Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Japan wins at Guadalcanal, then what?

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

  • Japan wins at Guadalcanal, then what?

    Read a book about Guadalcanal, the Japanese made some bad mistakes. For one they used an overclever attack plan, 3 pronged with all 3 arriving at different times. This allowed the Americans to blunt each one independently. The leader of prong # 3 allowed his men to cook rice over an open fire. The Americans saw the smoke & this gave away the Japanese position. Kinda dumb the American in charge thought.

    Now say none of these errors happenned, & Japanese dislodged the Americans, how does this change the complexion of the pacific campaign? Does japan continue to move forward to Australia? or stuffed in that attempt & Americans regroup & attack another island & war takes say 6 months longer?

    Or something else.

  • #2
    The significant event would be that the Japanese Army and Naval air probably does not suffer the irreplaceable losses that they did during the campaign. The Allies then will have to mount another campaign to take the solomons that now will have better, if not full coverage from Japanese land based air. With interdiction capability on US Aussie LOC/LOS this makes the solomons a primary target for an allied campaign to retake the islands--this might not be possible to 1944 considering the losses the allies would probably have taken in losing Guadalcanal in the first place.

    Comment


    • #3
      Shouldn't this be in Alternative Timeline?
      "Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen." - Albert Einstein

      Comment


      • #4
        Yep!

        &

        Done!

        On the Plains of Hesitation lie the blackened bones of countless millions who, at the dawn of victory, sat down to rest-and resting... died. Adlai E. Stevenson

        ACG History Today

        BoRG

        Comment


        • #5
          so.. what does "winning" guadalcanal means?

          I'd venture to say that the US would suffer too many casualties - i.e. the landing of the MArine Division gets severely disrupted by Japanese submarine, aircraft or surface action and subsequant supplies are prevented to reach the island in such a way that the US marines are forced to evacuate and regroup in New Caledonia.

          so what? wait 6 months and you have 10 times more US forces available to smash whatever Japanese forces are available.

          the war in the pacific was doomed to fail for Japan for they misunderstood the US will to fight and their industrial capacity that would dwarf anything Japan could muster. it was only a question of attrition and time before Japan would collapse militarily.
          "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

          Comment


          • #6
            If Japan succeeds at Guadalcanal, then they push on to further outlying islands. This changes whole complexion.

            Comment


            • #7
              I think that the japanese would cut off the supplies that Australia is receiving from the U.S. Without the supplies, in my opinion the Australians would be out of the war except for some resistance.
              "You can tell a lot about a fella's character by whether he picks out all of one color or just grabs a handful." -explaining why Reagan liked to have a jar of jelly beans on hand for important meetings

              CO for 1st S.INC Shock Security Troop

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by No_Nickname View Post
                I think that the japanese would cut off the supplies that Australia is receiving from the U.S. Without the supplies, in my opinion the Australians would be out of the war except for some resistance.

                My thoughts as well.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Maybe Not

                  I think Australia may be out of the war for a while, but with America's might moving on, the war was going America's way. Now, if there were a couple more setbacks, Australia would be out for the entire time.
                  For despite the silly sayings about violence never settling anything, history IS changed on the battlefield: ask the National Socialist German Workers' Party.
                  -Jerry Pournelle-
                  Introduction to 'Hammer's Slammers'

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by No_Nickname View Post
                    I think that the japanese would cut off the supplies that Australia is receiving from the U.S. Without the supplies, in my opinion the Australians would be out of the war except for some resistance.
                    Why would you think that? If the Japanese took Guadalcanal the USA - Australia supply rout just gets longer. The convoys can be routed further south in the pacific or they can come from the US East coast via South Africa and the Indian ocean.

                    The Japanese gave very little importance to inderdicting the allied supply routes so there is likely to be minimal disruption.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Japan still has to take New Caledonia, The New Hebrides, Fiji and Tonga to inderdict supplies to Australia. Oh yes, and American Samoa. IMHO Japan cannot take all of those islands. And they still haven't taken Port Moresby because of supply problems.

                      Australia will be OK, Japan will be even more overstretched than they were at the Canal, and the Americans can just hit the central instead of the southern Pacific because the Japanese are spread too thin, and let the Jap garrisons in all those new conquests wither on the vine, or get the supplies they need while the places getting attacked don't get the supplies they need. Either way, Japan still loses. Think Rabaul and Truk, exactly how many Allied casulaties were taken in conquering either, let alone both?

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        No effect except to delay the timeline. The US needs a proving ground to get 'into' the war and the line bewteen LA and Sydney is a good place to start. The US could lose at Coral Sea and the Solomons and would have to fight on some other south Pacific island or perform a last line of defense 'stand and die' at Port M to keep the line 'as is'.

                        It would be beyond the means of the IJN to cut off Australia. They could make it more difficult and make the convoys move further south, but they couldn't cut it off. The next 'stand or die' location would be somewhere grognard listed... New Cal, New Heb, maybe Fiji, but nothing after that... and then the tide begins to go out on the Japanese.
                        If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          No change in my opinion. The loss of Guadalcanal is costly in terms of loss of life, materially it means nothing. US industry is more than capable of making up any losses. At this stage the war in the Pacific is a second thought for the allies. The proof of the pudding is in how long Japan held out after the US turned its complete attention to her defeat.

                          Japan does not have the necessary amphibious capability to invade Australia. Remember Australia is of similar land mass size to China, 7.68 million square kms compared to 9.5 million square kms, and we all know the difficulty the Japanese had in conquering China. Bear in mind that the japanese would have to advance almost half the distance across Australia before hitting anything worth defending, with no possibility of living off the land. One would suggest supplies to an invading force would be rather difficult. Especially considering the swath the USN submarine fleet was cutting through the Japanese merchant fleet. The US however has 8 major Australian ports available even if the Japanese somehow conquer 1/2 the country. Fremantle, Perth, Adelaide, Melbourne, Geelong, Sydney and Newcastle. Post war wargames show that there is only one nation on earth capable of successfully invading Australia; the USA.

                          That being said Australia is nothing but a staging point for the US in the grand scheme its loss is of almost no consequence to the US war effort.
                          War. Young men killing each other for the benefit of old men!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Suppose Japanese land at Perth?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Purple fang View Post
                              Suppose Japanese land at Perth?
                              he he more japanese eventually starving into a banzai charge.
                              "Freedom cannot exist without discipline, self-discipline, and rights cannot exist without duties. Those who do not observe their duties do not deserve their rights."--Oriana Fallaci

                              Comment

                              Latest Topics

                              Collapse

                              Working...
                              X