Hey, lets discuss WWII!

Tyrant

Spaceman
Argh. You're treating this like some damned idiotic Space-Battles.com debate, where victory or defeat depends on which ship has more turrets than the other.

Way to distort my point there. Just because Yamato has the same amount of turrets doesn't mean it's equal to, say, the Iowa. Hell, by this logic, the King George V Battleship was the worst warship of all time because it only had two goddamned turrets

It's not about bloody stats.

No duh, that wasn't my point.

You don't look at Japan's production capabilities vs. America's production capabilities and decide that whoever has more wins. That's just plain wrong - the real world doesn't work that way.

See above. Fact of the matter is, numbers do count for something. You can have the best trained, bestmotivated personnel, best tanks, and the best warships, but if you can't actuyally out-produce an enemy who's is nearly on equal ground, you're finished. WHy do you think in Warhammer 40K the Imperium of Man is in decline?

Otherwise, Ithink we're in general agreement on the issue.

Oh, and I belive somebody spoke about the Graf Zepplin earlier in the thread. From what i've understand, the GZ wasn't an espcially hot design. I might look into it more.
 

NinjaLA

Alex Von T.
Way to win an argument.. Quote the events of a fictional setting full of space orcs.


Japan could have won the war, they just had to do it fast, and they bloody near succeeded. Our guys were throwing up their hats in frustration for almost a full year.
 

Dundradal

Frog Blast the Vent Core!
Japan could have won the war, they just had to do it fast, and they bloody near succeeded. Our guys were throwing up their hats in frustration for almost a full year.

I've avoided this thread because, well it's what I'm getting a degree in (my specific area of study relates to the European theater, but I'm also very interested in naval combat) and I wasn't sure if I wanted to wade into this but I figured I'd throw out some small thoughts, also be forewarned that my area of study is not strictly MH, but I incorporate a lot of anthropological thought into my work, as the culture of the Second World War is one that obviously spans the globe so societal reactions to it are of great interest to me.

The definition of "win" is very important in this discussion. The differences in the US and Japan's definition of "winning" the war are quite different. Japan didn't ever seek to invade and conquer the US. It wanted hegemonic control of the Pacific for its Greater East-Asian Co-Prosperity sphere. It saw itself as also possessing a "manifest destiny" similar to the US's from the 19th century. Japan's goals for the war were to force the US into a position in which it would sue for peace and grant Japan the control it sought in the Pacific.

It's not till after the declaration for "unconditional surrender" by the Allies that the definition of winning the war entailed a full invasion and occupation of the Axis nations, specifically in regards to Japan, the German situation has some notable differences.

Japan sought to force the US's hand in the Pacific, while the US sought the removal and punishment of the Japanese war time government. The US also had its collective hands in the air for first year of the war because most of the resources were being prepared to be sent to Europe. The Pacific had to make do with what they had and the few transfers they received from the Atlantic command. A large portion of the US fleet was tied up in the Atlantic for a variety of reasons until later in 1942 when the remaining fleet carriers were transferred to the Pacific.

One of the major reasons for Japan's defeat has nothing to do with things military. It revolves around cultural factors that the Japanese never looked at with any seriousness. The "American resolve" and the solidifying of the nation following Dec 7th was the exact opposite of what Japan expected. They assumed that the US would back down to such a show of power instead of totally gearing itself up to fight a massive war on two of the largest fronts ever seen in warfare.

This reminds me of some scenes in Action Stations, which is of course based on the idea of Pearl. When Jukaga is with his father's friend and their human friend (his name is just not coming out right now!) the human explains that even though the kilrathi appear more powerful and are more geared for war, they will in the end lose because of human resolve and the insult of being struck from the dark. The effects of the raid on McAuliffe did do terrible damage to ConFleet, but at the same time created a massive feeling for revenge. While this cultural response varies from culture to culture, the basic principles behind it are similar.

Most truly "surprise attacks" in the current mindset always provoke the same reaction in those being attacked. Instead of hiding and retreating, differences are buried in order that the common enemy pay for the attack they committed. The US and Soviet Union both exhibit these traits following their respective surprise attacks, although how they use those societal emotions is quite different.

But to get to the original quote, Japan could have never won the war in the way in which they fought it. The attack on Pearl did more to guarentee their defeat than any other action. Now you can argue with me on military victories all you want, but on the cultural and emotional front the events at Pearl made basically everyone in America extremely pissed off. You can examine post-war stories of the difference in treatment between German and Japanese people and equipment to see just how intense these feelings were.

A good example is Operation Crossroads in 1946 where the US used both the Japanese battleship Nagato and the German battlecruiser Prince Eugen as target ships in atomic tests. Following the tests, the Nagato was left to rot (still with Japanese corpses onboard from attacks during the war) and no tests or recordings were done on it, hell its time of sinking isn't even accurately recorded. Meanwhile the Prince Eugen was gone over, attempted to be scrubbed clean and then actually moved to Kwajelain (no idea how to spell that one) where it still sits today with it's stern above the water.

Culture has as much an effect on war as do actual military encounters. A battle or war can be lost long before any are fought if the events evoke unexpected or powerful cultural responses.
 

Dominator

Rear Admiral
Most truly "surprise attacks" in the current mindset always provoke the same reaction in those being attacked. Instead of hiding and retreating, differences are buried in order that the common enemy pay for the attack they committed. The US and Soviet Union both exhibit these traits following their respective surprise attacks, although how they use those societal emotions is quite different.

Soviet Union is not the best example here. Many people in the Ukraine, baltic states (and other parts of the country to some extent) welcomed Germans as liberators from communist rule in the opening stages of Barbarossa. Nazis had great opportunity to crush Soviet Union from within, but wasted it by being even more brutal to local populace then communists.
And this atoll is called Kwajalein :)
 

Tyrant

Spaceman
Way to win an argument.. Quote the events of a fictional setting full of space orcs.

If the example fits, I will use it. You don't like it, then, that is your problem, not mine.

True, it's fairly silly, yet it also works as a basic analogy.(Although obviously the Situations between the two are different.)


Japan could have won the war, they just had to do it fast, and they bloody near succeeded. Our guys were throwing up their hats in frustration for almost a full year.

Depends really on the definition ition of winning. Unlike what that retarded episode of Enterprise thought, The Germans had no more of a chance taking America than, say, England or Vladivostok. (I highly doubt that the Germans would magically take the US... or any part of it overnight. Logistics would be an utter nightmare, more so now than it was.)
 

Dundradal

Frog Blast the Vent Core!
Soviet Union is not the best example here. Many people in the Ukraine, baltic states (and other parts of the country to some extent) welcomed Germans as liberators from communist rule in the opening stages of Barbarossa. Nazis had great opportunity to crush Soviet Union from within, but wasted it by being even more brutal to local populace then communists.
And this atoll is called Kwajalein :)

That however was not the German method so the possibility of it having an effect on the war is minimal. The concept of a surprise attack being applied on the larger Soviet Union makes perfect sense in this situation. The fact that certain cultural groups thought they were being liberated has little effect on the greater sentiments of the Soviet people. As far as they were concerned they were attacked out of the blue by a nation they had signed a non-aggression treaty with. The vast majority of the Soviet population and even Stalin himself were in the end surprised by the German attack, despite the repeated warnings.
 

Pip

Spaceman
The vast majority of the Soviet population and even Stalin himself were in the end surprised by the German attack, despite the repeated warnings.

That's the conventional wisdom, but hasn't there been some rather suggestive evidence that Stalin was surprised only so much as the Germans beat him to the punch -- and he was planning on breaking the Molotov-Von Ribbentrop Pact first?
 

Quarto

Unknown Enemy
See above. Fact of the matter is, numbers do count for something. You can have the best trained, bestmotivated personnel, best tanks, and the best warships, but if you can't actuyally out-produce an enemy who's is nearly on equal ground, you're finished.
That would be a fairly reasonable point... except I had just presented you with a specific situation (even involving the Japanese, in fact!) where a definite underdog won. I'm not sure if the "equal grounds" thing applies to the war of 1905, since Russia was at a definite strategic disadvantage... but this strategic disadvantage was exactly what the Japanese were attempting to reproduce in WWII by depriving the US of as many of its bases as possible - and very nearly succeeded.

So, all I'm saying is that all this should be enough to stop any armchair generals from proclaiming the inevitability of Japan's defeat.

WHy do you think in Warhammer 40K the Imperium of Man is in decline?
Why, I don't know why the Imperium of Man is in decline... could it be because that's what the creators of this fictional universe decided? That's possibly the worst example I've ever seen - next you'll be telling us that Germany couldn't win WWII because evil supervillains like Seether always lose in the end :p.
 

Dominator

Rear Admiral
That however was not the German method so the possibility of it having an effect on the war is minimal. The concept of a surprise attack being applied on the larger Soviet Union makes perfect sense in this situation. The fact that certain cultural groups thought they were being liberated has little effect on the greater sentiments of the Soviet people. As far as they were concerned they were attacked out of the blue by a nation they had signed a non-aggression treaty with. The vast majority of the Soviet population and even Stalin himself were in the end surprised by the German attack, despite the repeated warnings.

You forget that Germans eventually enlisted huge numbers of soviet POWs into their armed forces and created Russian Liberation Army under general Vlasov (it was way too late, though) - something unthinkable in the Japan vs US conflict.
 

Tyrant

Spaceman
That would be a fairly reasonable point... except I had just presented you with a specific situation (even involving the Japanese, in fact!) where a definite underdog won. I'm not sure if the "equal grounds" thing applies to the war of 1905, since Russia was at a definite strategic disadvantage... but this strategic disadvantage was exactly what the Japanese were attempting to reproduce in WWII by depriving the US of as many of its bases as possible - and very nearly succeeded.

So, all I'm saying is that all this should be enough to stop any armchair generals from proclaiming the inevitability of Japan's defeat.

Oh, Japan was a dangerous foe, of course. The problem is how they went around conducting the war. As Yamamoto said, Japan was screwed more or less if they didn't win the war in the pacific in less than a year.


Why, I don't know why the Imperium of Man is in decline... could it be because that's what the creators of this fictional universe decided? That's possibly the worst example I've ever seen - next you'll be telling us that Germany couldn't win WWII because evil supervillains like Seether always lose in the end :p.

Yeah, on retrospect, it wasn't such a good analogy.
 

Tyrant

Spaceman
Now, bring this discussion back toward Battleships(Or toward it, period)

800px-HMS_Prince_Of_Wales_in_Singap.jpg


HMS_Repulse_1920s-1.jpg


yamato01.jpg


Cookies if you know which ones they are...
 

Houkiboshi

Rear Admiral
The last one is the Yamato...

The 1st one looks like a king Goerge V, no clue as the ship itself

Could the 2nd one be the Hood?
 

Sarty

Rear Admiral
Soviet Union is not the best example here. Many people in the Ukraine, baltic states (and other parts of the country to some extent) welcomed Germans as liberators from communist rule in the opening stages of Barbarossa. Nazis had great opportunity to crush Soviet Union from within, but wasted it by being even more brutal to local populace then communists.
And this atoll is called Kwajalein :)

There were several reasons that the Nazis failed to conquer the Soviet Union, in fact the partisan war that I think you are referring to actually began after the Nazi army's advance had faltered. When the Nazis still had the advantage of momentum, Hitler actually pulled units away from the push towards moscow to encircle Minsk, which they had been having trouble with. They successfully achieved the single greatest encirclement in military history, but had they not pulled units from other armies to do so, they might have taken Moscow rather than Minsk.

Another problem was when Japan attacked the US. Hitler declared war on the US shortly afterward and subsequently ordered all his units in the Soviet Union to hold their positions, in enemy territory during the winter. That, in hindsight, was not the greatest decision to make.
 

Houkiboshi

Rear Admiral
Correct.



The King George V in Question was the Prince of Wales in Singapore, in 1941.



It's not Hood, although it's a Battlecruiser. Specifically, it is the HMS Repulse, Renown-class Battlecruiser, while HMS Hood was a Admiral-class Battlecruiser.

Nice... I like the naval history of WWII

The HMS Repulse? The turrets were screaming Hood hehe... Weren't those 2 really similar?


By the way, is it me or the carrier behind the Yamato is very British like?
 

Dundradal

Frog Blast the Vent Core!
For all those who are interested in the battle of Midway...check out Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway by Jonathan Parshall and Anthony Tully. It does an excellent job of refuting the claims of Fuchida, Prange and Lord in their histories of the events. A well written history that is technical without causing one to drown.
 

Tyrant

Spaceman
Nice... I like the naval history of WWII

Same here. WW2 naval history is quite intriging to me.

The HMS Repulse? The turrets were screaming Hood hehe... Weren't those 2 really similar?

Not really, save for the fact that both were Battlecruisers. The Renown-class, of which Repulse was the sister ship of, was much less armoured than the Admiral-class. (HMS Hood's armour actually wasn't much less than either KGV or Bismarck. Hood just gets her horrid armour rep from what was essentialy a golden BB shot.)

Renown and her sister Repulse was armoured like a heavy cruiser, at best. HMS Hood was also 30% longer than any other British warship at the time, and as of the time of her destruction was one of the heaviest warships in the Royal Navy.

But the thing both Renown and Repulse had going for them was luck. HMS Renown turned off Scarnhorst IIRC and an escort by herself, and HMS Repulse gained a reputation as a ship with a Crack-gunnery group. Historically they were commanded ships. (Captain Tennant did the best he could with Repulse off of Malasia)


By the way, is it me or the carrier behind the Yamato is very British like?

Eh?
 

Houkiboshi

Rear Admiral
Well, I always saw the Hood and the Renown as physically very similar... I have the game Fighting Steel and the Renown is pretty much the hood without one turret aft


Take a look at the CV behind the Yamato... The flight deck strikes me as very British like... Blended with the hull, unlike the Soryu and company, with the flight deck separated quite notably from the hull

I'll see if I can get a pic
 
Top