It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

If Japan had never attacked Pearl Harbour

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 05:03 PM
link   
OK, not really a conspiracy per se but nonetheless a part of history which set America's course for the coming century in world affairs.

Along the chaos theory " A butterfly flaps its wings... a hurricane strikes miles away." but more close to facts...

Let's suppose Japan never bombed Pearl Harbour - the catalyst for the USA's intervention in WWII

Take into account the USA's traditional isolationism and reluctance to involve itself in world affairs further afield than the surrounding oceans:

What would the world be like now?

Factors to think about:

The bombing of Pearl Harbour was perhaps the first step out of isolationism for the US. Would it have interfered in other world affairs (esp the middle east) if that isolationism had not been traditionally broken?

How would Japanese society be different? Would they have had the post-war effect on manufacturing (esp electronics) if the war had not played a part in shaping Japan

Would anybody have yet set off the H-Bomb, precursor of modern nuclear weaponry?

Could Hîtler's Germany have conquered Europe? If so, what would European society be like today? If so, would the National Socialists have been overthrown later in a different way? Perhaps overthrown by a communist or anarchist revolution?

There are so many possibilities, it just struck me as interesting...and possibly a MAJOR defining moment in modern history




posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
Great question.

I think Hitler would have got the A Bomb first, and perhaps even taken over the world.

If Japan did not bomb PH, than America would have hesitated far longer to intervene in the war.

Japan would have had to skip the Philippines and Guam though as well.

With this strategy, Japan would have almost certainly defeated China, Australia, and the British, possibly even invading the Indian heartland.

Thus the Japanese Co Prosperity Sphere would have been complete, and over in Europe, Hitler would have almost certainly defeated the Russians without having to deal with American bombardments or supplies.

So, I suppose the Axis powers would have won the world war in this case.
Great thread, excellent food for thought.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 06:29 PM
link   
reply to post by 04326
 



Could Hîtler's Germany have conquered Europe? If so, what would European society be like today? If so, would the National Socialists have been overthrown later in a different way? Perhaps overthrown by a communist or anarchist revolution?


Yes, I believe that Hitler very well could have conquered Europe [assuming that he hadn't of gone into Russia in the winter]. Essentially, the only thing preventing him from doing so were those resilient British people not giving up their island. But, eventually, since Germany was attacking with air raids, Britian would've eventually fallen.

Had that happened, one major difference would be that everyone would speak German. Outside of that, I would think that Hitler would've banned all different cultural activities other than those of Germany/Austria. This is because he seemingly wanted a homogenious society.

There probably would've been attempts to overthrow the Nazi regime. I doubt that it would've been by anarchists or communists. It probably would have come about by freedom loving people that survived the War.

reply to post by muzzleflash
 



perhaps even taken over the world


I saw once on a documentary about World War II and in it, it was stated that Hitler envisioned the world containing three countries. Essentially, Germany controlling most, Japan in the Orient, and the US in the West. They went on to say that Hitler actually had plans to overthrow the emperor of Japan and grab that as his own! But he had no such plan for the United States. He, as well as the Japanese emperor, wanted to leave the US alone. It seems that they understood that there was, and even still is, something special, something different, about the United States compared to the rest of the world. They each seemed to know that if the US joined the effort in a more meaningful way, as we were giving supplies and such, it was done for. History shows to that that is essentially true as a well.

I said all that to just say, that I don't think Hitler could've conquered the whole world.
 


Something that I never understood is why Japan and Germany allied. I must've missed that in history class. Perhaps someone could shed some light on this?



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 06:36 PM
link   
Japan would probably be a very large country, today. Or so I tell my Japanese wife from time to time.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   
Just assuming that the Japanese don't bomb Pearl Harbor isn't really enough to postulate an alternate history from. You have to decide what they do instead of the historical attack. If they divert the Navy into supporting the already-existing attacks into the Chinese mainland, it's not hard to see Japan's military strength vanishing into a quagmire of epic proportions, leaving the U.S. to expand influence in the Pacific. If they use the Navy to attack into Indochina and the Indian Ocean, they can secure badly needed resources, but still run the risk of war with the United States, and face the certainty of a war with Great Britain. In my opinion, geopolitics will force some form of conflict between Japan and the U.S., and the longer the Japanese postpone it, the more one-sided it gets.

As for impact on the European theater, Germany can't do much more than take Continental Europe. England isn't in danger of a military defeat (note that a morale defeat is an entirely different story. The Luftwaffe doesn't have the throw weight or the range to even conduct heavy bombing raids over more than half of England, so the odds of forcing a settlement by air power alone are fairly long. The Royal Navy owns the English Channel, and will for the foreseeable future, so Operation Sealion isn't even a remote possibility (not that it ever was, due to a lack of sealift capability). The European theater will (most likely) turn into an unholy mess, with Germany bogged down in Russia (and haunted by the laughter of Napolean's ghost) on the east, blocked by the English Channel in the west, and wondering what in the name of Thor, Wotan, and Hel to do with all of that sand in the south.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   
Stormhammer hit it pretty well, IMO. The USN was heavily into expansion at the time of Pearl. The Essex carriers were on the ways. The Iowas were on the ways. The aircraft that won the war were coming into service.


Further, the IJN was still a gun club through most of the war. The IJN's early carrier losses drove more conversions than were initially planned. A delay of a year or more would have left the IJN with more gun platforms, and fewer decks.

The question would be how long before Plan Orange would go into effect.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:04 PM
link   
If Japan hadn't bombed Pearl then they would have had a much larger seventh fleet to contend with.

A better question might be, "what if Japan had finished their attack and launched the second wave?" Then Pearl would have been lost and the USN set back a few years, fleet strength wise.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Blackmarketeer
If Japan hadn't bombed Pearl then they would have had a much larger seventh fleet to contend with.

A better question might be, "what if Japan had finished their attack and launched the second wave?" Then Pearl would have been lost and the USN set back a few years, fleet strength wise.


But for Pearl, what became Kinkaid's Bombardment Force would not have been upgraded to the level it was. Granted, Arizona and Oklahoma would have been there, but the increase in AAA power more than made up for that in survivability.

Had a second wave taken place, Pearl would not have been lost, as the attack was a raid. Occupation of HI was never practical, due to the lines of communications. However, had the Tank Farm been destroyed, as well as the drydocks, Pearl would have lost its value as a forward base for the Pacific Fleet. Without those facilities, Yorktown's fast turnaround after Coral Sea would have been impossible. Further, without those docks, the repair of the battleline itself would have been nearly impossible.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 10:45 PM
link   
Made a mistake, I meant to say "third wave", as the Japanese did launch 2 waves.

If the third wave (never executed) had launched, the bulk of the fleet would have been destroyed, but more importantly the seventh fleet would almost certainly have been returned stateside, delaying the war by as much as a year. As you pointed out, with the loss of the shipyards the fleet would have been seriously lacking in a forward repair facility. Since those were spared, the fleet was able to restore operations fairly quickly at Pearl.

en.wikipedia.org...

Now, let's say the Japanese did not attack, how long could they have postponed the onset of war - months? A year? My guess is not much more than a few months.

Their best option would have been to utterly destroy Pearl (launching all waves) instead of "conserving forces".

But what affect on the country did Pearl Harbor have? I'm sure it was every bit as energizing as 9/11 was to the modern generation. It removed any doubt as to the country's commitment to the war, in the Pacific or the European theater.

[edit on 16-6-2009 by Blackmarketeer]



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:05 PM
link   
If Japan didn't bomb PH,

-We'd be in a vastly more technologically advanced state at present.
-We'll be driving in ultra-efficient non-polluting vehicles
-Our teens would be behaved, disciplined, and not breaking things
-Mindless conversations will be a thing of the past
-Our roads will be like formula 1 racing circuits
-Porsches will be quite common and cheap but won't be burning fossil fuel.

Maybe not! But I'm pretty sure we'll never know! It could be better, it could be worse, considering the mess we are also in, despite Allied victory!!!



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:20 PM
link   
Japan was devastated by the war, let's say they didn't attack and sat out the war or limited it to only the neighboring islands (staying well clear of the US).

They would have remained a highly militant, isolationist society. The zeal and effort they put into industry following the destruction of the war would have been funneled into other efforts (likely military), so we would never have had the Japanese invasion of cheap electronics in the 1960's in the US (indeed, the world over). Nor would we have had the Japanese auto industry displace the US auto industry in output.

If war with Japan had never fully materialized, the tension between the two nations may have still been there at the conclusion of WW2. The US would have treated Japan like Russia, a hostile eastern nation with little economic ties.

Instead they were utterly destroyed as a nation and with the implementation of the Marshal plan and the rebuilding of Japans industry, our countries became close trading partners.



posted on Jun, 16 2009 @ 11:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by octotom
reply to post by 04326
 

Something that I never understood is why Japan and Germany allied. I must've missed that in history class. Perhaps someone could shed some light on this?


Probably mostly to do with Strategic placement and politics. In otherwords by helping to empower the Japanese the European axis members drew attention and enemy resources away from themselves. Having the Japanese join up would mean that the Russians would send some of their stuff to guard the east so there would be less in the west for the Germans to deal with, it would also make it less likely that the Koreans or the Chinese would help out in the west.

It also meant that the British Empire couldn't rely on as many Australian or New Zealanders to help in Europe as most would have to stay in the Pacific to help fight the Japanese. It also meant that some of the US's resources and focus was else where.

Or in short, The enemy of my enemies is my decoy. It would also mean that their ally would be loosing soldiers who could fight back when and if the European axis got to a point where they then began fighting between themselves (hey it happened with the "allies/axis's enemies" sure bet it would happen within the axis if things had gone their way).







 
1

log in

join