Discuss @The Red 's latest Alternate Barbarossas article here.
-
Hi Guest!
The costs of running this forum are covered by Sea Lion Press. If you'd like to help support the company and the forum, visit patreon.com/sealionpress
When the World Held its Breath: Japan Strikes North
- Thread starter AndyC
- Start date
Honestly I'm kinda disappointed in the article for not noting the amount of motorization both armies employed. The Japanese might have enjoyed numerical superiority on the theatre of engagement, but practically somewhere around a half of their formations were not properly supplied nor were they in the position to get supplies for them. Trucks were incredibly vital for keeping far flung units supplied with vital munitions and rations, and if we counted a truck as worth it's crew of three over again that numerical imbalance would be far smaller- or even reversed.
- Location
- NYC (né Falkirk)
- Pronouns
- he/him
Great article, Paul. Especially liked the stinger at the end and the comparison that the same minds that thought it prudent to punch the US in the balls while they slept considered it insane to try and kick the Soviet Union in the arse while their back was turned.
- Location
- Balham
- Pronouns
- he/him
Really good read, both in content and execution. Didn't realise the sheer numbers involved on either hypothetical side. It's of interest as the Far East Front can become a factor in For King & Country.
Agree, this is a better article about a Japan goes North then some i have read so far.
That's very true. The Kwantung Army had about 29,000 trucks compared to the Far Eastern Front's 60,000 trucks but you need to be far flung to be, well, "far flung". Given the Japanese advance would likely have ground to a halt almost immediately, Soviet resistance would be a far more detrimental factor than logistics. I did consider doing a section on the Japanese problems with logistics and how the "live off the land, you're on your own" approach to sourcing food and other supplies for troops wouldn't work in a land of desert and tundra but it's doubtful they would be successful enough initially for those issues to apply in the first place.
I think it does actually highlight a problem in AH that maybe isn't as mentioned as frequently as it should be; ignoring or handwaving cause merely to examine the effect. Japan going north in 1941 is perhaps one of the most glaring examples but I'm sure there are a few others as well.
That's great, thanks!
The comparison wasn't actually meant to be in the article but it occurred to me when I was writing and I had to mention it. I like to imagine a scene of Japanese officers rolling their eyes at the idiot extolling the virtues of invading the Soviet Union before moving on to the sensible discussion of attacking the United States instead.
It's especially daunting when you consider that this is still a little babby invasion compared to the size of Barbarossa. The Japanese did actually have an even larger scale plan for invading the USSR in the thirties which would have resembled something a bit more...Red Alert 3 but the trucks just weren't there. Half of the trucks needed weren't there. And then they got their bloody nose at Khalkhin Gol and the whole thing suddenly began to seem a bit too optimistic.
- Location
- NYC (né Falkirk)
- Pronouns
- he/him
It's like the eyerolls that occur when Bigfoot is brought up in relation to UFOs, or vice versa.
The pot is calling the ideas of the kettle ludicrous.
Britain and the Netherlands declaring war on Japan soon after an invasion of the USSR makes sense, but why would the US join?
I mean that the war would be constrained to the Chinese coast and South China Sea, and the US interests at risk would be the Philippines and America’s (quite valuable) trade routes. It’s a decent casus belli, but it would be difficult to sell to the public. Perhaps the popularity of Isolationism has been overstated, but it is undoubtedly still potent. It’s entirely plausible that the US could remain neutral in such a conflict.
I mean that the war would be constrained to the Chinese coast and South China Sea, and the US interests at risk would be the Philippines and America’s (quite valuable) trade routes. It’s a decent casus belli, but it would be difficult to sell to the public. Perhaps the popularity of Isolationism has been overstated, but it is undoubtedly still potent. It’s entirely plausible that the US could remain neutral in such a conflict.
Why would Britain and the Netherlands declare war on Japan, they would know that will invite the Japanese to descend into their Asian colonies.
But a Soviet Union attack by Japan will mostly be a army affair, the Imperial Japanese Navy is still a threat and as long as it is a thread i doubt Britain and the Netherlands will declare war on Japan, but that is just me thinking.
I think it’s likely that the British and the Dutch would have declared war on Japan shortly after a theoretical Japanese invasion of the USSR, not inevitable but the British had pledged all available help to the Soviets and here was an arena where they and the Dutch (who were in lockstep with British foreign policy at this point) could have made a real difference.
The chances of the US declaring war at this juncture are far more debatable. I’d wager it’s above 50% with any potential incident making that higher. The Philippines would be in the middle of a crossfire and it’s likely such an incident would occur.
Could the have hold against the Japanese in combat, they still have to deal with the Imperial Japanese Navy.
The IJN could hold the RN, RLN, and RBPF, but I’m uncertain if they could fight the “Decisive Battle” against their combined strength. Even if they do attain naval supremacy, as @David Flin notes, the IJA troops just aren’t there in sufficient numbers to pull off an invasion of South East Asia any longer.
And neither are the British and Dutch able to invade ore threaten the Japanese i presume.
Also which nation use the RBPF if i can ask.
Not necessarily, the Japanese troops in French Indochina aren’t particularly secure any longer and certain Japanese held islands will be the same.
RBPF stands for Red Banner Pacific Fleet, admittedly it’s not a common abbreviation but I got a bit carried away with the alliteration. For the sake of consistency I’ve included the Australian, Canadian, and Kiwi fleets as “RN”.
I do not think the Red Banner Pacific Fleet has a change against the Japanese, especially if the Japanese do a Pearl Harbor attack against Vladivostok in the begin phase of the war.
On their own they’d be helpless but I was talking in terms of the Commonwealth and Dutch navies fighting alongside them.
Interesting article, and the point that a Japanese strike North helps the Germans far more than it does the Japanese exposes something about most of the discussion on the topic. It's not an attempt to explore what might happen, or how it might fall out. It's an exercise in stacking the deck in favour of the Third Reich. You've rightly pointed out that the effects on the success or otherwise (definitely otherwise) of Barbarossa have been oft-overstated, but the fact remains that most proponents of Special Manoeuvres in discussion or TL are in favour simply to see how it affects the battles at the Gates of Moscow.