@SuperbattleshipYamato hard to argue against any of this really. The IJN was so far gone by this point in the war that there’s not really much they could have done to salvage their situation one way or another. The bit about the allies not having many LSTs in general is something I never knew before though.
What if japan invaded the Soviet Union (alternative history scenario)?
-
In 1940, in preparation for Operation Barbarossa, along with Romania, Italy, and others, Japan is among those who were contacted to invade the Soviet Union from the East shortly after the German invasion of the Soviet Union. Japan agrees, rapidly building up the Kwangtung and Korea Armies to get revenge for the defeat at Khalkin Gol.
What happens next? I look forward to everyone’s responses!
Thank you!
-
@superbattleshipyamato123 It would’ve definitely stressed the Soviets but Japan probably gets it’s ass kicked again. They didn’t know how to use tanks.
Zuhkov schooling em earlier is why the Army wanted to go after easier prey in China. That didn’t work either, unless slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Chinese in Nanking was their goal.
-
I could try and say something intelligent about this myself, but there’s a vast array of well-documented posts on Quora about this: https://www.quora.com/If-Japan-had-attacked-the-USSR-in-1941-instead-of-the-United-States-at-Pearl-Harbor-would-the-USSR-have-been-defeated
Once the Soviets knew that Japan wasn’t going to attack (from the famous journalist/spy Richard Sorge), they felt safe to move troops from the East towards Moscow. Whether they would have done that anyway if Japan would have fought, is a matter of speculation. Maybe they would just have given up on that theatre in order to save Moscow - after all, the only real damage that Japan could have done, would have been the loss of a vast but sparsely populated and extremely remote part of Siberia that would have been a logistical nightmare to occupy.
-
Don’t count them out-the IJA was no Romania or Italy-their troops were very fanatical, and in an all out war, Japan would have thrown everything they had against the Soviets, rather than just those comparatively small border clashes. The Japanese would be semi supported by the navy, and Japan’s large air force outclassed anything the Soviets had in the Far East (which tended to be lower quality than the ones in Europe). This advantage nulified the Soviet advantage in tanks, which wasn’t actually that much (few T-34s or KV-1s were in the Far East, there were already so little in Europe). Those T-26s were more or less equal to those Japanese tanks. One more thing that has to be noted is that this hypothetical invasion would take place in July, soon after the
German invasion, which could mean more cooperation (not much though), unlike the independent Japanese plan to invade the Soviet Union, well into Operation Barbarossa (in this case, Japan would have invaded a weeks or so after the German invasion, much like Romania). Here’s a link to that:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kantokuen
I did see that Quora link before, but I consider Quora unreliable.
-
I seriously doubt that the Red Army would have trouble trouncing the IJA in a second round. The major issues would 1) whether the Red Army could spare the manpower and supplies to carry out a proper fight against the IJA and 2) the possibility that the Red Air Force would lose access to their aircraft pipeline from the US: the ALSIB.
But I am sure that if the IJA made actual progress into the Soviet Union, it would be because the Red Army let them, so they could deal with more pressing issues.
-Midnight_Reaper
-
Interesting point-I don’t think Japan would have went as far as Krasonyarsk, but maybe Japan could have taken Vladivostok (like the ports in southern China). I’m not sure how much help American aid would have come without a war with the US, so it certainly wouldn’t have been as helpful as it historically was. I wonder how Stalin would have reacted to this-he seemed to already be in a mental crisis after Operation Barbarossa. How would he have handled an attack in the east just days after? He would have recovered for sure, but maybe a few more days of shock during Operation Barbarossa were decisive-who knows?
Perhaps the main change in the war is actually the US not entering the war, which would have made lend-lease far lower than historically was, the Second Battle Of El Alamein could not have been won by the British without the Sherman and Grant tanks not coming from the US, the Battle Of The Atlantic would have been harder for the Allies, and no Operation Torch would have enabled Rommel to stay in Egypt for several weeks or months longer. The strategic bombing campaign against Germany would have been less damaging too. The loss of lend-lease for the Soviet Union would have been especially damaging, as much as Russia downplays it. Huge amounts of high quality air fuel that the Soviets could not make were given by the US, as were a lot of food and and supply trucks. Whilst lend-lease aircraft and tanks were not a important, every piece of equipment helps. Most likely the war against the Soviet Union would have stopped at a stalemate until either the Soviets make a peace treaty or the US enters the war-either way, the war would have been much longer with Germany and Japan able to more successfully consolidate their conquests over a longer period of time. It would have especially been hard to convince the US public to declare war on Japan, which would have made for a reduction in the massive increase of industry historically made after Pearl Harbour.
-
@superbattleshipyamato Yes, the IJA would have been under-confident if they had attacked the Soviet Union. But logic isn’t a factor in war, and the Soviet Union wasn’t a perfect military force. Most of their equipment wasn’t the best, but they made it work. They were well-trained and dedicated to victory. Their infantry were great at breaking through enemy lines. Their tanks were deadly, but they were vulnerable. The Red Army was known for using its armor to spearhead attacks, but it had a major weak point: it wasn’t trained to be a tank army. The Soviets didn’t use tanks as a dedicated force, but as a supporting one. They mainly used infantry to take over territory. The tanks would support the infantry to break through the enemy line and to neutralize the enemy’s tanks and artillery. But this wasn’t a hard and fast rule. The Red Army was capable of doing both. If the IJA had invaded the Soviets, the Soviets could have taken advantage of their massive tank armies and used tanks as a spearhead regardless. The tanks could have been used as a decoy to lure the Japanese tanks away from the infantry, and the infantry would have used the tanks as cover. The IJA’s tanks would have been decimated. The Soviets would have then used their other advantages: their planes and their tank troops. The Japanese tanks and troops would have been left defenseless and the Japanese troops would have been crushed. The Japanese troops would have been doomed regardless.
-
@barnee With the terrain being remote I see a Far East War between USSR and Japan turning very stationary, after the first few months. Much like the frontlines north of Leningrad and South of Murmansk.
The Russians focusing on the advancements of the Germans and Japan having a war in China to conduct, would have put an strain on both countries.
I could see strong Chinese counterattacks against depleted Japanese positions.
I could also see a Russia Expeditionary Force entering China.
-
@superbattleshipyamato We see during the Siege of Odessa in 1941 that the Romanians suffer heavily attacking head on Russia earthwork defenses.
The Japanese were very charismatic in charges that either resulted victories or mass casualties. The Russian infantry strength in 1941 was his ability to hold a fixed position. This he did well, as German infantry casualties tell.
The Japanese didn’t have the German’s artistic ability of infantry, armor and air working together. This force crumbled the Red Army in the summer of 41. Japan would be fighting into the Red Army’s strength.
-
@abworsham4 it also would leave the USA Pacific Fleet intact as well as the British in Singapore. The Philippines woulda been a potential nightmare for them.
While I think the japanese navy would have handled itself fine in a defensive roll, especially early in the war, leaving those strong forces intact for the Allies would still be problematic for them.
I would think FDR would manufacture some reason to enter the war at that point regardless of public opinion.
Hard to say. Does Hitler then not DOW on USA ? Makes for an even harder sale for FDR then.
Either way, after adolf attacked Russia, it was game over. Just a matter of time was all. Imo anyway
How you been AB ?
-
Thank you for respnding!
I personally think Germany could have won the war with the Soviet Union in and the US out-Germany’s not declaring war on the US.
-
Thank you for responding!
I don’ think the Japanese would have done Banzai charges-they were only as a final resort. The Japanese were definitely inferior to the German army in doctrine, but I think Japanese were better than the Romanians and thus would have performed better. I doubt the Soviets would have helped the Chinese-they went to fought each other before the war:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Soviet_conflict_(1929)
Support would most likely have been to the communists, in whatever way they were supported through before the war.
The frontline probably would have had the same situation as the Finnish front as you mentioned, but the Japanese would hopefully be able to capture Vladivostok via amphibious assault, like they did against China, cutting lend lease supplies.
-
Thank you for responding!
The Japanese would have had air superiority. The Japanese could deploy their best against the Soviet’s worst, as the best of the Soviets are fighting the Germans. And no tank armies would be fighting the Japanese. All the best Soviet tanks, and most tanks overall, were fighting the Germans. Whilst the Soviet tanks (most of which weren’t T-34s or KV-1s or 2s, as there were even very few in the west) were slightly better than the best Japanese ones, the Japanese tanks could have done something and air superiority would have nullified the advantage, as the Germans found out to their horror in 1943-1945.
-
I’ve been good, Barnee.
@barnee said in What if japan invaded the Soviet Union (alternative history scenario)?:
@abworsham4 it also would leave the USA Pacific Fleet intact as well as the British in Singapore. The Philippines woulda been a potential nightmare for them.
While I think the japanese navy would have handled itself fine in a defensive roll, especially early in the war, leaving those strong forces intact for the Allies would still be problematic for them.
I would think FDR would manufacture some reason to enter the war at that point regardless of public opinion.
Hard to say. Does Hitler then not DOW on USA ? Makes for an even harder sale for FDR then.
Either way, after adolf attacked Russia, it was game over. Just a matter of time was all. Imo anyway
How you been AB ?
-
I recently read a book on the Battles of Khalkhin Gol. This fact left me in deep thought about this question: before the battle of Khalkhin Gol, the IJA brought as much artillery rounds they could find in China and Korea, the IJA had 100,000 rounds for the operation. Meanwhile the Soviet Army had 100,000 rounds each day of the fight.
-
A ratio which the Soviets wouldn’t be able to keep up in a full scale invasion and fighting the Germans.
-
Found this article interesting.
-
I read that, and is one of my sources. Funny enough, KaLeu put a link to Quora asking the same question, and one of the answers just copied and pasted the article you sent me.
Suggested Topics
