Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

German-Japanese Barbarossa

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

  • German-Japanese Barbarossa

    I couldn't find this anywhere (may not have looked hard enough), but what if Hitler had convinced Japan to attack eastern Russian at the same time he attacked the west?
    I ask this because I'm reading a book and this was brought up. The author wrote that a quarter of a million fresh Russian troops from the east were moved west when Germany invaded.

  • #2
    dunno what the long term would be but I don't know if the Japanese had the troops and resources to combat both the Chinese and the Russians.
    The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed. -Carl Jung

    Hell is other people. -Jean-Paul Sarte

    Comment


    • #3
      Japanese got spanked in 39 by Russians. This is why it would be my guess they didn't pitch in on east end of Russia & be a part of Barbarossa.

      If they had taken Manchuria & Korea & been happy with it, perhaps this scenario is a tad more possible.

      Comment


      • #4
        this what ifg would be plausible, if indeed, the Japanese Army had had it's say prevailing over the navy.

        issues for Japan in this what if are:

        1. get the resources needs - mostly oil.
        2. beeking up the Army instead of the Navy in 1940-1941 - not easy to do.


        but the probable outcome would have been that the Soviet forces int he Far East would have give a severe beating to the Japanese but woudl indeed have been late to help Moscow. Moscow would still have hold, but germans would have found themselves in a better position in 1942 and with the US still neutral.

        Japan might have lost Manchuria though, unless the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1942 would have made up for that....
        "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


        • #5
          Or the Japanese wait for the transfer west of the Soviet divisions and then strike? Sort of a belated Barbarossa? I think Russia would have been hard pressed to counter such a move. Plus with the Japanese fleet at least blockading the Russian eastern ports(if not outright taking them), the Soviets would have an even harder time getting Lend-Lease supplies if that was still an option. This would have taken much more Japanese-German cooperation than was ever shown in the real timeline.
          Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.

          Comment


          • #6
            The russians might have retransferred troops after Moscow to liberate Vladivostok. They did need that port for lend-lease, etc.
            However, if Japan is not attacking the U.S. then no lend-lease, so Russia is in trouble.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by grognard View Post
              The russians might have retransferred troops after Moscow to liberate Vladivostok. They did need that port for lend-lease, etc.
              However, if Japan is not attacking the U.S. then no lend-lease, so Russia is in trouble.
              But if they retransfer, then they don't have the men around for the next German offensive. I agree with you that the Russians would have been in even more trouble than they were.
              Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy.

              Comment


              • #8
                The Soviets had plenty of men defending Moscow in 1942 that were not involved in Stalingrad. They could have cancelled Mars, kept Uranus and still hit Vladivostock.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by revans View Post
                  Or the Japanese wait for the transfer west of the Soviet divisions and then strike? Sort of a belated Barbarossa? I think Russia would have been hard pressed to counter such a move. Plus with the Japanese fleet at least blockading the Russian eastern ports(if not outright taking them), the Soviets would have an even harder time getting Lend-Lease supplies if that was still an option. This would have taken much more Japanese-German cooperation than was ever shown in the real timeline.
                  This would not have worked out the same as a simultaneous attack. Stalin would have gladly given up as much tundra as the Japanese wanted in order to put all forces beating on the Germans. However, a simultaneous offensive by the Japanese with a goal to cut the TransSiberian Railway and/or pin the Russian Army in Kamchatka where it could be completely pounded by Japanese air power would have an effect on Russian performance in the war. Really, had Japan just helped Hitler by operating a long range air campaign by its Bettys and Zekes against Russian transportation and logistics targets in Siberia, they would have accomplished roughly the same thing.

                  Really, the Japanese would have hurt terribly on the ground against the Russians because of the following:

                  1) Lack of AT weapons for ground troops.
                  2) Lack of a single quality tank (an oversight by the same bureaus that came up with the war's longest range fighter-bomber combination.)
                  3) Reliance on infantry and non-motorized transport


                  In short, the Japanese offensive would either have to win decisively or die, because they could never take the Russians toe to toe if the Bear ever recovered. Therefore, a decisive, months long, air campaign by the Japanese Air force, with targets being railroads, railyards, trains, vehicles, and troop concentrations would be more effective, as it could retrograde Soviet Army effectiveness and keep the Siberian troops from redeploying quickly enough, or at all.
                  Tacitos, Satrap of Kyrene

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Wouldn't it have just been good enough for the Japanese to attack the American shipping to the USSR? The Russians were really dependent on the US for a few essential goods (water-proof telegraph wires, trucks, radios, etc.) and some others (tanks, food, etc.), but the Japanese were afraid of targeting these convoys for fear of angering the Russians. If the Japanese had sent some of their subs north to interdict these shipments, that might have had an impact on the war, although by itself I doubt it would really change the outcome drastically (maybe the war lasts a few months longer as the Russians take longer to advance?)

                    This would help the Germans (depriving the Soviets of supplies) while simultaneously not endangering many Japanese soldiers. And if the Soviets attack, then the Japanese would be in their element (lack of mobile infantry not so much a loss on the defense, their airplanes could be fighting on friendly territory, etc.) and this would distract some of those reinforcements from going to the Eastern front.

                    So, is it a war winner? No, unless it's coupled with a different strategy on the part of the Germans.

                    As for a ground invasion of the USSR: I doubt that the Japanese would have accomplished much. I mean, the territory over there is like the steppes: vast, open, and generally useless. Now factor in the Japanese armies slow movement, and you have a recipe for disaster (to use a cliche) if the Russians send tanks thatway and they encircle the IJA.

                    Of course, those tanks would be used against the Germans then. . . hmmmm. . .


                    It could go either way.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by daemonofdecay View Post
                      Wouldn't it have just been good enough for the Japanese to attack the American shipping to the USSR? The Russians were really dependent on the US for a few essential goods (water-proof telegraph wires, trucks, radios, etc.) and some others (tanks, food, etc.), but the Japanese were afraid of targeting these convoys for fear of angering the Russians. If the Japanese had sent some of their subs north to interdict these shipments, that might have had an impact on the war, although by itself I doubt it would really change the outcome drastically (maybe the war lasts a few months longer as the Russians take longer to advance?)

                      This would help the Germans (depriving the Soviets of supplies) while simultaneously not endangering many Japanese soldiers. And if the Soviets attack, then the Japanese would be in their element (lack of mobile infantry not so much a loss on the defense, their airplanes could be fighting on friendly territory, etc.) and this would distract some of those reinforcements from going to the Eastern front.

                      So, is it a war winner? No, unless it's coupled with a different strategy on the part of the Germans.

                      As for a ground invasion of the USSR: I doubt that the Japanese would have accomplished much. I mean, the territory over there is like the steppes: vast, open, and generally useless. Now factor in the Japanese armies slow movement, and you have a recipe for disaster (to use a cliche) if the Russians send tanks thatway and they encircle the IJA.

                      Of course, those tanks would be used against the Germans then. . . hmmmm. . .


                      It could go either way.
                      Just asking ? What is the USN doing all this time? What would have been in it for the Japanese?

                      HP
                      "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                      Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                      you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by grognard View Post
                        The russians might have retransferred troops after Moscow to liberate Vladivostok. They did need that port for lend-lease, etc.
                        However, if Japan is not attacking the U.S. then no lend-lease, so Russia is in trouble.
                        Led-Lease was signed in March 41, first Protocol was signed in Oct 41 which basically states who is going to get how much of what, a shopping list. So then LL was not dependent on 7 Dec 41


                        Wouldn't it have just been good enough for the Japanese to attack the American shipping to the USSR
                        From what all I've read all the shipping was done in Russian ships. A couple of these ships were sunk by submarines. Ours

                        HP
                        Last edited by Half Pint John; 11 Apr 07, 12:47.
                        "Ask not what your country can do for you"

                        Left wing, Right Wing same bird that they are killing.

                        you’re entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          The Japanese military was not trained to attack supplies and supply lines, but rather to attack enemy forces. So a bombing campaign would have been unthought of and unproductive.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            A good observation. Although Japanese army & naval bombers did occasionally attack Chinese cities, railroads, bridges ect.. so as to disrupt the support of the Chinese field armys.

                            The fundamental problem for the Japanse in the autum of 1941 was the oil embargo the US Dutch & British organized. While the Siberian resources were a very attractive long range objective for Japan the Allied enonomic actions were an emergency that had to dealt with imeadiatlly. To get around that you have to assume both US & Britsh governments that are to incompetent to organize the embargo of exports to Japan.

                            Note that months before the oil embargo the US government had begain interfering with the sales of high grade scrap steel, alloys, and other items essential to japanese industry. (This led to some American businessmen to declare Roosevelt a incompetent meddling fool.)

                            If the British & US are too uninterested or inept to take economic action in 1941 then one might carry that forward into 1942. Thus Japan could remain unmolested in its Siberian war for the near term.

                            One point about the Soviet Far Eastern Army. There is a popular assumption that Siberia was stripped to save Moscow. This was not the case. As with the rest of the USSR the reservists in the far east were called up, and the next class of teenagers were drafted early as well. This pumped up the overall infantry/artillery strength of the far eastern forces. Into 1942 a considerable portion of the 'Siberian Army' remained there facing Japan.

                            Vladivostock was important for US aid, but so was the Persian route. The latter was a viable alternative for supplies to the USSR.

                            Comment

                            Latest Topics

                            Collapse

                            Working...
                            X