NationStates Jolt Archive

Its something I've always wondered about, during the timespan of world war two, If Germany and Japan were to face off, who do you think would be the victor? Lets say the two forces beat the allies and collied in the middle east/afgahn region fo the world, or possibly in the united states?

Germany, they were months from completing an atomic bomb, IIRC, so they'd have the extra fire power.

Its something I've always wondered about, during the timespan of world war two, If Germany and Japan were to face off, who do you think would be the victor? Lets say the two forces beat the allies and collied in the middle east/afgahn region fo the world, or possibly in the united states?

Nazi Germany would win hands down.
BUT inner turmoil MIGHT have caused Japan to make gains early on.

Due to Hitlers death however, a half-way competant leader may have arisen.

The Germans would probably win, given that they usually had more advanced technology, and had a stronger industrial base.

Germany would walk all over Japan.

Yeah, to me, it is easier to see German troops marching down the streets of Tokyo than to see Japanese troops marching on Berlin, I could see a stalemate, if no atomic weapons were used.

Agreed. Japan would get steamrolled.

Nazi steamrolled.

Didn't germany also have better weapons in general?

Japan had a more impressive navy though. Germany was rather weak in this area overall. Control of the seas is very important when it comes to world domination. I would say Germany would come out the victor in the end, due to the potential for atomic weapons and their industrial and technological power, but it would have been a very long war.

Germany's heavy tanks along with years of constant warfare would've lead to their victory. Japan would be to stretched to supply oil to tanks considering it would have to import oil from the pacific. Along with the fact of chinese partisans being a huge thorn in Japan's side. Germany would win hands down.

Japan had a more impressive navy though. Germany was rather weak in this area overall. Control of the seas is very important when it comes to world domination. I would say Germany would come out the victor in the end, due to the potential for atomic weapons and their industrial and technological power, but it would have been a very long war.


Well it depends on how much of their navy would have been left after a war with the united states.

Navy wouldn't have had such a large impact if we are considering the germany owns russian land, so a campaign into machuria and korea would starve japan of its needed resoursces

I could see the Japanese Navy laying out some hurt on Germany, perhaps Germany wouldn't have been able to get top Japan either anyway due to this, kind of a battle of Britain scenerio in the sea of Japan.....

If germany is in control of USA and Russia then its simply U-boat warfare and starving of Japans economy. The biggest german problem is a lack of a large bomber with which to attack japan's cities

If germany is in control of USA and Russia then its simply U-boat warfare and starving of Japans economy. The biggest german problem is a lack of a large bomber with which to attack japan's cities


But if it came in contact with American technology then it would be able to use the large bombers.

actually i think Japan was also only a few months away from an atom bomb, even though they were vastly under-funded and only had 5 scientists working on it. An American bomb fell on the lab where they worked and destroyed everything they had.
Also, remember that Hitler was insane. Had he not died, and gone straight for Moscow instead of stopping during 1942, and taken it...and not done the whole Stalingrad thing, he could have crushed the russians. Of course he could have also just not invaded Russia until he had taken Brittain. Then he could have forced America into a peace agreement, and focused on the East.

And Japan could have not invaded China until they had the resources and technology needed...not to mention the troops. But if the two armies were to face off, the Japs would have won IMO. They had crude tactics many times, but their technology was much better. The Zero was better than anything anyone else had for a long time. Had they been able to really go after some solid jet planes and test them properly, they would have taken air superiority, and then they would have sent in their bombers to eliminate the German Panzers, and then wiped up the rest with infantry.
Remember now, before you flame me for this post, that hitler was INSANE. He had parkinson's, and he would have deteriorated to a point of total unstability by the end of 1946. But as long as he lived, he would have been in charge...so the Japs would have had that advantage as well.

...let the flaming commence...

Japan had a more impressive navy though. Germany was rather weak in this area overall. Control of the seas is very important when it comes to world domination. I would say Germany would come out the victor in the end, due to the potential for atomic weapons and their industrial and technological power, but it would have been a very long war.

Assuming the Luftwaffe was still intact, Germany could bomb the living shit out of Japan. Japan's airforce was less impressive than Germany's, and the Japanese Zero was not as good a plane as Britan's Spitfire. The U-Boats would certianly harrass the superiour Japanese navy as well. As soon as the Germans could make a landing, Japan wouldn't stand a chance.

I aslo forgot to mention the fact that german use of rocket/jet technology would've garunteed
1. Air Superiority
2. Jet Bombers
3. Some form of ICBM's

Neither.

After a supposed Axis victory in WW2, both sides would be so starved of manpower that even occupying their wins effectively (the USSR for Germany, and China for the Japanese) would be near impossible - not even considering the USA and other large areas like India, Australia, etc.

They'd be too busy imploding upon themselves - we saw how much trouble the USSR had in Eastern Europe alone.

Remember now, before you flame me for this post, that hitler was INSANE. He had parkinson's, and he would have deteriorated to a point of total unstability by the end of 1946. But as long as he lived, he would have been in charge...so the Japs would have had that advantage as well..

I usually think of Hitler as stupid and incompetant, but never insane. He was a masterful public speaker, but a poor general. Not nessisarily insane, though.

Neither.

After a supposed Axis victory in WW2, both sides would be so starved of manpower that even occupying their wins effectively (the USSR for Germany, and China for the Japanese) would be near impossible - not even considering the USA and other large areas like India, Australia, etc.

They'd be too busy imploding upon themselves - we saw how much trouble the USSR had in Eastern Europe alone.


Oooh.. a very good point.

Neither.

After a supposed Axis victory in WW2, both sides would be so starved of manpower that even occupying their wins effectively (the USSR for Germany, and China for the Japanese) would be near impossible - not even considering the USA and other large areas like India, Australia, etc.

They'd be too busy imploding upon themselves - we saw how much trouble the USSR had in Eastern Europe alone.

Well, if the german's at this point would have had to occupy, but einzatzgruppen would've largely elimated this problem, and it only takes 2-4 years for the next generation of soldiers to be at the right age. With large industrial bases in russia, if kept under guard, would have let the german's produce 500 and upwards of their Panthers/ King Tigers a month. Surley naval ships would have followed quickly considering germany would strip russia of all its factories. Manpower would have been a problem but it is historically noted that 2 or 3 divisions of Anti-communists Cossacks were raised, clearly mroe could be a raised.

Assuming that both sides were in full control of their own respect situations, I'd say Japan. Germany was just no good in general.

I usually think of Hitler as stupid and incompetant, but never insane. He was a masterful public speaker, but a poor general. Not nessisarily insane, though.
perhaps insane is a bad word, but he had very serious Parkinson's before he killed himself (let's not get into conspiracies about how he died or even if he died or whatever...ok?) and it would have only gotten worse over time. He would not have been able to make big decisions the way he would have needed to if he wanted to win the war.

Assuming the Luftwaffe was still intact, Germany could bomb the living shit out of Japan. Japan's airforce was less impressive than Germany's, and the Japanese Zero was not as good a plane as Britan's Spitfire. The U-Boats would certianly harrass the superiour Japanese navy as well. As soon as the Germans could make a landing, Japan wouldn't stand a chance.


I dunno, the entire Japanese people were willing to hurl themselves at the enemy using whatever they had... sure it makes for a nice body count for Germany but could germany really hold on to an effective foothold on Japanese soil?

But germany's tactics sheer supplies in raw materials and technology along with 6 years of experience would have lead them to victory, japan's weapons, tactics, and dying for the emperor were huge problems. Germans weer not allowed to retreat but the army was seperate from hitler not part of the government and people like guderian and rommel (assuming d-day was reversed) would have taking their own judgements in the field.

Maybe the better exterminators would be the victors? On one hand the Germans had the whole death/labour/concentration camp thing, but the Japanese did have the Bataan Death march...

It would certainly be an interesting clash to watch, however....

Germany did plunder a lot of gold from conquered countries, so maybe it could pay for more weapons. Again this is assuming that Germany and Japan weren't bomb craters

Germany. The Japanese didn't have a chance against any of the countries in WWII.

As soon as the Germans could make a landing, Japan wouldn't stand a chance.

Thats the thing though. They werent good at landings. The last major combat landing was in Norway I believe, Not far off the northern coast. And that operation was done with scant amount of troops. They couldnt even keep North Africa supplied with the shit navy they had.

Lots of variables in a topic like this, but control of the seas is crucial to winning a global war. Germany lost the second WW because Hitler never gave the navy what they needed. Donitz wanted at least 500 U-boats, he was given less than half of that. The job couldnt get done. I couldnt see Hitler chaning his mind much. A major land army is junk if they dont have a navy to back it up, and Hitler never really gave a damn about it.

Germany. The Japanese didn't have a chance against any of the countries in WWII.

What about Italy?

What about Italy?


yeah, the weaklings of the Axis.

I think there could be a "Japanese Army Resurgent" kind of thing possibly, I mean if you look at the comparison of the Russians to the Germans at the outset of Operation Barbarossa, Germany had a way better army, And it wasnt just the Russian winter that defeated Germany, The Red Army rose from the ashes of defeat to crush the Germans in one of the biggest turn arounds in history.

Im basing this on the consideration that the Russians, and Japanese had a more Eastern style of warefare....

The majority of Japan's crucial factories/ food were on the mainland (manchuria and korea) an effective invansion into those from russia would have crippled japan. Germany winning those campaigns like russia did in their offfensives would have amounted to japan having to supply all its food, oil, and raw materials from the dutch east indies, some where around 2000 miles away. Eventually german naval power would have built up and blockaded japan effectively. Most likely germany would ahve employed greater numbers of carrier/u-boats relizing japan errors in battles with the U.S. leading to possible carrier-borne jet fighters. Clearly japan's only choices would be to fight on every island/keep a stronger navy against the economic warfare.

I think there could be a "Japanese Army Resurgent" kind of thing possibly, I mean if you look at the comparison of the Russians to the Germans at the outset of Operation Barbarossa, Germany had a way better army, And it wasnt just the Russian winter that defeated Germany, The Red Army rose from the ashes of defeat to crush the Germans in one of the biggest turn arounds in history.

Im basing this on the consideration that the Russians, and Japanese had a more Eastern style of warefare....

The Russian comeback wasn't anything special. It was human wave tactics. I can do that too, you know, if I had a country which breeds like rabbits.

Thats the thing though. They werent good at landings. The last major combat landing was in Norway I believe, Not far off the northern coast. And that operation was done with scant amount of troops. They couldnt even keep North Africa supplied with the shit navy they had.
And the Japanese had experience fighting amphibious attacks
A landing on their homeland would've been crazy, as the entire country was on large armed camp



Lots of variables in a topic like this, but control of the seas is crucial to winning a global war. Germany lost the second WW because Hitler never gave the navy what they needed. Donitz wanted at least 500 U-boats, he was given less than half of that. The job couldnt get done. I couldnt see Hitler chaning his mind much. A major land army is junk if they dont have a navy to back it up, and Hitler never really gave a damn about it.
thats true

the Japanese Zero was not as good a plane as Britan's Spitfire.

Depends on the version, but I would hardly call the Spitfire a clear winner overall - in the early war, the balance is probably in the Zero's favour.

The A6M2 had a greater speed, rate of climb and maneuverability than the Spitfire Mk.V. It had over a third more range as well. The service ceilings are about the same. Earlier Spitfire variants are even slower.

The Spitfire Mk.Vb had slightly more firepower - two 20mm cannon and four 7.7mm machineguns vs. the Zero's two 20mm cannon and two 7.7mm machineguns - hardly significant. Although the Spitfire had the edge in armour protection.

Germany. The Japanese didn't have a chance against any of the countries in WWII.

http://www.dean.usma.edu/history/web03/atlases/ww2%20pacific/ww2%20pacific%20%20maps/ww2-asia-overview.gif

No chance, eh? They took a lot of land considering their ineptness, didn't they?

Well, if the german's at this point would have had to occupy, but einzatzgruppen would've largely elimated this problem, and it only takes 2-4 years for the next generation of soldiers to be at the right age. With large industrial bases in russia, if kept under guard, would have let the german's produce 500 and upwards of their Panthers/ King Tigers a month. Surley naval ships would have followed quickly considering germany would strip russia of all its factories. Manpower would have been a problem but it is historically noted that 2 or 3 divisions of Anti-communists Cossacks were raised, clearly mroe could be a raised.

I don't think so. Have a look what was happening in Yugoslavia - despite brutal ethnic cleansing on the part of the Pavelic puppet regime, the axis still couldn't stop the partisan attacks. The same was true in the occupied USSR. Here, we're talking about a *lot* more land and population than the Axis had under their control historically. The Nazi's wouldn't have been able to control anything outside the major urban areas in anything more than name, and I doubt they would have the capability to forcibly eliminate 100 million people overnight - unless they nuked the lot, but then, that's not so good for them, is it?

Just consider the ramifications for a hostile occupied zone that stretched from Brest to the Urals - the logistics would be impossible. Don't forget also, those tanks need favourable weather conditions and terrain...Siberia doesn't have much of that.

It's also worth noting that many of the "anti-communist" troops were nothing more than Soviet POWs conscripted to fight, as well...

The Russian comeback wasn't anything special. It was human wave tactics. I can do that too, you know, if I had a country which breeds like rabbits.

not exactly...they did, but thats not what won them the war and The Japanese did do that the US and it didnt work, The Russians did devolp very advanced Shock tactics of rushing the Germans which may look like human wave but it uses more of a combined arms effect. When the Russians encircled the German sixth Army they used a pincer move and bled them to surrender, and at Kursk the Russians held their ground as the Germans bloodied themselves, and by the battle of Berlin, though russian loses were high, and there was like nothing left of the city afterwards, they had developed very effective infantry tactics.

The Russian comeback wasn't anything special. It was human wave tactics. I can do that too, you know, if I had a country which breeds like rabbits.
It was much mroe than that

The Soviets (they're not all Russians) had to do much more than that. They moved their entire industrial base out of Axis reach, had this fallen, the USSR wouln't have been saved by human wave attacks.
Also, the good Soviet formations did not use human wave attacks as much as it is belived, the regular army however....
By the end of the war, it was the superior Soviet resources, population, weaponry, and strategy (they had their share of excellent generals) that destroyed the Axis

It was much mroe than that

The Soviets (they're not all Russians) had to do much more than that. They moved their entire industrial base out of Axis reach, had this fallen, the USSR wouln't have been saved by human wave attacks.
Also, the good Soviet formations did not use human wave attacks as much as it is belived, the regular army however....
By the end of the war, it was the superior Soviet resources, population, weaponry, and strategy (they had their share of excellent generals) that destroyed the Axis

yeah the Soviet Generals like Zukov and Rossovosky were brilliant, Stalin was a fuckin jerk though.

Neither.

Germany could not make ships to match the IJN, the IJN would have walked all over the KM and, since they were friendly with the Brits (who saw Germany as a threat), we may have let the IJN use our bases, eitherway the IJN would have conducted a blockade on Germany, starving Germany out (like we did in WWI), but they couldn't invade, they didn't have the manpower or the land capability.

Germany, on the other hand, could no way beat the IJN. They were too inexperienced, and the IJN would have slaughtered them defensively or offensively if it came to it.

But neither could invade the other.

In the end niether side would have won. Germany would control the mainland (europe, asia, and *americas*). While Japan would maintain control of the oceans. Germany would have a better chance for a bombing offensive but with no invasion possbile would have lead to a stalemate. And japan's land forces were too weak, lacked supplies, and had no decent weapons. They were good for an alliance but not a war. Germany clearly had the land campagn and japan the ocean campaign. Possibly with Japan's helps in landings in africa/britain and germany's air cover they could have had more of an impact. This ofcourse if japan could use the panama canal, or had a way to refuel to head through the magellan straits.

I dunno, the entire Japanese people were willing to hurl themselves at the enemy using whatever they had... sure it makes for a nice body count for Germany but could germany really hold on to an effective foothold on Japanese soil?

I've always considered that tactic one of Japan's biggest weaknesses instead of a streanth. It seems to me that Japan was just staving off the inevitable by using Zeros as flying bombs and such. Looks like a tactic born from desperation to me; there's no real use in resisting like that, unless you want the entire population dead.

As Franberry points out, Russia did the same thing-human wave tactics. Fight to the death, and all that. Russia also managed to move it's industy around the nation, effectively avoiding the possibilty of it being destroyed by Nazis. Japan simply doesn't have the landmass to do such a thing-it is only a small island comared to Russia's hugeness, after all.

Lots of variables in a topic like this, but control of the seas is crucial to winning a global war. Germany lost the second WW because Hitler never gave the navy what they needed. Donitz wanted at least 500 U-boats, he was given less than half of that. The job couldnt get done. I couldnt see Hitler chaning his mind much. A major land army is junk if they dont have a navy to back it up, and Hitler never really gave a damn about it.

That's a good point you have there. Donitz only got something like 180, 200 U-Boats or something like that, right? Compared to the Japanese navy, that is next to nothing. Still...I think a major air assult(Perhaps an large force of Paratroopers would do the trick, but I doubt the job would get done without German armor.) coupled with the industrial powers of Russia and all the other lands Germany had in it's possession, Japan would have eventually given in.

In a war on open ground, the German Panzerwaffe crushes Japan completely.

In an island hopping campaign, the IJN wipes the Kriegsmarine from the face of the earth.

The Japanese really didn't have that much of an army to throw at Germany. On the other hand, the Germans had problems with supplies as close as in Belarus, let alone halfway across the earth. Also, their navy wasn't all that good.

If they want to take Japan, it's going to be slow and take a dungload of casualties. Even if they manage to get their superweapons research on track, their bombers and rockets lack the range to use them on Japan except if they crawl all the way to China or Vladivostok. Trying to take the Pacific islands will mean having their navy sunk, putting the Japs at an advantage.

Still, I bet on the Germans for a victory.

Germany because (a) huge resource base assuming they won Lebensraum and (b) technology. At the end of WWII the Nazis had a bomber that was capable of reaching New York, although it was never deployed. Add in the effects of the V2 rocket and the Japanese industrial centres are obliterated without the Japanese being able to retaliate.

As far as the Navy goes, the Germans weren't total pushovers either. Look at the Graf Spree and, of course, their U-boat fleet.

Nazis would have won any conflict with the Imperial Japanese.

Happily, for all of us, the Allies actually won.

Well I think its safe to say that the German Army would've beat any Japanese army, at the end of ww2 the Japanese were still using bolt actions while the Germans had moved on to Assualt rifles, German Weaponry was overall better too, I'd much rather fight with a german made weapon than a japanese one. Though we also must consider the fact at how would Germany handle a Jungle war? in Indo-china, India, lower china, Indoniesa, Japan would have way more advantage knowing the jungle a little bit better, they were not expert jungle fighters like the vietnamese but they had much more experiance.

The Japanese didn't have proper tanks, they were no good at fighting in anything other than the jungle (two (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khalkhin_Gol) examples (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Storm)), and much of their equipment and know-how was transferred to them by the Germans.

Kanabia is right, neither side would've had the manpower to fight a war in Asia, but in the few battles, Germany would've kicked Japanese arse.

As for the Japanese Navy...well, I don't really see a scenario in which it could have helped the Japanese Army somewhere in India or Central Asia.

Why is Graf Spee such a great comparison when it was pwned by an 8 inch cruiser and two 6 inch cruisers?

...Whereas the Japanese were able to orchestrate the greatest single military attack in the history of the world so far and obliterate the USN's presence in the pacific within a 24 hour attack and then destroy two extremely capable capital ships of the Royal Navy and seize the Jewel in the crown?

Deutschland. Uber. Alles.

So ja, Germany.

Why is Graf Spee such a great comparison when it was pwned by an 8 inch cruiser and two 6 inch cruisers?
It wasn't. The damage was superficial. And the Exeter got its arse kicked. But if you have more targets than turrets, something's gotta give.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_River_Plate

Germany never paid much attention to its surface fleet. They had maybe four decent ships (Bismarck, Tirpitz, Scharnhorst and Gneisenau), and that was it. The Graf Zeppelin was never completed.

...Whereas the Japanese were able to orchestrate the greatest single military attack in the history of the world so far and obliterate the USN's presence in the pacific within a 24 hour attack and then destroy two extremely capable capital ships of the Royal Navy and seize the Jewel in the crown?
I don't think that's quite how it happened either, but it's definitely true that the Japanse Navy received a lot more attention from their government - understandably giving their position.
But Germany and Japan couldn't fight each other in a Naval War by virtue of geography, leaving Japan for dead.

Um, you don't seem to understand that the Germans had no way to invade Japan. Had they tried from Russia or China or Korea, they would have had no way to invade Japan itself; the IJN would have simply placed their superior destroyers in the straits, and used their aircover to stop the Nazi aircraft. The Luftwaffe weren't as fanatical as the IJ pilots, and they weren't exactly better trained either (IJ would have had an excellent airforce had the yanks not eradicated it). Supply convoys would have taken a huge time to travel all that distance, so the Japs would have had logistical superiority. Furthermore, the Nazi airbases would have been eventualyl found and eradicated by the IJNs carrier aircraft.

The Japs would have simply have bought their food from the Yanks, or imported from other neutral nations; after all, they had just as equal submarine force and a FAR FAR FAR superior surface force, they would have easily been able to cover the convoys.

The Germans would eventually have been brought down by the long time it took to transport things across siberia, and the fact they had no superiority over the Japs that could be used, in a geographical situation a little like the Battle of Britain. In that case, the Germans would have simply made a peace treaty, and the Japs would have used another lightening strike to regain what they lost, after learning why they lost it so they could keep it again.

Who wins?

Imperial Japan.

Zeros may be nice, but by the end of the war, the Germans had jets....the zeros would have been poring from the sky. Also with the V-2 rocket, they had a distance of 200 miles, and they begining to work longer range rockets
Also the Japs, most of em could not fight in Germany, it would have most likely been to cold for them. However the most crucial part is who took the United States. Not only a berth of resources, but also the Manhattan project plans. That would put the balance to whoever got those. If the Germans, they could put them on jets and drop nukes, or use the V-2. In the Japs, a kamizae sub into a random German Major port or a bomber could finish the Germans. Also if Hitler died, that would leave his military leaders in charge, much like japan. It was also easier for the Germans to starve the Japs.

Luftwaffe+radar and sonar= sunken Jap navy. We did the same to them
My money's on the germans

You think Germany could take the USA? That's a laugh. Here's a tip: Don't try to invade a country where everyone is a patriot and every other person has a gun. It's kinda... HARD and IMPOSSIBLE, for any nation.

Secondly, who says the Japs wouldn't have had a jet, either? You seem to forget that all these advances the Germans had, the Japs had some sort of counter to them.

You think Germany could take the USA? That's a laugh. Here's a tip: Don't try to invade a country where everyone is a patriot and every other person has a gun. It's kinda... HARD and IMPOSSIBLE, for any nation.
Ermmm...Germany...a country where everyone was a patriot, and back then most had a gun. Terrible argument. Use a real one next time.

Um, you don't seem to understand that the Germans had no way to invade Japan.
As I said before - neither side would've had the manpower to even get that far. The only half-way realistic scenario would have been a fight between frontline troops somewhere between India in the south and Siberia in the North.
Japan's Army was an absolute joke and would have suffered worse than the Russians did in the first few months of Barbarossa.

...after all, they had just as equal submarine force...
Not really. Especially not if you consider the new developments that the Germans had ready in the final months of the war, which were essentially modern boats.

...and the Japs would have used another lightening strike to regain what they lost, after learning why they lost it so they could keep it again.
In which case they would've to fight the Wehrmacht on land again, which the Japanese would invariably lose without tanks, without tactics and without a proper infantry force.

You think Germany could take the USA? That's a laugh. Here's a tip: Don't try to invade a country where everyone is a patriot and every other person has a gun. It's kinda... HARD and IMPOSSIBLE, for any nation.

Secondly, who says the Japs wouldn't have had a jet, either? You seem to forget that all these advances the Germans had, the Japs had some sort of counter to them.

The japs did not have jets, and the Germans would not share that kind of resources. Flak is useless when the plane flies high, fast, and doesnt have to dive bomb. Much like the the Germans in ww2 by the time the japs did have a jet it would be to late.

Also i might add, island hopping does not work on this when you are trying to take the mainland. The Japs would face a superior fighting force on land while the Germans at sea.

Europa Maxima: Is not being able to read considered flamebaiting?

Neu Leonstein: Why don't you try reading my posts? I'm not saying a 10,000 man strong Glorious and Righteous Imperial Japanese Army would force the entire German Army back into a full blown retreat across Russia, for christ sakes. I'm saying that Imperial Japan could force the Germans into a stalemate by using the same tactics the Brits did in the Battle of Britain.

Again, refer to the first point. 'after learning why they lost it so they could keep it again.' they're not just going to attack like they did originally. They're going to develop new methods of doing this, new technology, and new tactics. The Japs were ingenious, really. It's amazing the shit they pulled.

Umajawe: Right. And in 1937 the USN didn't know that the IJN was laying down the largest battleship in the world, and it didn't know in 1940 they were planning a surprise attack. The Japs burnt almost all of their records and destroyed almost all their prototypes; the Japanese jet program is about as provable or unprovable as UFOs. Now tell me this, since we tested the first jet in '33, do you think the Japs would just ignore that, and say 'Screw it. We don't need to develop that, like Germany and Britain are doing.' and ten years later, would they think 'Crap, we still don't need to develop that!' ?

Europa Maxima: Is not being able to read considered flamebaiting?

I read your "argument" perfectly well. It was lacking.

Secondly, who says the Japs wouldn't have had a jet, either? You seem to forget that all these advances the Germans had, the Japs had some sort of counter to them.
Not in aircraft design. Every single jet or rocket-powered aircraft the Japanese had was based on German designs. Usually they were pretty blatant copies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakajima_Kikka).

So why is the patriotic and militant stance of Nazi Germany relevant to an invasion of the USA? You're effectively saying that Nazi Germany would mobilise partisans to attack the US, because the USA has partisans too.

Secondly, the ability of the luftwaffe to cross the Atlantic, and for the Kriegsmarine to cross the Atlantic, carrying troops..

If you think that's possible, go back to Year 4, please.

Not in aircraft design. Every single jet or rocket-powered aircraft the Japanese had was based on German designs. Usually they were pretty blatant copies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakajima_Kikka).

And that means that if relations between IJ and Germany were straining, the IJ wouldn't take what they already had from the Germans and develop it themselves?

[b]Umajawe: Right. And in 1937 the USN didn't know that the IJN was laying down the largest battleship in the world, and it didn't know in 1940 they were planning a surprise attack. The Japs burnt almost all of their records and destroyed almost all their prototypes; the Japanese jet program is about as provable or unprovable as UFOs. Now tell me this, since we tested the first jet in '33, do you think the Japs would just ignore that, and say 'Screw it. We don't need to develop that, like Germany and Britain are doing.' and ten years later, would they think 'Crap, we still don't need to develop that!' ?

There a flaw though. The Germans HAD Jets by the end of the war that we fought that were useable in fighting, in fact were do think we got the plans from?If they had overpowered us and taken us over, they have more fuel to make more.And the germans were sure as hell not giving to the japs. The japs were still in devoplment, let alone production. Bombing various labs would keep them in dark.

So why is the patriotic and militant stance of Nazi Germany relevant to an invasion of the USA? You're effectively saying that Nazi Germany would mobilise partisans to attack the US, because the USA has partisans too.

Secondly, the ability of the luftwaffe to cross the Atlantic, and for the Kriegsmarine to cross the Atlantic, carrying troops..

If you think that's possible, go back to Year 4, please.

The germans had jets and soon long range bombers. They could soften the US for attack with the Luftwaffe, but not carry them yes.

So that assumes that Germany knows where these labs are?

I'm not sure who 'we' is in your case (Sorry I did not explain, I am British if that has already not been made clear) but if its the USA, I already explained why Germany could never invade the USA and secondly if its Britain, we would have probably not had that much usable oil left, having either shipped it to the US or $Colony, or burnt it in the face of the Germans.

So why is the patriotic and militant stance of Nazi Germany relevant to an invasion of the USA? You're effectively saying that Nazi Germany would mobilise partisans to attack the US, because the USA has partisans too.
No. You mentioned this American patriotism as some kind of atout that would help the defendants. It would mean nothing. Germans were notoriously efficient and lethal warriors. Americans? Heh.

The germans had spies almost every country when hitler took power. That allowed to pin point various locations

I'm mentioning the fact the last time the Germans tried to invade a fiercly patriotic people, they failed. They also failed combined with the fact that that nation was receiving supplies; in this case, the nation is producing those supplies plus, what, 50x extra?

That and the fact I already explained why its impossible for the Nazis to land on America.

The germans had spies almost every country when hitler took power. That allowed to pin point various locations

Right, because they wouldn't move the labs, and because Germans look so much like Japanese.

I'm mentioning the fact the last time the Germans tried to invade a fiercly patriotic people, they failed. They also failed combined with the fact that that nation was receiving supplies; in this case, the nation is producing those supplies plus, what, 50x extra?
And this nation would be?

It would be nothing extra. Germany was efficient in what it did; conquering other nations.

Im switching to another stance. They couldnt hold there empires together. Partisians would cause sabotage to factories on both sides and cripples them. Eventually both empires would buckle upon themsleves.

And this nation would be?

It would be nothing extra. Germany was efficient in what it did; conquering other nations.
That other Nation is the U.S.S.R, and those battles got bloody

And this nation would be?

It would be nothing extra. Germany was efficient in what it did; conquering other nations.

Try Russia.

Can you explain to me how the Germans would have landed on America, then?

Umajawe: Thing is, we've take the prerogative of assuming that IJ has no Empire. Therefore, it doesn't need to allocate any resources in mantaining this.

I'm saying that Imperial Japan could force the Germans into a stalemate by using the same tactics the Brits did in the Battle of Britain.
Because unlike the Japanse, the Germans would be unable to think of a new way of approaching the problem?

They're going to develop new methods of doing this, new technology, and new tactics. The Japs were ingenious, really. It's amazing the shit they pulled.
And meanwhile the Germans were going to sit back and let them? You don't suddenly develop an entirely new tank industry and military tactics out of nothing.
I disagree when you say the Japanse were particularly ingenious. They had surprise on their side, and that's how they managed to conquer a lot of area. During the rest of the time, they were beaten pretty much in every engagement they fought, they were unable to come up with anything new at all, and as I said before, they borrowed all sorts of technology from the Germans because their own economy was busy collapsing on them.
Even their so-called nuclear program primarily consisted of a German submarine being sent with the technology on board that gave itself up when they heard that Germany surrendered.

Try Russia.
The nation who suffered massive casualties against Nazi Germany? Oh, and fiercely patriotic? Please. Most Russians had no choice but to fight.

Can you explain to me how the Germans would have landed on America, then?
Submarines. Aircraft. The Germans almost succeeded in a submarine invasion, except they were betrayed by their own spies.

Furthermore, had Germany held on to its nuclear technology, the US would be a pile of ash right now.

Umajawe: Thing is, we've take the prerogative of assuming that IJ has no Empire. Therefore, it doesn't need to allocate any resources in mantaining this.

It doesnt matter what "name" they are called. Germany had a empire, yet they werent called the German empire. When you conquer and enslave, rape, pillage, and kill people, theres bound to be some sabotaging, and eventually both of whatever there called would have fallen apart

Massive casualties, yes. Crushing victory, yes.

And no choice but to fight? You have to understand that is a load of bollocks that is supported only by people who want to lambast the Soviet system.

A pile of ash? As in, New York is levelled by a single bomber which results in the complete and utter destruction of all German airbases?

About the Japanese and the Germans, you can't assume that Germany would look after its overseas possessions so well. We certainly didn't look after Singapore around the time it was lost, whats to assume the Germans will?

It doesnt matter what "name" they are called. Germany had a empire, yet they werent called the German empire. When you conquer and enslave, rape, pillage, and kill people, theres bound to be some sabotaging, and eventually both of whatever there called would have fallen apart

...What? I said that IJ didn't have an Empire because the Germans took it, not that it was called something different... your comprehension skills are really lacking.

Massive casualties, yes. Crushing victory, yes.
Well duh. They were fighting on two fronts. They could only hold out for so long. Plus their allies were pathetic. And, not so crushing a victory.

And no choice but to fight? You have to understand that is a load of bollocks that is supported only by people who want to lambast the Soviet system.
Patriotism was not the motivating force. Those who say otherwise usually have a pro-Soviet agenda.

A pile of ash? As in, New York is levelled by a single bomber which results in the complete and utter destruction of all German airbases?
Nuclear holocaust, that is what.

...What? I said that IJ didn't have an Empire because the Germans took it, not that it was called something different... your comprehension skills are really lacking.

Your assuming the Germans took it. Assuming is not a good thing, as you can see what I put

Not so much a crushing victory as in Berlin being defended by a half strength infantry division and an anti air regiment against the entire Soviet Army, German divisions being finished off within days?

Secondly, I have read notes and talks with Russians that fought during WWII, and none of them have ever said anything contrary to that. Yes, maybe it was the Soviet system that forced the patriotism into them. But they didn't need to force the Russians to keep it, it was natural. You just need to read any World War II text to understand this.

Nuclear holocaust? Sorry, this isn't 1989. This is 194X, the Germans don't have ICBMs or bombers that can cross the Atlantic. Think again.

Your assuming the Germans took it. Assuming is not a good thing, as you can see what I put

Yes, my entire argument is based on the assumption that the Germans took the whole of Asia, which is the worst case scenario.

Yes, my entire argument is based on the assumption that the Germans took the whole of Asia, which is the worst case scenario.

Basing your entire argument on a assumption or theory is about as stupid as wearing a Nazi uniform with a swastika into a jewish synagogue full of jewish muscle builders.

This is 194X, the Germans don't have ICBMs or bombers that can cross the Atlantic. Think again.
To be fair:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkers_Ju_390
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Me_264
http://www.luft46.com/horten/horten.html

Basing your entire argument on a assumption or theory is about as stupid as wearing a Nazi uniform with a swastika into a jewish synagogue full of jewish muscle builders.

Not really. We are arguing about a particular part of this argument, which is based off the entire theory.

See, it's 3:55 AM, and I am definetly not in the mood to continue an argument with four people, two of which fail ultimately at actually using their brains in any meaningful matter.

Neu Leonstein: They're controversial, thouhg. Could they really have carried a bomb to New York, routinely?

And that means that if relations between IJ and Germany were straining, the IJ wouldn't take what they already had from the Germans and develop it themselves?
The problem is that they showed absolutely no propensity to develop radical new designs at all. The Zero was a good fighter, but hardly revolutionary. Their battleships and carriers were big, but not radical either (and unlike it was for the Americans, fire control and electronics were neglected).
And they developed not a single proper tank design.

Not so much a crushing victory as in Berlin being defended by a half strength infantry division and an anti air regiment against the entire Soviet Army, German divisions being finished off within days?
A crushing victory means they faced no opposition. That is far from true.

Secondly, I have read notes and talks with Russians that fought during WWII, and none of them have ever said anything contrary to that. Yes, maybe it was the Soviet system that forced the patriotism into them. But they didn't need to force the Russians to keep it, it was natural. You just need to read any World War II text to understand this.
I've read them. I do not think Russian patriotism played as much a part as you say it did. Sure, they had a warrior mentality. Russia always did. The US? In the 1940s? Not really.

Nuclear holocaust? Sorry, this isn't 1989. This is 194X, the Germans don't have ICBMs or bombers that can cross the Atlantic. Think again.
Check the links NL posted.

Ah, from what we know, they have not. As I said, an extremely great deal of data was lost. There's no real way of determining the strength of their programs, though it is fair to say their jet programs were not up to western standards.

They didn't need to develop a tank design. Does Israel need to develop an aircraft carrier? no, because it's not theatre useful.

A crushing victory means they faced no opposition. That is far from true.

I've read them. I do not think Russian patriotism played as much a part as you say it did. Sure, they had a warrior mentality. Russia always did. The US? In the 1940s? Not really.


Check the links NL posted.

No it does not. A crushing victory means they faced no real obstacle, which they did not.

It depends. Look at St Petersburg, for example. The city could easily have surrendered if it wanted to, but it didn't, because its way of life was under direct threat. Same with the US, if Nazi Germany invaded. It's amazing what people do to protect themselves and their family+friends if they're in danger of being wiped out.

[QUOTE=Questers]Not really. We are arguing about a particular part of this argument, which is based off the entire theory.

See, it's 3:55 AM, and I am definetly not in the mood to continue an argument with four people, two of which fail ultimately at actually using their brains in any meaningful matter.[QUOTE]

Good job with the insult to intelligence, thats been overused quite a bit when no one has a come back.
Also I'm not the one arguing with a theory that has a quite a bit of chance of not happening.

No it does not. A crushing victory means they faced no real obstacle, which they did not.
Again, this only applied to the end of the war. The Nazis posed a significant obstacle for most of it.

It depends. Look at St Petersburg, for example. The city could easily have surrendered if it wanted to, but it didn't, because its way of life was under direct threat. Same with the US, if Nazi Germany invaded. It's amazing what people do to protect themselves and their family+friends if they're in danger of being wiped out.
I doubt the 1940's post Great Depression US had any such a mentality going for it. Not surrendering in any case may prove foolish in certain circumstances.

Um, I've stated my comeback twice already. If you can not read it, that is not my problem.

It's highly unlikely IJ would ever fight Nazi Germany. Go figure.

Again, this only applied to the end of the war. The Nazis posed a significant obstacle for most of it.


I doubt the 1940's post Great Depression US had any such a mentality going for it. Not surrendering in any case may prove foolish in certain circumstances.

From 1943+ (Let's say, Kursk onwards.)... that's half of the Great Patriotic War. It's certainly a large amount.

Secondly, that's true, but my point still stands. The Russians were dirt poor, too. What do you have to lose?

Um, I've stated my comeback twice already. If you can not read it, that is not my problem.

It's highly unlikely IJ would ever fight Nazi Germany. Go figure.

Though you were to tired to continue this?

And highly unlikely? I lean more to never, but that seems good enough/

From 1943+ (Let's say, Kursk onwards.)... that's half of the Great Patriotic War. It's certainly a large amount.
It's the end of the war. That is all. The victory was earned through sacrifice of immense amounts of blood. It was by no means "crushing".

Secondly, that's true, but my point still stands. The Russians were dirt poor, too. What do you have to lose?
Comparing dirt poor Russians to simply economically frustrated Americans is silly.

What I should have said is I do not have the strength to continue an argument with someone who cannot see my point of view and constantly refers to things that are not relevant whatsoever and then argue about a totally different thing.

When I say argue, I say that term loosely, because all arguing here is is throwing your points at someone else, and they throw theirs back at you. If you're right, or they're right, then you on't accept it, becaus ethat's weak and you are too firmly indoctrinated in your believes to accept that you are wrong.

Good night, sir.

Japan would have won the war. easily.

Although few people know it, Japan had its own Atomic Bomb. Yikes!
Japan with the bomb? Impossible!

No my friends, possible. Actual. For fellow History Channle watchers, this should not be anything new. Everybody else, Listen UP!

Japan had been working on the atom bomb for a number of years. They had the mentality, the means, and the knowledge to do so. It is rarely discussed, but Japan's aeronautic workhorse, the Zero, was the top flying machine for many years in the war. They applied that same diligence to the bomb. The day before we bombed Nagasaki (American here) the Japs successfuly field tested their own bomb in Manchuoko (Korea/Manchuria region.) It was the Emperor's order that stopped the development of the bomb. Following his declaration of an intent to surrender, the entirety of the research was destroyed, as per Imerial Orders, orders that the Japanese regarded as divine law. the japs had the bomb. Had the Allies been defeated, Hitler would never have committed suicide, and it would have been a showdown between a large and powerful army and submarine fleet against a mighty navy and slightly superior airforce that would have possession of the atomic weapon. Japan trumps Germany. Victory for the Islands of the Rising Sun.

Japan has the samurai mentality though. Germany just had "Swastikas! Swastikas! More swastikas!"

They didn't need to develop a tank design. Does Israel need to develop an aircraft carrier? no, because it's not theatre useful.
I wasn't speculating about the purpose. But if you ask Israel to design an aircraft carrier today, without help from anyone - would you expect the product to hold its own against things like the CVN-21 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CVN-21)?

If the industry and expertise isn't there, it can't be created out of nothing in the blink of an eye. Japan could not have designed a world-beating tank equal to late-generation Panthers, Tigers or whatever would've come after them.

Japan would have won the war. easily.
Even with a nuke, Japan could not have won against Germany. Building a nuke in 1946 takes months, and delivering it is difficult, particularly if the German air force survived the war.

Japan had been working on the atom bomb for a number of years. They had the mentality, the means, and the knowledge to do so.
That old thing (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_atomic_program#Disputed_reports_about_the_nuclear_program_in_Konan_in_1945) again. All we have for evidence is an interview with an ageing Japanese nationalist, a journalist looking for a scoop and a revisionist historian with a fetish for Japan.

The Japanese nuclear program was primarily focussed (like the German one) on the development of nuclear reactors to power ships and U-Boats. A bomb was conceived only late, and then the program was still tiny and had no chance of success.

It was the Emperor's order that stopped the development of the bomb.
No, it was the advice by the Imperial Head Scientists that a bomb would not be possible for many years to come that stopped it. And that was some time before the alleged test.

As by the theory, they destroyed as much as they could because the Soviets were coming, who also captured the rest.

In reality, the only hard evidence that we have for the Japanese even knowing what an atomic bomb is was a German U-Boat (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unterseeboot_234) transporting materials to Japan, which never reached its target because it gave itself up when Germany surrendered.

Japan has the samurai mentality though. Germany just had "Swastikas! Swastikas! More swastikas!"
And what did Russia have? Because that sure as hell worked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Storm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khalkhin_Gol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lake_Khasan

And what did Russia have? Because that sure as hell worked.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Storm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khalkhin_Gol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Lake_Khasan


It didn't work against Poland in 1921. ;)

The Japanese didn't have proper tanks, they were no good at fighting in anything other than the jungle (two (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Khalkhin_Gol) examples (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/August_Storm)), and much of their equipment and know-how was transferred to them by the Germans.

Kanabia is right, neither side would've had the manpower to fight a war in Asia, but in the few battles, Germany would've kicked Japanese arse.

As for the Japanese Navy...well, I don't really see a scenario in which it could have helped the Japanese Army somewhere in India or Central Asia.
*Has my 1 million percent approval*
The Jap tanks were worse than the Honey/Stuart
Yay for Recon Units!

Its something I've always wondered about, during the timespan of world war two, If Germany and Japan were to face off, who do you think would be the victor? Lets say the two forces beat the allies and collied in the middle east/afgahn region fo the world, or possibly in the united states?
Afghanistan or the Middle East?
Germany easily because it was closer to their area of operations they would have supplies going through the USSR and a continuation of the African Front which one would assume they would have claimed after winning the war.

germany.

After all, germany was also trying to make atomic bomb, but japen wasent.

Why is Graf Spee such a great comparison when it was pwned by an 8 inch cruiser and two 6 inch cruisers?

...Whereas the Japanese were able to orchestrate the greatest single military attack in the history of the world so far and obliterate the USN's presence in the pacific within a 24 hour attack and then destroy two extremely capable capital ships of the Royal Navy and seize the Jewel in the crown?
The Graf Spree was pwnd by New Zealanders thats why.

The facts are that Germany maintained a superior land force and japan a superior naval force. We all assume that fighting will be in the Pacific/Asian regions because the German army could reach there fastest. So that means the German homeland would not be under attack so Japan would feel more pressure and would not be able to counter attack.

Japan although they have a navy it wouldn't be enough becuase at this point naval forces are vunerable to air attack. Sheer distances would stop the Japanese from effecting supplies in and around Germany. Germany at this point with Russia under control would conduct land campaigns into Manchuria, China, and Korea. Japan's army using bolt weapons would fare terribly without a modern gun. Lack of tanks are assualt guns would give German's the immediate advantage.

Production favors Germany who had a dedicated workforce receiving food and raw materials at a reasonable speed. Japan's raw materials had to be shipped in meaning a slow down in production. Their workforce was mainly old men and young boys, whoever was not in the army. The Germans would ultimately outstrip the Japanese.

In terms of a navy, although Germany lacked one if they went into production of ships, they would all be modern with heavy guns and radar. Germany would specialize its navy production into which ever ship proved most effective.

So while Japan may not be invaded a pressure would remain on them while any invansion into Germany would be Highly Unlikelyand would be too hard to coordinate on top of the fact that the germany PanzerWaffe would destroy them on the plains of europe.

you all seem to forget the japanese held honour above all else. they would never surrender to the nazi's so the nazis would have to invade. which they would almost certainly cock up. in the end you would just get some sort of stalemate where there is constant warfare. i.e. a ninteen eighty four style thing.


plus the japanese had ninjas which could destroy armies simply by blinking

I dont think Germany's land forces would ever be beat by Japan, wether Japan had control of the air or not, Remmember for the last year of WW2 Germany had piss poor air power (with exception for awhile when they had they're ME262's up, until we blew they're bases away) compared to the allies but we still needed to engage them on the ground in major operations to defeat them. Anywhere (save for maybe the jungle) Japanese Ground forces were the germans would defeat them, But I dont think they'd ever be able to defeat the Japanese navy... Unless they somehow did gain air superiority, or perhaps...*shifty eyes* dug a tunnel from China into Japan!

But once there Germany would need a very huge land force, and would end up having to destory the entire Japanese people in order to win.

Now having said that, why did the Japanese never consider updating they're infantry weapons? they stuck with bolt actions, they rarley employed SMG's, and most of they're machine guns sucked.

But once there Germany would need a very huge land force, and would end up having to destory the entire Japanese people in order to win.


You think the Nazi's would not consider doing that?

You think the Nazi's would not consider doing that?

I'm not saying they wouldnt Its wether they could

Its something I've always wondered about, during the timespan of world war two, If Germany and Japan were to face off, who do you think would be the victor? Lets say the two forces beat the allies and collied in the middle east/afgahn region fo the world, or possibly in the united states?

Like every army that ventures into Afghanistan they would both find out that it would eventually be the Afghanis who would win.