Thread 17917601

>Japan could've won if- ACK!
They made helmets from bamboo lol

>>17917601 (OP)
>Japan could've won if
You're just imagining people to argue with. Even the biggest weeaboos know their industrial capability is insanely outmatched.

Why didn't Japan just look at the US and go like
>Oh their population and economy is 3x ours, we would lose
Literally everyone who plays map painter games knows this.

>>17917632
Because the Yamato race had never lost a war in their 2600 year history, and had the divine wind at their side

>>17917632
They thought the Pearl Harbor attack would significantly damage the US naval capability for a time, and they would go for a temporary appeasement deal. If they had access to US oil again and 2-3 years to really dig into Asia and the Pacific, they'd have a chance of conducting prolonged guerrilla warfare and making the US think it's not worth fighting to the bitter end over it.

>>17917646
They make major mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbmDpafbVn0

So? Russia defeated NAFO with donkeys and shovels.

>>17917690
The point is, they never thought Grorious Nippon stood a chance of straight up defeating the US on the battlefield, just that they could expand their empire a bit and maybe keep some territory in a bizarre gambit.

>>17917703
Lol zigger

these were civil defense helmets

>>17917769
They must have really defended them from Curtis LeMay's special Tokyo BBQ

>>17917601 (OP)
Still looks more aesthetic than m1 helms

>>17917632
Japan did that, it's just inter-branch rivalry and victory disease so they began to believe their own myths of invincibility.

>>17917768
t.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wC0zrqTZeLg

>>17917632
Have you met map painting gamers? They always play some shitty one province nation and try to do a world conquest.

>>17917856
because use naval doctrine after Port Arthur victory

>>17917632
It was harder for them to gauge American sea superiority I think, and the war in the Pacific was primarily a Naval War, so they were probably hoping for an attrition warfare scenario where the US backs off to focus on Europe. That's probably also what Hitler was hoping for when he declared war on the US after Pearl Harbor, forcing America into fighting two fronts in hoping they'll abandon one of them.

It was actually a pretty dumb move on Japans part. They should have diverted their forces invading the colonies into destroying America's Pacific naval capabilities. Then they could have invaded the colonies and I don't envision there being much resistance.


Honestly, it wasn't uncommon that two carriers were stationed at pearl harbor. It was bad luck that their pearl harbor attack didn't cripple America's navy.

>>17917632
>trying to analyze imperial japan's strategy like it was a unified, rational actor
Japan was a military junta with two opposing factions, the army and the navy. The navy was more powerful so they did what the navy wanted, which was to take the entire south pacific. That area was and is filled with American assets and America stopped selling them oil and would eventually intervene and attack them so they attempted a preemptive strike because the circlejerk of fat 60 year old admirals had convinced themselves that the cowardly, dishonorabu gaijin would fold after one setback and just let them have the pacific.

If they had just consolidated their newly taken lands in mainland asia and taken up a defensive position against the USSR which also wanted them, they would probably be a superpower today, but sucks to suck I guess.

>>17917969
IJA = West Japan
IJN = East Japan

>>17917969
>That area was and is filled with American assets and America stopped selling them oil and would eventually intervene and attack them so they attempted a preemptive strike because the circlejerk of fat 60 year old admirals had convinced themselves
Maybe shouldn’t invade French Indochina

>>17917601 (OP)
Just looking at coal production numbers should have let them know. But pre war peace process was sabotogeted by soviets and allies.
>>17917646
They missunderstood american pacifism.

>>17917632
Because the militarists were more interested in short term promotions and funding. They succeeded before in China, intervening in the Chinese civil war, staging the Mukden incident in 1931 as an excuse to invade Manchuria and another at Marco Polo bridge in 1937 to invade the rest of China. Careers were made of it, and fortunes, Tojo himself rose in the ranks of the semi-autonomous Kwantung army of Manchuria.

In his view all their work in China, all his buddies rising in the ranks who had supported him and achieved lifelong ambitions, it would all be for nought if the war ended. It was unacceptable. Further, entry into world war would boost their careers even further, and those of the Navy. There was also uncertainty about the outcome of the war without hindsight bias, whether it was really that hopeless. They could not have predicted how new technology would change the battlefield, perhaps Germany had some decisive edge and could take Moscow in 1942 and then continental asia, linking up with Japan in India, they just had to hold off the US long enough.

>>17917785
Nothing is cooler than the M1. German helmets look like dickheads and OP looks like a bell or some kind of toy.

>>17918234
>whether it was really that hopeless.
They absolutely knew it was hopeless to try and actually defeat the united states. Their hope was just to cripple the pacific fleet badly enough that the united states would just let them keep the south pacific islands and turn their attention to the war in europe.

>>17917632
True. But we'll never talk about what happened in Korea in the 1590-s, bros..

>>17917632
>>Oh their population and economy is 3x ours, we would lose
There will always be people who will fight regardless of the odds. Sometimes they win (vietnamese vs Americans, Greeks vs Persians) sometimes they lose (this war, Zulu vs Anglos).

>>17917911
yeah but you do it by a mix of insane strats the AI can't use or diplomacy (making bigger nations fight your wars for you)

>>17918267
German helmets more kino than Frenchie one

>>17917632
they thought they could cripple America's ability to fight in the Pacific long enough to sue for a peace that would guarantee trade rights in goods American cut off from the Japanese, but they both overestimated the damage a surprise first strike could do and underestimated America's resolve

>>17918267
I’ve take Johnson M1941 or Pedersen rifle over overrated ping

>>17919206
>post-1590s
>still mindbroke by Manchu bvll and Nippon steel
Irreverent topic

>>17917632
What Japan did makes sense in the context of the whole of modern Japanese military history. Against China, Russia, despite having less manpower, they won. And every time they won by winning one big impressive battle (Kantai Kessen) and forcing the other side to come to the negotiating table.

I find there's a lot missing in their final analysis. Like they didn't take into the Home Front situation. For example, the China they fought was more like a Feudal Kingdom literally divided into feuding armies and local powerbrokers rather than a united modern nation.

So they thought they could do it again.

The problem this time, no-one came to the table.

In China, Chiang did not throw in the towel and they were stuck. And everything that came after that was them trying to make a win out of it, the only way they knew how. To compound their problems, I am pretty sure they lost almost every single one of these "decisive battles"