commonwealth allie with the Axis ...

[RF]

Mexico on its own won't be enough, the significance is the availability of its territory as a land base. Other allies - such as Britain changing sides, along with the French - yes that is possible as a result of the blitzkriegs of 1940. And yes you are right about the course of the war tilting the way of the Axis by their exploiting every chance and opportunity. But if both the USSR and China are out of the war and there were close collaboration between Germany and Japan from 1933 onwards it could have happened. The Roosevelt Administration was well aware of the possibility of the Axis seeking a foothold in Latin America as a stepping stone to the US from 1938 onwards, as evidenced in their policies towards those countries and their obtaining of bases in the British Empire under Lend Lease. To the US it was a serious threat. The fact it had no basis in reality doesn't alter the fact that the administration saw it as a threat that had to be reacted to. Even the limited Italian involvement (the supply of arms and aircraft) in the Chaco War between Paraguay and Bolivia wasn't unnoticed by the US State Department.

[lwd]

Mexico on its own won't be enough, the significance is the availability of its territory as a land base. Other allies - such as Britain changing sides, along with the French - yes that is possible as a result of the blitzkriegs of 1940.

Not reallly and it needs to be Cannada as well as Britain.

.... But if both the USSR and China are out of the war and there were close collaboration between Germany and Japan from 1933 onwards it could have happened.

Could it? Given close cooperation between Germany and Japan from 33 on several of the other players are going to react differently. Indeed the Japanese attack vs the Soviets might well be the strat of a full scale war as the Soviets try to take out one of their possible opponets before the other is in any shape for a war. Especially since China and possible the US and Britain would likely support if not join in.

The Roosevelt Administration was well aware of the possibility of the Axis seeking a foothold in Latin America as a stepping stone to the US from 1938 onwards, as evidenced in their policies towards those countries and their obtaining of bases in the British Empire under Lend Lease. To the US it was a serious threat.

Indeed it was percieved as such and the movement of any significant number of Axis troops to Mexico would have provoked a serious reaction from the US. If it's before the war starts Germany is short on troops for Poland and France. If it's afterwards they have to get them past the RN then the USN....

Even the limited Italian involvement (the supply of arms and aircraft) in the Chaco War between Paraguay and Bolivia wasn't unnoticed by the US State Department.

Exactly. And the US isn't going to sit idlely by while all this is happening. Britain isn't likely to either.

[RF]

lwd,

I see your line of reasoning and given the scenario you are assuming it is logical. But you are overlooking my pre-conditions, which include Britain being defeated or neutralised, the non-aggression pacts between Germany/Japan and the USSR being in place, no full scale war in China, and the Japanese concentrating on and dominating the Central Pacific. Central to my assumptions are the greater part of the US Fleet being sunk and German U boats, supported by surface ships and Vichy French warships plus the Italian Fleet being able to operate in the western North Atlantic. This factor prevents any effective US interdiction of Axis forces into Mexico.

With regards to German/Japanese collaboration from 1933, with no war in China and the USSR neutral there is actually less Axis aggression initially, until 1939/40, when Germany strikes in the West. No Panay incident or any other action to stir up US concern - until it is too late.

[lwd]

...gical. But you are overlooking my pre-conditions,

I'm not overlooking them I just don't see any way they could come to pass. Certainly not with any post WWI POD.

which include Britain being defeated or neutralised, the non-aggression pacts between Germany/Japan and the USSR being in place, no full scale war in China, and the Japanese concentrating on and dominating the Central Pacific.

With no full scale war in China would there even be significant anatagonism between the US and Japan? With Britain out of the war would the US even get involved in a war with Germany?

Central to my assumptions are the greater part of the US Fleet being sunk and German U boats, supported by surface ships and Vichy French warships plus the Italian Fleet being able to operate in the western North Atlantic. This factor prevents any effective US interdiction of Axis forces into Mexico.

The US has a two ocean navy. How do you sink it all especially once it's gone to wartime production. I'm not sure any of the Italian ships are capable of operating in the Western Pacific. In a thread on another forum it was pointed out that many of their smaller vessels didn't even have the range to sail from Italy to the French Atlantic ports. The US will almost assuredly put defence of the Atlantic coast as the highest priority in a case like this as well.

With regards to German/Japanese collaboration from 1933, with no war in China and the USSR neutral there is actually less Axis aggression initially, until 1939/40, when Germany strikes in the West. No Panay incident or any other action to stir up US concern - until it is too late.

But the US was gearing up for war with Germany as the primary target. I don't see the above having much impact on US naval developement. Indeed without tension with Japan the US Pacfic fleet may be still home ported in San Diego which is well beyond the reach of the Japanese.

[RF]

lwd, the comments you make suggest to me that you are not understanding my pre-conditions.

Firstly in 1940 if Britain were defeated, Japan would immediately move into Malaya and the Dutch East Indies, as well as French Indo-China. It is at that point that the US becomes antagonistic towards Japan, perceiving a threat to the Philippines. To meet such a threat and to emphasise to Japan that the US would fight to keep the Philipinnes I would expect the US Pacific Fleet to be moved to Pearl.

You then ask would the US get involved in a war with Germany without Britain? I'm sure that the US General Staff would be very concerned if Hitler got his hands on British and French warships and built up a substantial Atlantic presence, supported by the Italian Fleet. I never suggested the Italians operate in the Pacific; the availability of the ports of the French Empire, Spain, Portugal answers any supply and fuelling difficulties plus the facility to refuel at sea.A substantial surface threat can be built up in the western Atlantic, backed by U-boats and Luftwaffe bombers operating out of the Canaries, the Azores and then Bermuda and the various British and Dutch islands in the Caribbean. The question is at what point the US takes warlike action against Germany.

[Bgile]

I don't understand the point of all this. Can the USA defeat every other country in the world? Of course not. For one thing, resources would eventually be exhausted. If you postulate that the entire navy is sunk, you might as well postulate that everyone gives up fighting and surrenders. Or the Klingons attack and drop neutron bombs on all US cities. Again, what's the point? Obviously if you concentrate enough overwhelming force and stipulate conditions like the navy is wiped out, the war is over, and we are now living under the thousand year reich.

[RF]

The point is that I am offering a scenario in which the original postulate of this thread could happen. And no I don't think the US would give up and meekly surrender, neither is the US fighting the rest of the whole world, but principally Germany and Japan. The US could still defeat such an invasion scenario.

As I have already have said I don't think it is any more fantastic than the Heer defeating the French Army and forcing France to surrender in 1940 in a six week period, when the Germans were outumbered in tanks and heavy artillery by the French alone, let alone what the British had. Or Operation Barbarossa inflicting the losses that it did on the Russians up to the time of the December 1941 Soviet counter offensive.

[Bgile]

As I have already have said I don't think it is any more fantastic than the Heer defeating the French Army and forcing France to surrender in 1940 in a six week period, when the Germans were outumbered in tanks and heavy artillery by the French alone, let alone what the British had. Or Operation Barbarossa inflicting the losses that it did on the Russians up to the time of the December 1941 Soviet counter offensive.

Those two examples are completely predictable knowing what we know now about the relative capabilities of the forces involved. They weren't fantastic at all.