Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Japan invades DEI 1940

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Japan invades DEI 1940

    Hi

    After the Fall of France and the defeat of the Netherlands, FDR had a meeting in late June'40 about the DEI and other European Far East Colonial possessions.
    Though he and his military advisers agreed that the invasion of the DEI by Japan at that time would be troublesome, it wouldn't be a 'Casus Belli' for the US.

    So accepting that the US wouldn't have gone to war in 1940, with Japan over their invasion and occupation of the DEI. What would have been the possible ramifications of a Japanese occupied DEI both prior to PH and shortly thereafter?

    Regards
    "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

    "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

  • #2
    Got a cite for the meeting? I'd like to read what they said.
    Hyperwar: World War II on the World Wide Web
    Hyperwar, Whats New
    World War II Resources
    The best place in the world to "work".

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi

      Nothing direct or giving a verbatim recording. Given FDR's MO, the lack of notes or minutes is hardly surprising but always infuriating

      Information and inference comes via several sources such as Leutze, Watson, Conn & Fairchild etc.

      Regards
      "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

      "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Andy H View Post
        Hi

        Nothing direct or giving a verbatim recording. Given FDR's MO, the lack of notes or minutes is hardly surprising but always infuriating

        Information and inference comes via several sources such as Leutze, Watson, Conn & Fairchild etc.

        Regards
        I was going to try and find a reference to that in the Hearings.
        Hyperwar: World War II on the World Wide Web
        Hyperwar, Whats New
        World War II Resources
        The best place in the world to "work".

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by OpanaPointer View Post
          I was going to try and find a reference to that in the Hearings.
          Hi

          Lord Lothian had approached FDR in late May'40 about whether he would approve discussions about a joint action should the Japanese occupy the DEI. Lord Lothian reported back that FDR was not enthusiastic and that FDR was thinking more about the abortive economic blockade/embargo from January'39, than any proactive intentions etc

          Regards
          "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

          "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

          Comment


          • #6
            So accepting that the US wouldn't have gone to war in 1940, with Japan over their invasion and occupation of the DEI. What would have been the possible ramifications of a Japanese occupied DEI both prior to PH and shortly thereafter?
            Not sure we can accept that the U.S. wouldn't have gone to war. Considering that the Sec of State in January 1950 omitted Korea from America's Defense Perimeter, and yet we went to war over Korea in June of that year, it is always possible that we would have gone to war over the DEI in 1940. First, American reluctance in 1940 was centered on reasons for not going to war in Europe. But did that mean we would not do so in the Pacific? We'd already had the USS Panay incident, which inflamed some public opinion, and the Marines and Navy had been busy in the Banana Wars in Latin America, so the only real question is: What would have been the American interests in Southeast Asia that justified risking war with Japan? Off the top of my head: The Philippines and French Indochina (rail link to Nationalist China). The Navy certainly knew that war with Japan was coming, and Roosevelt had been Sec. of the Navy. I don't think that the Japanese-American community had the same political clout as the German-American community in 1940.

            Pity we have no one on the forum to weigh in on how the Japanese viewed it.
            dit: Lirelou

            Phong trần mài một lưỡi gươm, Những loài giá áo túi cơm sá ǵ!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Andy H View Post
              Hi

              Lord Lothian had approached FDR in late May'40 about whether he would approve discussions about a joint action should the Japanese occupy the DEI. Lord Lothian reported back that FDR was not enthusiastic and that FDR was thinking more about the abortive economic blockade/embargo from January'39, than any proactive intentions etc

              Regards
              Ah, thanks.
              Hyperwar: World War II on the World Wide Web
              Hyperwar, Whats New
              World War II Resources
              The best place in the world to "work".

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by lirelou View Post
                Not sure we can accept that the U.S. wouldn't have gone to war. Considering that the Sec of State in January 1950 omitted Korea from America's Defense Perimeter, and yet we went to war over Korea in June of that year, it is always possible that we would have gone to war over the DEI in 1940. First, American reluctance in 1940 was centered on reasons for not going to war in Europe. But did that mean we would not do so in the Pacific? We'd already had the USS Panay incident, which inflamed some public opinion, and the Marines and Navy had been busy in the Banana Wars in Latin America, so the only real question is: What would have been the American interests in Southeast Asia that justified risking war with Japan? Off the top of my head: The Philippines and French Indochina (rail link to Nationalist China). The Navy certainly knew that war with Japan was coming, and Roosevelt had been Sec. of the Navy. I don't think that the Japanese-American community had the same political clout as the German-American community in 1940.

                Pity we have no one on the forum to weigh in on how the Japanese viewed it.
                We have their own words...

                http://www.ibiblio.org/pha/monos/
                Hyperwar: World War II on the World Wide Web
                Hyperwar, Whats New
                World War II Resources
                The best place in the world to "work".

                Comment


                • #9
                  Such a move by Japan might just be counter productive in the long run. COnsider the resources Japan would need to commit and the deploy to maintain and expand their base.

                  In my opinion I think the US would have hastened the reinforcement of the Philippines with the intent of striking the Japanese shipping routes should war come. Wake my also have been beefed up enough to be used a transfer base for long range aircraft (PBY, B-17, B-24) although I am not sure stripped down B-17s could make the hop without Guam.

                  If the American focus in the Pacific becomes a stronger Philippines it may just manage to hold out and upset the entire Japanese assault plan for Dec 1941. Or, it may require more assets being assigned to taking the US base and thus leave other bases outside the scope of the initial waves of attack Dec-Mar making an allied recovery that much quicker.

                  The British would likewise have diverted additional strength or similar strength sooner. More aircraft may have been sent and more equipment form the home divisions, perhaps a larger submarine contigent to attack the shipping should war come. Like the Philippines, SIngapore and Malaya may prove a tougher obstacle effecting operations elsewhere and exposing the shipping lanes to attack.

                  All of this reinforceong by the allies might just make Japna's position in the Pacific and east Asia weaker rather than stronger.
                  The Purist

                  Words ought to be a little wild, for they are the assault of thoughts on the unthinking - John Maynard Keynes.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The US Neutrality Laws would have kicked in as well, stopping war material sales to Japan a year earlier. If China avoided being included in that activation they'd have an advantage.
                    Hyperwar: World War II on the World Wide Web
                    Hyperwar, Whats New
                    World War II Resources
                    The best place in the world to "work".

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by lirelou View Post
                      Not sure we can accept that the U.S. wouldn't have gone to war.
                      Hi Shaun

                      Obviously we can't be a 100% but given FDR's & the military's conversations in June, it seems highly unlikely.

                      In fact you could use the lack of action by the US to the occupation of French Indochina (On September 23 Secretary of State Hull, referring to these events in Indochina, declared that it seemed obvious that the status quo there was being upset "under duress"; he repeated that the United States disapproved and deprecated such procedures) as a template for DEI. Strong words but no action!

                      Regards
                      "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

                      "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Hi Gerry

                        Thanks for your input.

                        Originally posted by The Purist View Post
                        Such a move by Japan might just be counter productive in the long run. COnsider the resources Japan would need to commit and the deploy to maintain and expand their base.
                        Agreed, though I think that it wouldn't unduly upset the Japanese High command to the point where they wouldn't contemplate it.

                        In my opinion I think the US would have hastened the reinforcement of the Philippines with the intent of striking the Japanese shipping routes should war come. Wake my also have been beefed up enough to be used a transfer base for long range aircraft (PBY, B-17, B-24) although I am not sure stripped down B-17s could make the hop without Guam.
                        A distinct possibility, but I wonder if it would have been enough and within time to be effective!

                        If the American focus in the Pacific becomes a stronger Philippines it may just manage to hold out and upset the entire Japanese assault plan for Dec 1941. Or, it may require more assets being assigned to taking the US base and thus leave other bases outside the scope of the initial waves of attack Dec-Mar making an allied recovery that much quicker.
                        Mmm US strategy over defending the Philippines was pretty much set, set in the sense that the Philippines was likely to fall and the reinforcements needed to effectively hold it were not readily available, without stripping other commands. Even then it was coin toss, with the US services following their own interests/plans, and without some grown up inter-service co-ord, the chances were very small.

                        The British would likewise have diverted additional strength or similar strength sooner. More aircraft may have been sent and more equipment form the home divisions, perhaps a larger submarine contigent to attack the shipping should war come. Like the Philippines, SIngapore and Malaya may prove a tougher obstacle effecting operations elsewhere and exposing the shipping lanes to attack.
                        In principle yes, but given that the UK was fighting for its life and likely facing an invasion, the ability to send an effective force would be limited. The UK Government had been lobbying for the USN to base some Fleet assets at Singapore, but the US had resisted for various reasons.

                        All of this reinforceong by the allies might just make Japna's position in the Pacific and east Asia weaker rather than stronger.
                        Possible but doubtful. I think the Japanese like Germany and to a lesser extent Italy were already on the path to war. It was just a matter of when where and with what!
                        Regards
                        "You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life." Churchill

                        "I'm no reactionary.Christ on the Mountain! I'm as idealistic as Hell" Eisenhower

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I'm with the Purist. While speeding up PI isn't likely, much of the issues regarding the National Guard and other war preparations that FDR struggled with I '40 and earlier '41 would have been made much easier by the Japanese invading the DEI.

                          ObamaPointer is right that embargos were the logical response, which would force the Japanese on their course a year earlier.
                          Any man can hold his place when the bands play and women throw flowers; it is when the enemy presses close and metal shears through the ranks that one can acertain which are soldiers, and which are not.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Gallup Polls for 1940 (just those related to the war.)
                            Hyperwar: World War II on the World Wide Web
                            Hyperwar, Whats New
                            World War II Resources
                            The best place in the world to "work".

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              The US was mobilizing for war at the time but not really prepared for it. I would say that if the Japanese did that the US would have greatly upped aid to China and then massively reinforced the Philippines far more than they did historically.
                              As the IJN lacks the A6M and has other issues with their fleet it is going to hurt Japan more than it helps them. They get the resources out of the DEI but the US and Britain reinforce their holdings (Malaysia and the Philippines, maybe even other spots like Guam) and make it impossible for Japan to pull off the offensive they historically did.

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X