One thing about Mahan's doctrine that I think may not be fully recognized here would be the focus on controlling the sea to control the land. If you go through probably his most notable work, Influence of Sea Power Upon History (not a bad price as part of a Kindle book with his complete works), he posits less that a single decisive action is necessary to support naval supremacy, but that the control of the sea allows for lines of communication to ferry troops, supplies, etc. to a certain location and deny that same transportation to the enemy, which thereby eventually lets the faction controlling the sea take control. It was primarily focused on lands not contiguous to the belligerents' landmasses (mostly on colonial battles between Britain and France), but could definitely be seen as relevant to the Pacific theater of WWII or Taiwan today, where either faction would need continuous inflow of supplies to control islands. He made a point to say that certain tactics he covered wouldn't be relevant later on (likely to include massed fleets necessarily meeting all at once, which wouldn't be as clear-cut beneficial in today's world of missiles, air power, submarines, etc.), but that by focusing on the sea first, one faction could enable their own maritime transportation and deny that to their enemy, effectively starving them of necessities on their islands until enough of an amphibious force was developed to basically steamroll the island. I would think this isn't too far off from the Pacific theater, considering the US saw its biggest successes after significantly reducing Japanese naval power and allowing amphibious landings in the island hopping campaign (and leaving some islands in the withering-on-the-vine approach), and could even be seen as relevant in the Atlantic theater of WWII where so much depended on the effectiveness of German U-Boat efforts. Even today, I would expect that same logic to hold in the event of a US-China war over Taiwan, where either side would only be able to control that (or other nearby) islands long-term by establishing naval dominance in the area, proximity of forces and supporting bases being relevant (hence pre-positioning of stocks). Much love for the videos and sorry about the wall of text, I've just been reading Mahan lately and that stuck out to me. He definitely knew he was in the midst of changing times when he wrote a lot of his stuff; he mentioned that a lot of the tactics from the age of sail were likely going to become obsolete since ironclad ships were being developed. Probably one of the most interesting details I found was that he wrote that at the time of his writing, American maritime culture seemed to have degraded since the post-colonial era because the Louisiana purchase gave the US a breadbasket that made it less reliant on foreign trade, but that America might go back to its maritime roots a little more significantly once work was completed on some obscure canal being constructed through Central America. Not necessarily prescient, but absolutely observant.
Thanks for your comment building upon what cappy mentioned. Mahan seemed like a very intelligent, forward thinking tactician even though I've seen him touted as someone who was stuck in the past during his time. Which seems to be almost the opposite.
This was a topic with which I am more than merely conversant. As a former naval officer, one of my jobs as a became more senior was to update the existing Oplan for war with the old Soviet Union. After I left active service, I worked doing war gaming for the navy; all of this was for the Pacific Fleet. Although this video was not your best work, it is broadly accurate. I must say that the forces in the Pacific were flexible and adapted well to the changing circumstances. In fact, the longer the war went on the more flexible and innovative they became. The old expression 'improvise, adapt, and overcome' fits the WW II Pacific fleet and its Army team mates very well. Pre-war war gaming formed a solid basis for winning that war.
War plan orange was also not followed by the USAFFE in the Philippines after Pearl Harbour. The General did not strike Taiwan where the Japanese landing force was situated. Lots of aircrafts lost sitting in the Philippine airfields and that's why Manila fell really quick. Then, the Death March.
MacArthur dropped the ball by waiting until after lunch to launch an attack. The Japanese hit during lunch time and destroyed most of the aircraft on the ground. This was 1 day after Pearl Harbour.
This is assuming Taiwan was within reach regarding logistics of fuel, armaments, and knowledge beforehand of the attacks. Pearl Harbor was not a singular attack from the Japanese perspective. It was multi-pronged and calculated to hit all of the colonial powers at once at the same time within the SE Pacific to render the most damage possible before they could react. They were well aware that they would not win a projected war and made a calculated risk to win a negotiated peace with the powers being more focused on Europe. Their failure was underestimating US pride and assuming the country was too decadent to fight a drawn out war of attrition.
Maybe comprehensive computer simulation exercises could give us a vague idea of how effective our defenses are at stopping all potential threats. Maybe we also need to beef up our defenses, just for good measure. We also need to think hard about any new kinds of attacks against our navy there are that we haven't anticipated yet.
First Seargents and Seargent Majors get paid just as much as all but the highest ranking officers (Colnel or above). Officer rank requires a college degree and either OCS or West Point. Many enlisted men choose to stay in enlisted ranks despite having the necessary college degrees.
I promise I would have made a terrible officer I didn’t want the responsibility . It’s also more lonely of a position I liked being one of the guys. When I was 19 I didn’t care about the strategy or logistics side of the military I stupidly thought it was lame back then . I was more interested in explosions and kicking in doors. Now that my knees and back are done I’ve gotten more interested in the arm chair General role
bro you gotta mention this channel on your main. if you have I didnt even notice and i watch all your videos. so glad i found this second channel with more content.
Very insightful & easy to follow summary; Thank you! For me, this topic hits close to home. As a Baby Boomer, I grew up listening closely to war stories from my father and his Greatest Generation friends. During WW2, my teenaged father served on a USN oil tanker (the USS Cache)…throughout the Pacific Theater. Here we are many decades later, and Thanks to the rising existential threat China poses to our nation today…once again all of those “little-known” island chains across the massive Pacific Ocean…are suddenly of critical importance again to our national security.
It's the Pentagon's job to make plans in case of war. For instance the first part of 'Desert Shield', in 1990, was based on NATO plans incase the Soviet Union made an attack through Iraq towards Saudi Arabia.
I could see a war with China evolving along similar lines. While the range of weapons, aircraft and ships have increased markedly since 1945 land based infrastructure is still essential. Operation Causeway was a canceled plan to invade and liberate Formosa (Modern Taiwan) from the Japanese, there was also a 4 day air battle over the island using the Marianas as a staging area. I feel like our current plan is War Plan OrangeX.
As you hinted at, all plans need to be revised when the technology advances. For instance, THE BOMB and how it influenced Japan's decision to "give up".
"Following World War II, Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz famously remarked that rigorous and repeated Naval War College war gaming had ensured “nothing that happened during the war was a surprise . . . except the kamikaze tactics.”3 It is important to recall, however, that Nimitz was referring to surprises at the high operational and strategic levels." -War Gaming Must Get Red Right An expert in-house adversary is a powerful tool for the fleet. By Captain Dale C. Rielage, U.S. Navy
It doesn't matter what happens to our carriers or other surface combatants, because our submarines are gonna be the ones that win out future naval battles
I was curious about the white face paint and found this on a forum. Enjoy THAT is Anti Flash Cream worn by those in the first waves. You see it on engineers clearing mine fields on the beach on the first day-you see it worn by those Marines going in-first wave-this was ONLY done for the Iwo operation. And it is wider spread than you may think or have seen. I have spent a few years logging footage in the film footage archives and was surprized at how many Marines wore this anti flash cream. The Japanese had anchored underwater fuel barrells that they were going to set off as the Marines came in-for what ever reason they were not set off... One of the U.S. counter measures was to have those Marines going in on the first wave wear this anti flash cream to protect their faces from burns that might occur when and if these barrells exploded and sent gysers of flame shooting up from the floating barrells. This is fact and not some silly story that I made up for lack of something to do:) If you can find a copy of the 5th Amphibious Corps Enemy Situation Report-Iwo Jima (which I had an ORIGINAL copy of and offered to Eastwood's company Malpaso-at no chrage-to help them with their production of FLAGS-yet they chose NOT to take advantage of:) you'd see that this was one of the many surprizes that the Japanese had in store for the Marines on Iwo Jima-the entire report is about 2.5 inches thick and laden with all sorts of intel that was marked in big red letters across the front TOP SECRET! If you watch the one hour Iwo Jima show that Digital Ranch did a few years ago-the anti flash cream was covered and discussed-this was one of the few ALL color Iwo shows where you ONLY see footage of Iwo Jima and not the same old mixed up news reels of Tarawa and Saipan and Iwo and Peleliu-all supposedly Iwo-yet clearly NOT. From what I can tell from the raw arcival footage-both 4th and 5th MARDIV wore the anti flash cream-which was rubbed off and gone by the end of the first day of the landings on Iwo.
The first 2 US divisions to arrive in Australia in 1942 were the ones on the way to the Philippines. They were a big deal because Australia's troops were overseas.
I think America's over-emphasis on carrier battlegroups has become something of an Achilles heel much as the British faith in the Grand Fleet was an Achilles heel before WW1. While the carriers float the American public feels invincible, which has done a lot to justify their cost, but it also means that should the carrier fleet take any losses will be a massive blow to morale, both civilian and military. This presents a significant advantage, particularly to China, because they can spend resources far in excess of the equivalent cost of the carriers themselves in anti-carrier capabilities. This is to say that the American carrier program costs (I believe) around 50billion a year, which is a considerable sum in and of itself, but the Chinese can actually spend in excess of that 50billion a year because America is so reliant on the carriers in so many ways that their loss would do more damage to America's ability to fight a war than the (already high) price of the carriers would suggest. To Wit: While submarines and airpower are often framed as technological change which reduced the relative importance of battleships, from another perspective it was simply having a diverse toolbox not reliant on a single way of conducting war at sea that put America in a position much stronger than the Japanese anticipated in 1942. It wasn't so much that America had capitalized on advances in technology better than their opponents, it was that sinking the American battlefleet at pearl harbour did not have the deleterious affect it would have had if America hadn't also had submarines and aircraft carriers as options for conducting a war in the pacific. If the Japanese had focused on eliminating American carriers in December 1941 while leaving American battleships largely unscathed instead of the reverse, America would have found a way to fight the war in the pacific with battleships instead of carriers. Looking at the USN today it's difficult to conclude that America has that same robustness. Should American carriers be knocked out or otherwise mitigated, it's not clear that America has other options to conduct a war at sea in the Western Pacific. America's submarine strength is considerable, but is it enough to fight a war at sea without the carriers? If not then from the Chinese perspective focusing on defeating just the carriers and nothing else mitigates ALL of America's warfighting capability in Asia. While the carriers might only cost 50b a year, upon them rests the effectiveness of entire US defence budget in so far as a war in east asia is concerned. It seems to me that what America needs to guarantee the success of plan A (a carrier based war) what America needs is a solid plan B to shift at least some of a potential opponents resources away from anti-carrier capabilities. For example if America restarted it's battleship program, the battleships might not be a war winning weapon, but at least it would give Chinese military planners something else to think about, which would take some of the heat off the carriers. "Do not fight too long with a single enemy lest you teach him your way of war" - Napoleon.
The US Navy had good submarines at the beginning of the Pacific War. Armed with the terrible mk14 torpedo. Similarly American surface ship and aircraft torpedoes were crap. It took years to remedy that
An idea for a future video would be, why does the US military have this obsession having the most sophisticated weapons when the biggest lesson to be had from WW2 (and Ukraine) was whoever can bring the biggest force will be the winner. As the saying goes "Quantity has a Quality all its own.
So on point. I've been saying for a few years that our military resembles the WW2 Wehrmacht. Some of the best equipment, but the lack of numbers is a problem. The Allies had some amazing equipment also, so my post isn't 100% correct.
@@renorailfanning5465what are you talking about? The worlds largest Airforce is the US Airforces. The second largest airforce is the US Navy. We have a whole lot of firepower. Quality ones too.
Logistics. That is why. US has to travel across the world to fight. That means every man, or vehicle needs to hit above its weight. Technology is the only way to achieve this. We call it force multipliers. Strength in numbers does have its own quality. However without tactics or technology you would be like how Russia is today. Russia can't even invade its own neighbor who is like 15 times weaker. They are such a bad example of anything anyone should do. Only thing that war shows is how important logistics is. Then how effective mines and fire support are.
War plan orange would have seen the entire usn combined fleet attritted by dd and ca attacks with long lance and then finished off.. end of.. Their plan vs the RN would have been even more hilarious ....
Something very interesting there's a book called how to hide an empire and it talks a bit about this.... American soldiers said to the Filipinos we have liberated your country and they looked at the soldiers really weird because they're like we're Americans this is American territory
I think they said that because if it wasnt for the war, the Philippines would have been granted independence. Then, it was given just a year after the end of wwII in July 1, 1946.
@@markborromeo1001 March 9, 2024 - I agree with you. The Philippines were working towards independence from the U.S. for decades. Some Filipinos may have considered themselves American, but a lot of them wanted to be free of American rule.
@@markborromeo1001THE ARGUMENT IS IF THE PHILIPPINES WAS GIVEN INDEPENDENCE EARLIER IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO AVOID BEING INVADED OR WOULD'VE MOUNTED A MORE EFFECTIVE DEFENSE WITH MORE COMPETENT COMMANDERS
Okay, can you imagine today if the US lost the Philippines today? The we want "instant gratification now" generation would be trolling the military generals and President and want them all to resign, be charged, convicted and jailed. 😂 On the bright side, those folks would vote for Cappy to be the new president and Allied Supreme Commander! Go Cappy!
Interesting that the war plan orange included Japanese American internment decades before it happened, showing the plans were premeditated vs a kneejerk reaction. Wondering what the current war plans are regarding millions of Chinese Americans on the west coast.
Not entirely silly question. In a war against the CCP, there would be a serious issue re: CCP members, of whom there'd be millions. Eg. Campuses. They already harass other Han Chinese like Taiwanese.
Old stuff that can be read in Wikipedia Cappy😂. Also please make videos about stuff such as the arsenal & gear used by Army Special Forces operators in the future? 🤔 From Kalashnikov rifles to Javelin anti-tank missiles.
March 9, 2024 - I have serious concerns about the militaries of the Western democracies. They seem to be more interested in DEI , and politics than in facing real threats like China. In my opinion, Russia has always been a second rate military power but armed with nuclear weapons. The European NATO members wouldn't have to be running around like scared chickens. If they had maintained strong militaries. It's interesting how Holland sold its tanks, and now suddenly realizes that they need them. I have noted that historically, powerful militaries have always been complacent and arrogant in their world views. The U.S. military establishment seems to be more interested in service loyalty, their careers, and politics. Than they do about protecting their country. Billions of dollars are wasted on weapon systems that are eventually cancelled, and no one is held responsible. "What's a few billion here or there, as long as I can retire with a good pension?"
With the mass protest in the west for terrorist groups such as Hamas I wonder if those supporters will be thrown in camps if WW3 breaks out. One things for certain with the internet it would be vastly easy to find who the Palestine supporters are just based on what they post online.
This is an example of fighting the same way as your last war and arrogance on our militaries leadership . Our fighting forces need to be trained in unconventional warfare and the use of teaching others or to be a guerilla force because there may very well be a time when that needs to be done .
FDR decided to be Germany first even though Japan had started fighting in China way before Germany's actions and FDR made embargos on products like oil , rubber and steel to Japan and they let him know that if he continued there would be repercussions . FDR ignored all the signs and threats and decided stopping Hitler was more important than beefing up our situation in the Pacific . So who attacked the US first ?
It’s not our responsibility because another countries government is corrupt also i dont care about the drug demand i dont do drugs not everybody does drugs so its certainly not my responsibility figure it out in your own country or some where else America’s got is own problems going on we don’t have time for anybody else i dont care i dont care
@@TaskPurpose1stSquad ok perfect. Can't wait to hear the next propaganda episode, what is Russia running out of this time I wonder? Hey maybe you can comment on the Abrams dominant performance on the battlefield! Ya do that one Cappy!
I've been very up front about my support of Ukraine since the war started. I'm aware that the reality on the ground is that Russia is advancing, they might even end up occupying all of Ukraine if France or an ally doesn't send troops in Ukraine which they're claiming they will do if the advances continue. I don't deny the situation is turning in Russia's favor as much as I wish it were not. several abrams tanks were destroyed, they might all get knocked out. The video I'm creating is going to reflect the reality of the situation on the ground in Ukraine. @@hannibalwantsahuggrande3433
One thing about Mahan's doctrine that I think may not be fully recognized here would be the focus on controlling the sea to control the land. If you go through probably his most notable work, Influence of Sea Power Upon History (not a bad price as part of a Kindle book with his complete works), he posits less that a single decisive action is necessary to support naval supremacy, but that the control of the sea allows for lines of communication to ferry troops, supplies, etc. to a certain location and deny that same transportation to the enemy, which thereby eventually lets the faction controlling the sea take control. It was primarily focused on lands not contiguous to the belligerents' landmasses (mostly on colonial battles between Britain and France), but could definitely be seen as relevant to the Pacific theater of WWII or Taiwan today, where either faction would need continuous inflow of supplies to control islands. He made a point to say that certain tactics he covered wouldn't be relevant later on (likely to include massed fleets necessarily meeting all at once, which wouldn't be as clear-cut beneficial in today's world of missiles, air power, submarines, etc.), but that by focusing on the sea first, one faction could enable their own maritime transportation and deny that to their enemy, effectively starving them of necessities on their islands until enough of an amphibious force was developed to basically steamroll the island. I would think this isn't too far off from the Pacific theater, considering the US saw its biggest successes after significantly reducing Japanese naval power and allowing amphibious landings in the island hopping campaign (and leaving some islands in the withering-on-the-vine approach), and could even be seen as relevant in the Atlantic theater of WWII where so much depended on the effectiveness of German U-Boat efforts. Even today, I would expect that same logic to hold in the event of a US-China war over Taiwan, where either side would only be able to control that (or other nearby) islands long-term by establishing naval dominance in the area, proximity of forces and supporting bases being relevant (hence pre-positioning of stocks).
Much love for the videos and sorry about the wall of text, I've just been reading Mahan lately and that stuck out to me. He definitely knew he was in the midst of changing times when he wrote a lot of his stuff; he mentioned that a lot of the tactics from the age of sail were likely going to become obsolete since ironclad ships were being developed. Probably one of the most interesting details I found was that he wrote that at the time of his writing, American maritime culture seemed to have degraded since the post-colonial era because the Louisiana purchase gave the US a breadbasket that made it less reliant on foreign trade, but that America might go back to its maritime roots a little more significantly once work was completed on some obscure canal being constructed through Central America. Not necessarily prescient, but absolutely observant.
Thanks for your comment building upon what cappy mentioned. Mahan seemed like a very intelligent, forward thinking tactician even though I've seen him touted as someone who was stuck in the past during his time. Which seems to be almost the opposite.
Great video! History is always fascinating to look at and compare to the present. Sometimes it looks like "Same s*** different day".
Confederate general Forrest explained how to win battles:
"Get there firstest with the mostest"
March 9, 2024 - Exactly! 👍👍😊One of my all time favorite military saying since hearing decades ago. Actually.. I didn't remember who actually said it.
They have to stop the waste from being killed in order to come for us.
This was a topic with which I am more than merely conversant. As a former naval officer, one of my jobs as a became more senior was to update the existing Oplan for war with the old Soviet Union. After I left active service, I worked doing war gaming for the navy; all of this was for the Pacific Fleet. Although this video was not your best work, it is broadly accurate. I must say that the forces in the Pacific were flexible and adapted well to the changing circumstances. In fact, the longer the war went on the more flexible and innovative they became. The old expression 'improvise, adapt, and overcome' fits the WW II Pacific fleet and its Army team mates very well. Pre-war war gaming formed a solid basis for winning that war.
War plan orange was also not followed by the USAFFE in the Philippines after Pearl Harbour. The General did not strike Taiwan where the Japanese landing force was situated. Lots of aircrafts lost sitting in the Philippine airfields and that's why Manila fell really quick. Then, the Death March.
Thanks to MacAurther before he ran away.
MacArthur dropped the ball by waiting until after lunch to launch an attack. The Japanese hit during lunch time and destroyed most of the aircraft on the ground. This was 1 day after Pearl Harbour.
This is assuming Taiwan was within reach regarding logistics of fuel, armaments, and knowledge beforehand of the attacks. Pearl Harbor was not a singular attack from the Japanese perspective. It was multi-pronged and calculated to hit all of the colonial powers at once at the same time within the SE Pacific to render the most damage possible before they could react. They were well aware that they would not win a projected war and made a calculated risk to win a negotiated peace with the powers being more focused on Europe. Their failure was underestimating US pride and assuming the country was too decadent to fight a drawn out war of attrition.
@@jon00769 -- yes but MacAuther did not follow the defence plan so lost the Philippines quickly then ran away.
Loving the frequent uploads!
Maybe comprehensive computer simulation exercises could give us a vague idea of how effective our defenses are at stopping all potential threats. Maybe we also need to beef up our defenses, just for good measure. We also need to think hard about any new kinds of attacks against our navy there are that we haven't anticipated yet.
Why were you never an officer, Cappy? Whom did you rub the wrong way? 😂
gotta go to school to be an officer. They dont allow you to eat crayons or ground pound nearly as much when you have to study for 2 years.
First Seargents and Seargent Majors get paid just as much as all but the highest ranking officers (Colnel or above). Officer rank requires a college degree and either OCS or West Point. Many enlisted men choose to stay in enlisted ranks despite having the necessary college degrees.
Maybe it's who he didn't rub the ~right~ way. _wink_
I promise I would have made a terrible officer I didn’t want the responsibility . It’s also more lonely of a position I liked being one of the guys. When I was 19 I didn’t care about the strategy or logistics side of the military I stupidly thought it was lame back then . I was more interested in explosions and kicking in doors. Now that my knees and back are done I’ve gotten more interested in the arm chair General role
bro you gotta mention this channel on your main. if you have I didnt even notice and i watch all your videos. so glad i found this second channel with more content.
Very insightful & easy to follow summary; Thank you!
For me, this topic hits close to home.
As a Baby Boomer, I grew up listening closely to war stories from my father and his Greatest Generation friends.
During WW2, my teenaged father served on a USN oil tanker (the USS Cache)…throughout the Pacific Theater.
Here we are many decades later, and Thanks to the rising existential threat China poses to our nation today…once again all of those “little-known” island chains across the massive Pacific Ocean…are suddenly of critical importance again to our national security.
It's the Pentagon's job to make plans in case of war. For instance the first part of 'Desert Shield', in 1990, was based on NATO plans incase the Soviet Union made an attack through Iraq towards Saudi Arabia.
I could see a war with China evolving along similar lines. While the range of weapons, aircraft and ships have increased markedly since 1945 land based infrastructure is still essential. Operation Causeway was a canceled plan to invade and liberate Formosa (Modern Taiwan) from the Japanese, there was also a 4 day air battle over the island using the Marianas as a staging area. I feel like our current plan is War Plan OrangeX.
As you hinted at, all plans need to be revised when the technology advances. For instance, THE BOMB and how it influenced Japan's decision to "give up".
The US was thinking about fighting japan WELL before 1911. Its a big part of what the Great White Fleet was.
Japan was an ally during WW1
@@Charles-k9g5y So was Brittan. We still had plans to fight them in the 20's and 30's.
cappy keep hitting it off lately
"Following World War II, Fleet Admiral Chester Nimitz famously remarked that rigorous and repeated Naval War College war gaming had ensured “nothing that happened during the war was a surprise . . . except the kamikaze tactics.”3 It is important to recall, however, that Nimitz was referring to surprises at the high operational and strategic levels."
-War Gaming Must Get Red Right
An expert in-house adversary is a powerful tool for the fleet.
By Captain Dale C. Rielage, U.S. Navy
Video games. Prepare for a possible(?) war with alien life forms that haven’t been confirmed to exist yet.
“No plan survives contact with the enemy “-attributed to Helmut von Moltke, the Elder
Thoughts on today and near future. Sumbarines. Need a lot more submarines, even if at the expense of other naval assets.
It doesn't matter what happens to our carriers or other surface combatants, because our submarines are gonna be the ones that win out future naval battles
I want to learn more about geography. Is Vietnam part of the Americas or Asia? A neighbour of China or the USA?
What happens if the PLA takes Manila first, then go north to flank the prepositioned Taiwanese and Japanese defenses?
Submarines gave Britain huge headaches in the 1st world war, so I'm surprised that they weren't given a bigger role in the war plan
I think they wanted 'fleet subs' that could keep up with the fleet (30knots ish), that wasn't available at the time.
I was curious about the white face paint and found this on a forum. Enjoy
THAT is Anti Flash Cream worn by those in the first waves. You see it on engineers clearing mine fields on the beach on the first day-you see it worn by those Marines going in-first wave-this was ONLY done for the Iwo operation. And it is wider spread than you may think or have seen. I have spent a few years logging footage in the film footage archives and was surprized at how many Marines wore this anti flash cream. The Japanese had anchored underwater fuel barrells that they were going to set off as the Marines came in-for what ever reason they were not set off... One of the U.S. counter measures was to have those Marines going in on the first wave wear this anti flash cream to protect their faces from burns that might occur when and if these barrells exploded and sent gysers of flame shooting up from the floating barrells. This is fact and not some silly story that I made up for lack of something to do:) If you can find a copy of the 5th Amphibious Corps Enemy Situation Report-Iwo Jima (which I had an ORIGINAL copy of and offered to Eastwood's company Malpaso-at no chrage-to help them with their production of FLAGS-yet they chose NOT to take advantage of:) you'd see that this was one of the many surprizes that the Japanese had in store for the Marines on Iwo Jima-the entire report is about 2.5 inches thick and laden with all sorts of intel that was marked in big red letters across the front TOP SECRET! If you watch the one hour Iwo Jima show that Digital Ranch did a few years ago-the anti flash cream was covered and discussed-this was one of the few ALL color Iwo shows where you ONLY see footage of Iwo Jima and not the same old mixed up news reels of Tarawa and Saipan and Iwo and Peleliu-all supposedly Iwo-yet clearly NOT. From what I can tell from the raw arcival footage-both 4th and 5th MARDIV wore the anti flash cream-which was rubbed off and gone by the end of the first day of the landings on Iwo.
Plans are necessary for ops to be successful.I dunno about US military plans.You should feature them,if thats ok.
I know you are forcing me to comment w/the 1980's version of Mahan... he wasn't into punk or disco
Now take an educated guess about the war plan for a fight against China.
Wow the MLOK on the AR caught me off guard
5:31 1980's, you mean 1880's?
Yes I misspoke Woopsie thanks for catching that
The first 2 US divisions to arrive in Australia in 1942 were the ones on the way to the Philippines.
They were a big deal because Australia's troops were overseas.
I think America's over-emphasis on carrier battlegroups has become something of an Achilles heel much as the British faith in the Grand Fleet was an Achilles heel before WW1. While the carriers float the American public feels invincible, which has done a lot to justify their cost, but it also means that should the carrier fleet take any losses will be a massive blow to morale, both civilian and military. This presents a significant advantage, particularly to China, because they can spend resources far in excess of the equivalent cost of the carriers themselves in anti-carrier capabilities. This is to say that the American carrier program costs (I believe) around 50billion a year, which is a considerable sum in and of itself, but the Chinese can actually spend in excess of that 50billion a year because America is so reliant on the carriers in so many ways that their loss would do more damage to America's ability to fight a war than the (already high) price of the carriers would suggest.
To Wit: While submarines and airpower are often framed as technological change which reduced the relative importance of battleships, from another perspective it was simply having a diverse toolbox not reliant on a single way of conducting war at sea that put America in a position much stronger than the Japanese anticipated in 1942. It wasn't so much that America had capitalized on advances in technology better than their opponents, it was that sinking the American battlefleet at pearl harbour did not have the deleterious affect it would have had if America hadn't also had submarines and aircraft carriers as options for conducting a war in the pacific. If the Japanese had focused on eliminating American carriers in December 1941 while leaving American battleships largely unscathed instead of the reverse, America would have found a way to fight the war in the pacific with battleships instead of carriers.
Looking at the USN today it's difficult to conclude that America has that same robustness. Should American carriers be knocked out or otherwise mitigated, it's not clear that America has other options to conduct a war at sea in the Western Pacific. America's submarine strength is considerable, but is it enough to fight a war at sea without the carriers? If not then from the Chinese perspective focusing on defeating just the carriers and nothing else mitigates ALL of America's warfighting capability in Asia. While the carriers might only cost 50b a year, upon them rests the effectiveness of entire US defence budget in so far as a war in east asia is concerned.
It seems to me that what America needs to guarantee the success of plan A (a carrier based war) what America needs is a solid plan B to shift at least some of a potential opponents resources away from anti-carrier capabilities. For example if America restarted it's battleship program, the battleships might not be a war winning weapon, but at least it would give Chinese military planners something else to think about, which would take some of the heat off the carriers.
"Do not fight too long with a single enemy lest you teach him your way of war" - Napoleon.
The US Navy had good submarines at the beginning of the Pacific War. Armed with the terrible mk14 torpedo. Similarly American surface ship and aircraft torpedoes were crap. It took years to remedy that
An idea for a future video would be, why does the US military have this obsession having the most sophisticated weapons when the biggest lesson to be had from WW2 (and Ukraine) was whoever can bring the biggest force will be the winner. As the saying goes "Quantity has a Quality all its own.
interesting point yeah that would make for a good video in the future. there's definitely something to be said about having more more more
@@TaskPurpose1stSquad More, More, More... that's what my ex-wife said. She may have won that one too.
So on point. I've been saying for a few years that our military resembles the WW2 Wehrmacht. Some of the best equipment, but the lack of numbers is a problem. The Allies had some amazing equipment also, so my post isn't 100% correct.
@@renorailfanning5465what are you talking about? The worlds largest Airforce is the US Airforces. The second largest airforce is the US Navy. We have a whole lot of firepower. Quality ones too.
Logistics. That is why.
US has to travel across the world to fight.
That means every man, or vehicle needs to hit above its weight. Technology is the only way to achieve this. We call it force multipliers.
Strength in numbers does have its own quality. However without tactics or technology you would be like how Russia is today.
Russia can't even invade its own neighbor who is like 15 times weaker. They are such a bad example of anything anyone should do.
Only thing that war shows is how important logistics is. Then how effective mines and fire support are.
Please bring some India and Chinese fore coming war videos
A war plan orange.
Floating drydocks would limit reliance on hawaii
War plan orange would have seen the entire usn combined fleet attritted by dd and ca attacks with long lance and then finished off.. end of..
Their plan vs the RN would have been even more hilarious ....
DOD considers: if the state of New Mexico goes rogue, a naval treatise on concept and strategy.
Something very interesting there's a book called how to hide an empire and it talks a bit about this.... American soldiers said to the Filipinos we have liberated your country and they looked at the soldiers really weird because they're like we're Americans this is American territory
I think they said that because if it wasnt for the war, the Philippines would have been granted independence. Then, it was given just a year after the end of wwII in July 1, 1946.
@@markborromeo1001 March 9, 2024 - I agree with you. The Philippines were working towards independence from the U.S. for decades. Some Filipinos may have considered themselves American, but a lot of them wanted to be free of American rule.
@@SabastianMoranwin-win
@@markborromeo1001THE ARGUMENT IS IF THE PHILIPPINES WAS GIVEN INDEPENDENCE EARLIER IT MIGHT HAVE BEEN ABLE TO AVOID BEING INVADED OR WOULD'VE MOUNTED A MORE EFFECTIVE DEFENSE WITH MORE COMPETENT COMMANDERS
The RN of the time had carrier groups of often 3 ships flying off full strikes.. duh
Okay, can you imagine today if the US lost the Philippines today? The we want "instant gratification now" generation would be trolling the military generals and President and want them all to resign, be charged, convicted and jailed. 😂 On the bright side, those folks would vote for Cappy to be the new president and Allied Supreme Commander! Go Cappy!
🇺🇸🇯🇵
Interesting that the war plan orange included Japanese American internment decades before it happened, showing the plans were premeditated vs a kneejerk reaction. Wondering what the current war plans are regarding millions of Chinese Americans on the west coast.
Not entirely silly question. In a war against the CCP, there would be a serious issue re: CCP members, of whom there'd be millions. Eg. Campuses.
They already harass other Han Chinese like Taiwanese.
Old stuff that can be read in Wikipedia Cappy😂.
Also please make videos about stuff such as the arsenal & gear used by Army Special Forces operators in the future? 🤔 From Kalashnikov rifles to Javelin anti-tank missiles.
I'll cover some special forces stuff soon working on a CIA video
@@TaskPurpose1stSquad oh ok got it. Plus hope for stuff used by CIA SAC SOG operators with GRS members.
I would have never found this on Wikipedia. Thank you for expanding my knowledge, Cappy!
Wait why are we trying to defeat japan again
Wish for video of how Murica 🇺🇲 deal with hostile alien invaders 👾👽?🥺 Cause last year 2023 US gov admits aliens do exists.😂
we would clap dem alien cheeks brah
@@TaskPurpose1stSquad totally 😂🤣, or commit war of destruction WH40K style. XD
Most likely the Federal government will ship them around the US to shift Congressional districts. Oh wait wrong hostile aliens.
@@pyeitme508impossible! Y'all too corrupted by chaos for that ;)
Helldivers 2 is secretly a military training program.
March 9, 2024 - I have serious concerns about the militaries of the Western democracies. They seem to be more interested in DEI , and politics than in facing real threats like China. In my opinion, Russia has always been a second rate military power but armed with nuclear weapons. The European NATO members wouldn't have to be running around like scared chickens. If they had maintained strong militaries. It's interesting how Holland sold its tanks, and now suddenly realizes that they need them. I have noted that historically, powerful militaries have always been complacent and arrogant in their world views. The U.S. military establishment seems to be more interested in service loyalty, their careers, and politics. Than they do about protecting their country. Billions of dollars are wasted on weapon systems that are eventually cancelled, and no one is held responsible. "What's a few billion here or there, as long as I can retire with a good pension?"
The fact that the US planned to invade Brazil if they didn't joined the Allies doesn't surprise me anymore. Was that The Green Plan ? 😂
While considering them a major ally, the americans do love to talk about defeating japan in ww2 huh
Japan?
🇺🇸
Di you say Japan
With the mass protest in the west for terrorist groups such as Hamas I wonder if those supporters will be thrown in camps if WW3 breaks out. One things for certain with the internet it would be vastly easy to find who the Palestine supporters are just based on what they post online.
wouldn't fly today. legal precedent against internment
Good idea.
@@Charles-pf7zyWON'T CONGRESS PASS A LAW TO COUNTER THAT, IN TIMES OF WAR?
Blockades are always a solid strategy if they can work
What about war plan rainbow 🌈? Nimitz's plan that actually let the pole enter the hole 🤭
This is an example of fighting the same way as your last war and arrogance on our militaries leadership . Our fighting forces need to be trained in unconventional warfare and the use of teaching others or to be a guerilla force because there may very well be a time when that needs to be done .
There's been more of that than conventional warfare for decades.
FDR decided to be Germany first even though Japan had started fighting in China way before Germany's actions and FDR made embargos on products like oil , rubber and steel to Japan and they let him know that if he continued there would be repercussions . FDR ignored all the signs and threats and decided stopping Hitler was more important than beefing up our situation in the Pacific . So who attacked the US first ?
It’s not our responsibility because another countries government is corrupt also i dont care about the drug demand i dont do drugs not everybody does drugs so its certainly not my responsibility figure it out in your own country or some where else America’s got is own problems going on we don’t have time for anybody else i dont care i dont care
Hey Cappy, talk nore about how Ukraine is dominating the battlefield.....
I have a new video coming out next week about Russia's offensive sounds like you'll love it
@@TaskPurpose1stSquad Perhaps my sarcasm was missed in translation....
nope I read you Lima Charlie@@hannibalwantsahuggrande3433
@@TaskPurpose1stSquad ok perfect. Can't wait to hear the next propaganda episode, what is Russia running out of this time I wonder? Hey maybe you can comment on the Abrams dominant performance on the battlefield! Ya do that one Cappy!
I've been very up front about my support of Ukraine since the war started. I'm aware that the reality on the ground is that Russia is advancing, they might even end up occupying all of Ukraine if France or an ally doesn't send troops in Ukraine which they're claiming they will do if the advances continue. I don't deny the situation is turning in Russia's favor as much as I wish it were not. several abrams tanks were destroyed, they might all get knocked out. The video I'm creating is going to reflect the reality of the situation on the ground in Ukraine. @@hannibalwantsahuggrande3433
Second
If US 1v1 Japan, US would’ve lost
I dunno bro we had double their population and more than double their industrial output
Nuclear Bombs
@@Dionaea_floridensis idk bro Japans main forces was fighting in China. US had Australia, Canada, Philippines and the UK helping them all the way.
Ah yes love a youtube video to read the Wikipedia page to me. 😒