Strange Creature wrote:
> Basically the strategy of Japan seems to be to destroy the
> U.S. fleet in the Pacific so that they can drive them out of the
> Phillipines and then destroy the U.S. bases in the Hawaiian islands
> and perhaps establish a few there themselves so that the U.S. would
> require a long journey without resupply to reach Japan and east Asia.
>
> One question about execution might have been whether to attack both
> Midway and Pearl Harbor simultaneously. If the question, however, is
> one of exerting maximum damage on resources in a first strike, how
> feasible would it have been to sail a few carrier groups entirely
> across the Pacific and attack the West Coast and Panama without being
> detected before attacking?
>
> If the purpose of the two missions were to 1. Destroy the Panama
> Canal, and 2., to destroy as many naval construction ****pyards and as
> many ****ps and aircraft as possible before sailing away, could the
> Japanese navy have been more successful at the goal of destroying the
> U.S. navy in the Pacific and getting a more complete retreat from the
> Phillipines with a more long distance assault than that on Hawaii?
If this could be done then the focus of the war would be across the
Aleutians
leading to a conventional land war. Japan would have to move into Siberia.
We
would see what Stalin's abilities against Japan and keeping those tanks in
the
Far East instead of going to its western front.
OR Stalin gets a lot more in exchange for US safe passage through Siberia
and
staging is Siberia north of Manchuria but still requires keeping the tanks
in
the east.
OR Stalin says no. The US says to no to helping Stalin.
All around it appears to favor Germany against Russia.
--
Charon won't take counterfeit coins.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 4037
http://www.giwersworld.org/environment/aehb.phtml
a2
|
