Why did Japan lose World War II? The 4 Keys to Your Defeat
Вставка
- Опубліковано 11 чер 2024
- Did Japan have any chance of winning World War II against the United States? What were your biggest mistakes? When and why did the beginning of the end begin for them? Which battles were most decisive and what mistakes did Japan make in them?
In this fascinating video, we explore in detail the reasons behind Japan's defeat in World War II. Immerse yourself in the military and political history of Japan during this crucial period and discover the reasons that led to the decline of the Japanese Empire.
👉👉Do you want to support the channel? You just have to watch another video. This will help You Tube to recommend them more to new users.
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
🔴📣Other videos of interest:
- ✅ The Battles for the Most Important Islands in the Pacific | Complete series: • The Battles for the Mo...
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
💲Supports the channel:
🟠Support the channel by becoming a member, and enjoy exclusive benefits!
/ @waracademy128
Paypal: www.paypal.com/paypalme/quien...
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
🦅 Social networks
Twitter: / belicasque
/ historiasbelicasoficial
00:00 Japan Expansion
00:57 1º Error: Aircraft Carrier
02:40 2º Mistake: Many Fronts
04:50 3ºMidway
07:13 4º Battle of the Philippine Sea
08:30 Final considerations - Розваги
Here is something to consider. In ALL of the territories seized by Imperial Japan there was not a single industrial center worth talking about. There were resources there, but no factories. The few that were there were destroyed by the retreating Dutch, British and American forces before the Japanese got there. The only real industrial centers in the Japanese Empire were in Japan itself. Here’s something else to think about. When the Pacific War broke out the Americans, British, Dutch and Australian merchant fleet stopped transporting manufactured goods and raw materials to Japan. About 30% of Shipping to and from Japan ceased altogether. You simply cannot fight a war this way, never mind winning it.
So the British/Commonwealth Army that fought the Japanese Army to a standstill and all the other British and Allied navies were not major enough to be mentioned?
Not really. The Brit’s outnumbered the Japanese 3 to 1 and surrendered. China already had a large part of the country and couldn’t expel the Japanese. The issue of the factories was worse for Japan. The factories weren’t setup for mass production by an untrained workforce. They were more specialized and thus couldn’t keep up with the American Industrial Complex.
USA 😂Technology beat Japan
There was industry in Manchuria.
Two words: No Oil.
The refusal of the Japanese Army and Navy to cooperate, stemming from centuries of culture defined by internal political competitiveness, cost them as badly as any of the issues you cite here, though not easily illustratable in any single incident.
This was something I was thinking of; I know this lead to idiocy like destroyer crews shoving stuff they were meant to be delivering to isolated soldiers off the decks of their ships to use the guns more effectively if attacked and then "delivering" stuff the same way and both sides claiming the other one is responsible for stopping USAF attacks on the Japanese mainland.
Two words: No Oil.
Yeah, you're right. Ridiculous as it sounds, Japan started war on the USA simply to avoid internal war between IJA (Imperial Japanese Army) and IJN (Imperial Japanese Navy). It's as simple as that.
@@penultimateh766 The Netherlands East Indies had oil (Indonesia is a major oil producer). That oil inustry was in an early stage of development,but the Japanese lacked the means of eploiting it. They were more concerned with looting the food production, and occupation forces were largely intent on bleeding southeastern Asia for foodstuffs.
What centuries? Stop spreading BS. IJN wasn't established until 1868, before Meiji Restoration Japan had no navy, there was no "centuries of culture", by WW2's time it was 70 at the most. The problem between IJN and IJA stems from Japan back then was basically a military dictatorship and navy and army was fighting for the control of their government. There's no "competitiveness", it's pure power grab.
The decimation of the Japanese merchant marine fleet by American submarines drastically reduced the supply of petroleum and food to the Island nation.
True; failing to damage the submarine base at Pearl Harbor was another significant mistake. They completely ignored it in the December 7 attack.
And also the contribution made by Dutch submarines.
Also u have to admitt, that at the beginning, the lose of the bases at the Philippines and Marianas was bad for them because of the long time to reach their zone. Also the Mark 14 torpedo did suck @@jacksons1010
@@manfred101964 The Mk.14 did suck, but it also sank a fair number of Japanese ships even in 1942.
Two words: No Oil.
Amateurs talk strategy; Professionals talk logistics.
There was insane reasoning behind Pearl harbor. The US provided 90% of oil to Japan. After the incursions into China, the US started the oil embargo. So their mentality was "if we bomb Pearl Harbor, they'll give us the oil again!".
You completely missed the United States submarine campaign. All the iron from China and Korea, oil from Indonesia was cut off from mainland Japan. It was so bad Japans battleships had to go to Singapore to get fuel. Japan failed to develop meaningful anti submarine warfare tactics to adequatly protect its merchant fleet. It also could not replace merchant fleet losses. By 1945 there was almost nothing left floating. Japanese industries were starving for raw materials.
Still a 👍 good video though keep up the good work.
Agreed. The Imperial Japanese Navy never organized a convoy system. American submariners trained to fight against convoys, but they never had to face any.
@@TheKulu42 there was small convoys. But ASW escorts were few and far between. This results in multiple kills for one Submarine once the American torpedo problem is solved. A large portion of the merchant marine available to Japan in the Pacific was German and Italian. Those ships returned home in 1939. Japan had a transport shortage even with those ships. It was worse when they left. So in 1939 to 1941 they had a problem and that was before ships started sinking. So every load of cargo was precious. Japan's government was military dominated so capital ship production was a priority. Not merchant ships or ASW escorts even destroyers built were to escort the carriers. Many Heavy cruisers went into battle without a proper destroyer screen. There was also a lack of ASW air patrol and coordination with merchant traffic as well. This was partly due to Japanese Army and Navy air force issues. Who does what where when. And on top of it all the Japanese Army commanded some of the merchant marine. The Japanese Navy didn't like that.
A major part in Japan's defeat that it lagged behind in technology and electronics. They could not increase capacity to keep up with demand. This meant that any significant increase in the production of ships, planes and other things was curtailed. That and the increasing lack of resources doomed Japan
Japan, if I remember correctly, produced less than 4% of everything produced in WW2, The US produced over 40%. Even if you consider that the US only delegated `15% of their output to the Pacific until Germany was defeated, that's still producing 50% more than Japan was putting out.
@@frednoneThis is the main reason. industry/oil/metal. Thats all it boils down to, everything else that anyone mentions is trivial and second. So it is amazing Japan even lasted that long and even inflicted heavy defeats against the allies.
If Japan had even 25% of our oil and steel the war would have ended very differently. Not to an exaggerated point like that in the book TMTHC but a ceasefire or stalemate if Japan were able to produce enough replacements of ships and planes. Tanks were not very important in the Pacific as its impossible to have "nice" tanks like in the steppes of the eastern front. Even tin can tanks worker well against inept 0:54 chinese infantry
Two words: No Oil.
@@penultimateh766the IJN had plenty of oil in 1942.
The US had its own technology issues. Junk torpedos. Lack of armor piercing bombs. Lack of fleet oilers.
The IJN had better night fighting skills and the long lance torpedo.
The IJN blew it at Midway. That is what doomed Japan.
@@f430ferrari5 Which is why they didn't start losing until MID 1942...
Training doctrine was also a consideration. The Japanese Navy always kept its best pilots. mechanics and ground crews on their individual carriers. Japanese sailors and pilots received basics in their initial training and the rest was learned on their ships. For an expert pilot or aircrew to ne sent back to be an instructor was seen as a huge demotion. Whereas, an American pilot or aircrew member who showed abilities that exceeded standards were usually sent back to the states as an instructor with the understanding they would eventually be returned to duty to hone their skills and learn new techniques and new equipment.
Once again, this baffles me. In a culture with such emphasis on training, why wouldn't you take the pilots and crews you've spent millions of yen training back to the schools to teach what they 've learned? That just seems like basic logic to me.
@@GrayNeko Japanese operations had a rigidity in the way it was set up, whereas the USN showed some flexibility.
A good example what the IJN did after the Battle of the Coral Sea. The Shokaku was badly damaged during the battle, but it's airwings were still largely intact. The Zuikaku was relatively undamaged but its airwing was destroyed.
The logical thing to do, would have been to assign Shokaku's airwing to Zuikako, thus giving them another carrier to add to the operation. But the IJN leadership never considered this as an option.
On the case of the Yorktown. As a part of Nimitz's orders to have it seaworthy in three days, the airwings were cobbled together from the airwings of the Satatoga (in drydock) and whatever else they could find around Pearl.
As far as returning experienced pilots back as instructors. to the frontline pilots, such duty was considered a demotion or punishment.
Fuel was also in short supply. so the training units made do with what they got. so trainees barely had the basics down before they were sent on to specialized training or assignment to the fleet.
Yep and this helps overall effort because we are one big team and in the end it makes it easier for everyone and also shows the value of life.
First of all, while the Pacific Theater of WWII may be less studied by European historians, it certainly isn't similarly neglected by American historians. IMO the main reason Japan lost and could never have won was the vast industrial power of the US. Yamamoto knew this which is why he told the Japanese authorities he could run wild in the Pacific for a year but after that he could guarantee anything. The fact that he missed the American carriers at Pearl Harbor merely hastened the inevitable.
Yup, failure to listen to the most informed admiral they had was mistake #1
@@mikedearing6352 You got that right. Oops! I meant to say "couldn't" guarantee anything.
Great analysis, I think you absolutely nailed it on the top reasons, you even mentioned the smaller ones such as coordination problems between the army and the navy.
Before the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor, Admiral Yamamoto predicted that Japan would "win victory upon victory" in the first 6 to 12 months of war, but after that he had "no expectation of success." He predicted the nearly unlimited resources and industrial capacity of the United States would eventually overwhelm Japan's ability to win.
There were in reality many factors which led to Japan's defeat,. But, without question, that industrial capacity with its incredible production of ships, airplanes, submarines and other weapons of all types, ensured Japan's ultimate defeat. The weapons, the manpower, the training and the logistical support provided to the American military and its allies made all the difference in the Pacific War.
Nice video segments. I think the main factor was simply geography. The Pacific Ocean is vast and the islands are generally small, which means it was hard to garrison large troop concentrations anywhere but the Phillipines. Next is the factor you touched upon but it was the one that gave the US a crucial advantage, code-breaking. Third, you also mentioned the economy, but the sheer size of the two nations' economies was so disparate, that one the US entered the war the outcome was assured, only the time to victory was uncertain.
In 1940 Congress passed the “Two Ocean Bill”. It takes time to build the Iowa Class battleships & the Essex Class carriers. By 1943 1944 the USN was getting an overwhelming number of ships The IJN could not match the US.
I would argue that the Battle of Leyte Gulf was the last great Hurrah of the IJN, but otherwise I think you hit the main points.
Very good video
I would include their massive overreaction to the Doolittle Raid. It compelled them to tremendously expand their defense perimeter, spreading their already overstretched resources even thinner and leading to their attack on Midway.
As important as Midway was, I think that calling it THE turning point is an overstatement. It certainly allowed the US to take some initiative in invading Guadalcanal, but it took 3 months of hard fighting and Japanese Pyrrhic victories for IJN and IJA forces to be ground down and another 3 months for Japan to give up on Guadalcanal. Arguably, that was the turning point, the time when the IJN was ground down to the point it was always and cautiously on the defensive, and the IJN and IJA lost a large percentage of its experienced pilots. The "Great Marianas Turkey Shoot" was the disaster it was because of IJN and IJA pilot losses in the Solomons. I think the last 7 months of 1942, all those battles and raids taken together, would more appropriately be called the turning point in the Pacific war. In 1943 US' greater industrial production, training, logistics, and tactical learning combined to travel the road to victory in the Pacific.
MIdway has been seen as one of the most devastating losses in the history of naval warfare equal to Lepanto, Trafalgar and Salamis.
If Midway was the key to permitting the Guadalcanal invasion, how could Guadalcanal be the turning point?
Had the Japanese taken Midway, it seems unlikely that the Guadalcanal invasion would have taken place. Had that happened, the US Navy would have been busy defending Hawaii, I suggest.
I would argue that there was NO turning point in the war with Japan. The only way Japan could have won the war was on the coattails of a German victory. Without it, there was no way Japan could win the war - the battles of Midway & Guadacanal only hastened their ultimate defeat.
Thw loss of 2/3 of Kido Butai certainly shifted initiative away from Japan in the Pacific (ignoring China, Burma. and India). While the US did take up the initiative in attacking Guadalcanal, it took months of very hard fighting - land and sea - and Japanese under-estimation and mistakes for the US to keep hold of that initiative. If there was a "turning point", it might be the 6 months from June through November 1942, from the destruction of 2/3 of Kido Butai through the 3-day battle in mid November when the IJN's attempt to bombard Henderson Field out of existence and an attempt at a large-scale reinforcement ended with the loss of two of the IJN's most useful battleships, quite a few of Japan's precious transports, and the loss of much of the landed reinforcements' equipment and food. In those bloody and costly 6 months, initiative was reversed (or maybe 7 months, to include the Battle of the Coral Sea, which turned back the sea assault on Port Moresby).
Heh, heh! Well, that's taking the LONG view!
But while the Brits and Dutch were being kicked out of their territories while the United States was shellacked at Pearl Harbor, losing the Philippines and MacArthur was high tailing it to Australia, it didn't look that way at the time, I suggest!
Still, the Japanese would have been wise to take the long view you suggest rather than taking the Pearl Harbor initiative.
The essential reason both Germany and Japan lost WWII was because they totally underestimated the resilience of the world's democracies - Britain, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and others.
Exactly
And yes, even those commie bastards were underestimated.. The irony is that Hitler had Russia on it's knees with its neck exposed for hacking off, but then Hitler suddenly changed his mind and moved his divisions away from Moscow and to the oil fields of Azerbaijan. The Soviets regrouped and with the aid of the Russian winter, turned the tide against Germany.
Demo... what? Its just a question of resources and numbers. So the russians played a huge role in defeating G, but are no democracy at all ...
As others have mentioned, the first reason by far was the economic/industrial disparity between Japan compared to the US. The Americans could lose 5 to 1 vs Japan an still overwhelm them thanks to their economic/industrial power. Through in the US technical advances and Japan was defeated already on the day of Pearl Harbour.
But the Japanese never had a 5 to 1 kill ratio against the Americans, except maybe during Pearl Harbor. Overall, far fewer Americans lost their lives to the Japanese than vice versa. If American manufacturing had produced ships and equipment at the same rate as Japan, I think America *still* would've won the war in the end. Yes, we could massively outproduce them, especially when we completed shifting to war footing, but there were other factors involved in America's victory than just that. We learned, adapted, and seemed luckier than the Japanese. We overcame our initial disadvantages and exploited our strengths better than the Japanese did, IMO. Our manufacturing advantage only hastened what was already going to happen.
Don't deny there are multiple factors in play but the industrial might of the US guaranteed the defeat of Japan and Nazi Germany. The technological innovation of US military hardware through the war was only possible because of it's huge industrial capacity.
Oh, I don't think so. Many of those technological advances such as the cavity magnetron and atomic bomb, first had to be shipped to the United States from Europe. Once over here though, their development was often spectacular.
No one on the battleship Arizona knew that on that fateful day.
Well done... Interesting, accurate and clearly explained.
One big thing that caused the defeat at Midway was the lack of Japanese carriers that took part in that battle. Two carriers that had been at the Battle of Coral sea the Shokaku ( damaged) and the Zuikaku were back in Japan repairing and refitting during the Midway campaign. Two light carriers the Junyo and the Ryujo were in the attack force directed at the Aleutian instead of Midway. That splitting of available carriers was not a sound plan because if the Japanese wanted to destroy the remaining US carriers they should have sent everything they had. Another big Japanese mistake was their carrier force was 250 to 500 miles away from the rest of the Midway invasion fleets at the front of the forces. Those other ships should have been with the carriers to provide anti- aircraft support and strength in numbers. When the US fleet was spotted the Japanese could have detached fast battleships and cruisers to directly attack the US fleet but they were a day sailing behind the carriers.
True. One large task force would have been better. Reminds me of what Rommel said about his early British opponents. What difference does it make if you have 200 tanks and I only have 50. You divide yours into 10 independent groups.
Well said! My father fought in that conflict and was the first ship to sail into Nagasaki.
Could have done with mention of why battles were lost (over complexity of planning, caution of certain admirals and miscalculation), it’s naval codes being cracked, the economic imbalance and its failure to technologically innovate after its earlier successes. It wasn’t all about a few naval defeats.
Nicely done!
The short answer is supply chain. That and Yamamoto’s famous quote about awakening a giant.
I would add the failure to adequately protect their merchant fleet from submarine attack. This included convoys with an adequate number of screening destroyers. Had the USN fixed their Mark 14 Torpedo and tactics much sooner, the war would have been shortened. In particular, the lack of oil greatly restricted new pilot training and convoy screening.
This is totally misleading. The merchant fleet mainly started to get hit in late 1943 and 1944.
The US subs were not doing much of anything in 1942. Japan had it all until they blew it at Midway.
@@f430ferrari5 Does the question just reference 1942? Get your facts straight before calling someone a liar.
@@lonnieparsons6068
It's a good and remarkable channel... I appreciate your channel hard work for orchestrating and introducing these wonderful explanations and accurate military evaluations. Thank you🙏 ( war academy) channel ....I think all factors that were labeled by this remarkable video were interacted amongst 🤔 themselves and caused Japanese defeated
Good history Channel
Japan did not have enough ships to both operate offensively and still protect its merchant fleet. Also, before the war, Japan depended heavily on Dutch and British merchant ships to bring goods, and those ships were lost to them.
Sure they did. They blew it at Midway.
If anything it was the USN that was scraping the bottom of the barrel in mid 1942.
Yamamoto studied in América he knew that america was powerfull ,he said that he only can fight against americans for a few month , if Japan dont defeat america after that time they Will lose the war...
Japan had no reasonable expectation of winning WWII and they knew it
Great analysis
The Americans thought so little of the Japanese that their focus was on Germany first and correctly predicted the loss of empire in six months.
Wow ! Interesting, entertaining and informative !!! 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
I believe that the brutality of the Japanese army was also, one of the factors that led to its downfall
Perhaps you can explain this assertion....
I don't see it myself.
One interesting aspect of the Pacific theater was that IJN had the interior lines (Singapore, Dutch holdings, Solomon's, Marshals, Marianas...) but the USN did something crazy. Like Japan the US Army and Navy did not get along well so Gen. Marshal and Adm. King broke the Pacific into two campaigns. MacArthur up New Guinea, Salomon's (after Guadalcanal) to the Philippians. Nimitz up the gut island hopping to The Marianas then to Philippians. This arrangement worked well until the lack of unified command almost hurt them at Layte Gulf but that was fixed thereafter.
You’re discussing a point where the outcome was inevitable.
The IJN had the US right where they wanted them and blew it at the Battle of Midway.
Do you realize the US only brought 8 cruisers and 15 destroyers with them along with the 3 carriers. This was it for Task Force 16 and 17.
It’s almost like the IJN didn’t want to gang up in the US and bully them so they held back a huge portion of their forces.
11 battleships, 22 cruisers, 64 destroyers and 9 carriers available. Over 500 planes available.
The IJN blew it.
Britain was a far bigger player than the Soviet Union in the war against Japan.
I don't know about that British suffered heavy defeats to the Japanese where as as soon as the Soviets entered Japan surrendered immediately
In fairness to the British at least you denied the Japanese takeover of India proper. Which prevents China from being isolated. Losing Singapore to an inferior force though, that was bad. If I was king I would never let General persaval back on English soil, ever.
@@forrestsory1893 If I were King I would have prevented Winston Churchill from eating for 4 hours.He would've died of starvation.
Good history channet
The imperial Japanese lost the war on December 7th 1941.
That was the day in world history they never recovered from. Everything they won after that was defeat.
Don't forget to add in the strong interservice rivalry between the Japanese army and the Japanese navy. Also consider some of things the Japanese navy failed to do in their Pearl Harbor attack. They could have launched a third aerial attack on Pearl Harbor which would have destroyed its maritime docking facilities. They also could have brought their accompanying battleships to bear on Pearl Harbor in the form of bombardment. While their Pearl Harbor attack was underway they could have sent out scout planes to search for nearby U.S. aircraft carriers. Lastly, the Japanese could have considered bringing along a substantial landing force to temporarily deny the American use of Oahu Island. With all of these factors brought together along with the Japanese conquest of U.S. territories, the United States MAY have sued for peace. From my perspective the Imperial Japanese High Command really didn't think this through but embraced a half-baked approach.
It wasn’t just a European war. It was a European and Asian war. It was a world war after the US got involved.
The truth of the matter is that FDR levied harsh sanctions against Japan over Japan’s overt aggressions with China. Those sanctions were going to deprive Japan of oil and necessary commodities with which to fight its foreseeable battles. Japan’s government evolved into a military junta that dictated how and when Japan would pursue its ambitions. Therefore, the military decided it had no choice but to launch its war against the USA, the UK, France, Nederland, and Australia with the goal to seize oil and commodities in the Western Pacific which meant not only the Philippines, but Indochina, Singapore, Burma, and Indonesia. It is correct that Japan bit off more than it could chew in its quest to wrestle control in a vast expense of land and sea.
The surprise Doolittle Raid over Tokyo stunned the military leaders. Next, the Coral Sea naval battle stopped Japan’s plans in pushing more into the southern reaches towards Australia. Japan had also launched its effort in New Guinea to capture Port Moresby, but the U.S. and Australian forces pushed back. Absolutely the Midway loss for Japan was a big blow to the military leaders which signaled they were now greatly handicapped to prevail against the USA foe that was rapidly recruiting manpower and ramping up armaments, ships, subs, and better aircraft. The attitude was that surrender was just unthinkable no matter the changing odds for success in the war.
The Guadalcanal loss in 1942 also spelled disaster for Japan. They lost not only an invasion army there but important naval and cargo ships.
Another aspect of importance was the USA subs sinking the Japanese cargo and troop ships. Japan suffered continuous attrition and degrading of his merchant marine ships that in turn greatly harmed its war efforts and machine.
It is worthwhile to note that Japan attacked the Alaskan Aleutian archipelago and eventually suffered losses there and ultimately was a wasted venture.
No matter the unfolding events for Japan, both good or bad, the USA was inevitably going to build and use nukes to finish off Japan. So even if Japan didn’t fail in these battles, land and sea, Japan was “doomed” as the nukes were going to defeat them anyway. The advent of the nukes meant that Japan finally realized that its war was never winnable because they had no defense to nuke bombs.
I read the first nuclear reactor was fired up in December 1937, Berlin, the publishing of this breakthrough in international science magazines assured that everyone who read and understood the meaning would rush to tell their government leaders. Imagine if the NAZIS acted like good democrats, censuring this critical information, denying it to the world, with their lead in rockets and Japanese cameras in their space stations, they could have held the world hostage, no army or navy world go undetected and nukes in space may have ended liberty on earth...at least until Jesus returned.
The worst mistake the Japanese made during Gaudalcanal was taking their best pilots off their carriers and having them fly harrowing long missions from Rabaul so if they got shot down they lost the pilot and crew. They lost between 700-850 aircraft during the struggle and most of their best pilots that survived up to that point.
I seen the Japanese submersible aircraft carrier (3 unique airplanes in the hanger + 1 spare). Admiral Yamato was pushing production for 18-27 of these super submarines, 3 were produced. Extreme long range allowing the trip around S.America to launch against the USA capitol germ warfare as they redeveloped the bubonic plague and figured out how to spread it in a bombing attack. This was actually an option before wars end but cooler heads in their command decided against it because the reprisal was virtually guaranteed. I wonder if they had the atom bomb would they have felt the same way
One item about Pearl Harbor you didn’t mention is that they failed to destroy the dry docks, fueling facilities, and repair facilities. By not doing this Pearl Harbor was still a viable staging area and ships didn’t have to go to the states for repairs and replacement. The Japanese would have done better by taking out these facilities than by hitting the battleships.
Later that same December 7, at night, one of our carriers sailed into pearl harbor, refueling and provisioning throughout the night, and left port before dawn, Japan didn't accomplish anything except for shooting themselves in the foot
The only issue I have with this is that tactical bombing was still in it's infancy, with both navies believing in the power of battleships. It really wasn't until after Pearl Harbor that both sides really got it into their heads that carriers were the way to go.
A doctrine for bombing specific targets like dry docks and such just did not exist at the time. The emphasis on the American battleships proves this.
Not to mention the fact that has been debunked multiple times they lost the element of surprise and didn't know where the US carriers were so it was justifiable prudence that called off the last wave. The fuel would have been almost impossible to take out anyway the only thing they may have been able to do some of the repair facilities and some of the sub infrastructure but much of it like the fuel was reinforced with concrete and they could not justify the losses for the limited gains.@@blockmasterscott
@@jameshannagan4256 good one, I seen the movie, something about a fuel tanker full of high octane aviation gas in pearl harbor during the raid, they claimed it would have blown up half the harbor....and the Japanese pilots could only focus on sailors in the water as Glory killings, imagine brains instead of cruelties, all them bullets into the tanker instead of the swimming sailors, they might have dodged the midway disaster and more
Honestly that is utter nonsense I saw a panel of historians 3 to be exact and all 3 emphatically debunked the oil storage theory. John Parshall was one of them I can't remember the other ones Trent something was one of the other ones. There were multiple reasons why they did not have the ability to effectivly take out any meaningful amount of oil period and that narrative has been debunked by any credible historians not to mention the fact of a third strike even being a plausable idea. The consensus was that in light of the fact that surprise was lost and they would lose more planes and pilots and they still had no idea where the US carriers were or the many subs were not to mention their fuel issue which was rapidly becoming critical. just imagine trying to refuel at sea which takes almost all day, within range of bombers that at this point in 41 they had no idea it would be so hard to hit moving targets, then subs of which we had more than any country in the world and 3 carriers unaccounted for what would you do.@@mikedearing6352
Very nicely done. I have a theory based on fact. Many historians have this same theory. Before WW1, the Russian navy lost two wars to Japan. So Japan had a very strong navy. They also wanted a strong army. This stems back to the Treaty of Versailles to close out WW1. During WW1, Japan fought with the allies. Their navy helped win the naval war against Germany. All the attention was given to the British. At the Versailles signing, Japan felt snubbed. And sadly they were by the Europeans and America. The glory went to the big three: France, the United Kingdom, and the USA. Japan's representatives left angry with the western allies, vowing to improve their army. As we all know, this took materials and minerals Japan did not have. China did have them. You could say Japan lost the war they began in the 1930s when they left Paris so angrily a decade and a half before.
Japan's biggest issue was their battle plans always revolved around the one, big decisive battle that either never came, or they never won. There was no flexibility, no other line of thinking.
Guerrilla wars like Vietnam and Afghanistan are another matter but conventional wars like WW2 are nearly always won by the side that makes the fewest mistakes and has the most resources.
None of these military mistakes japan made changed the outcome of the war. The war was decided by the US industrial and technological superiority. These mistakes may of changed the timing, but not the outcome. In fact, all of the pre war US carriers, except the enterprise, were sunk before the battle of the Philippine sea.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the attack on pearl harbor was not forewarned to Hitler so while he quickly declared war and had faith they would win in Russia, there was still grumbling that they were not ready for the US to enter the war at that time.
The biggest example of no corporation between allies.
and Hitler only sent a couple U-boats for the opening attack on the US, Hitler had dozens available but felt bound to protect Norway instead.
The Japanese lost the war on December 7, 1941 when they failed to take out the American carriers or the fuel farms in Hawaii. They expected to force the US to the negotiating table when they should have known that such an attack would never be accepted without total victory by the Americans. They held out for three and a half years until we dropped the sun on them twice and finally came to the realization that it was over. Coupled with the fact that the IJA and IJN lookied at each other as a greater enemy than the Allies they never stood a chance.
They attacked the British Commonwealth first first when they invaded Malaysia less than an hour before Pearl Harbor. I wouldn't necessarily say they lost the war on that date. They still could have prevailed but unfortunately they made numerous mistakes which cost them dearly.
@@CLARKE176 It doesn't matter who they attacked first. The fact is they sank or disabled all eight of the US battleships at Pearl Harbor which prevented them sortying out to face off against the Japanese fleet which would have sunk most or all of them at sea due to the superior Japanese carrier and aircraft numbers at the time resulting in a much greater loss of life for the US. As it was six of the eight battleships were put back into service and went on to fight for the remainder of the war. Missing the US carriers and fuel storage areas in Hawaii led directly to the IJN getting its clock cleaned at Midway six months later. The Midway battle itself was a pipe dream for the Japanese because even if succesful the US would simply have taken it back since it was much closer to Hawaii than to Japan. It was at the very limit of the Japanese supply line and within easy reach of Hawaii which by that time was a well armed, heavily manned fortress with almost limitless resources to fight the IJN. Along with the large number of carriers that were then building in the US as well as submarines and other warships at a rate the Japanese could never match the outcome in hindsight was really never in doubt. While it was a bitter, hard fought campaign it must be noted that the US only devoted about ten to twenty percent of its war resources to the Pacific campaign while sending eighty to ninety percent to Europe.
@@tamer1773 the Japanese got too overconfident following their victories and believed themselves superior to their enemies like the Germans did. When you get too cocky, you can mistakes which turn disastrous.
@@CLARKE176 They got too cocky aftetr invading China which wasn't the walkover they thought it would be. I could see how they thought the Brits and the Dutch would be too busy fighting the Germans on the homefront to expend a lot of resources in the Pacific, but how they thought that they could defeat the US knowing what they did about its industrial power is beyond understanding. Of course the militarists thought the western powers were decadent, but the Japanese elites both in the military and government were just as decadent if not more so.
they had a chance. if everything went as planned. there was a strong isolationist movement at the time if their message practically saying we are at war arrived on time the ire might have not been so bad. Yamamoto was against the war knowing the outcome but since that was out of his hands he gave them the best chance he knew
Their field equipment was terrible. For a country known for things like the Zero and other technological wonders, they basic equipment they gave their solders was not that good. US troops were shocked how bad their rifles, grenades and Machine guns were. The other thing was that the Japanese high command had no appreciation for the value of an experienced soldier. How many soldiers were wasted on Banzai charges. MacArthur on the other hand after the New Guinea campaign expected commanders to reduce all losses. The US also would send experienced soldiers and officers home to train other soldiers, an officers, especially pilots. Most of the Senior pilots at Midway ended the war at home training new pilots.
It's about how much resources that can be lost to win.
Don't forget Operation Hailstone. The American attack on Truk Lagoon cost the Japanese a large number of aircraft, ships and an estimated 4,500 personnel. It was nicknamed: Japan's Pearl Harbour. Also, the biggest naval battle in history: The Battle of Leyte Gulf occurred shortly after The Battle of The Philippine Sea. The Japanese lost what was left of their carriers but were so short of carried-based aircraft by then that their remaining carriers posed little threat. That battle was the end of the Imperial Japanese Navy. They would never again be able to directly engage the Allies in naval warfare. The battleship: Yamato (the biggest battleship ever built) escaped from that battle but was later sunk by aircraft.
Midway put the Japanese on the defensive but it was Guadalcanal that ground them down. They lost many ships and veteran pilots to that campaign.
It was just about math . Japan did not know the US would out manufacture Japan 6 to 1 as the war went on.
Even If Japan won at Midway it would not matter. The US was making the largest Navy in the world no matter what Japan did or did not.
By 1944 80% of the US Navy had ships that were not even in service during the battle of Midway .
but both the UK and US were also fighting on two fronts.
Japan would have been so much better off if it cancelled the idea of a war, and just concentrated on making GREAT CARS much earlier.
RS. Canada
US put high tarrifs on import of Japanese products during the Great Depression.
Three other strengths the Americans had were 1. Japanese resource transportation was largely over sea rather than rail putting supply lines closer to attack as Asia had poor infrastructure overland. 2. Adequate material resources were outside the home islands, unlike the U.S. which had oil, wood, iron, and other ores and the industry to process it within its interior 3. The population ratio of America alone to Japan was roughly 2 to 1 in favor of America. 4. We knew a lot from the interception and decoding of messages throughout the Pacific but Japan did not have the same about American movements and plans.
1:20 the japanese attacked Pearl Harbor to eliminate the BATTLESHIPS - naval doctrine had not developed (on either side) around the carriers, and the only reason the americans made the carriers the center of their task forces is that they didnt have the battleships.
even 6 months later, after seeing what hit-and-run carrier tactics were capable of (by the americans), the japanese still insisted (at Midway) that the final decision would be a battleship engagement.
Japan didn't get it, I think our side mostly knew, I believe Franklin Roosevelt deliberately moved our battle fleet into range of the emperor's strike force, as Roosevelt was a loyal communist supporter it make the most sense he wouldn't want to support a 100,000 US army in Asia, the communist wouldn't be able to conquer China and democrats wouldn't ever get their slavery institutions back to the way they were before Abraham Lincoln came along and took away the democrats slave empire
It’s not only they didn’t have battleships. The issue was actually the US lacked fleet oilers. Massive cover up. Do some research.
There was a reason why the battleships were docked to begin with. They couldn’t easily refuel at sea. They were old and slow too. It took time for the US to completed new battleships.
The IJN blew it at Midway. They had many vessels which the US didn’t have.
8 cruisers and 15 destroyers plus the 3 carriers was all the US could muster up for Task Force 16 and 17.
The IJN had 11 battleships, 22 cruisers, and 64 destroyers plus 9 carriers available.
Japanese battle plans were always overly complex.
Guadalcanal was the turning point … not Midway. But Midway made Guadalcanal possible.
Ye
To me it is simple. The pissed off the greatest industrial power in the world.
Never cracking the Allies codes; never upgrading the Zeros and other aircrafts; never developing long range strategic bombers; never developing nor deploying radars on their planes, ships and submarines; their penchant for massive blows (and seemingly at all cost) to annihilate their enemies… All of that did them in.
I believe there are two biggest factors contributing to Japan's defeat in World War II.
The first is that the war started too early. People often view Japan's start of World War II as the attack on Pearl Harbor, but the attack on Pearl Harbor was only the beginning of America's participation in World War II.
Japan started the war faster than anyone else, starting in 1937. The incident called the Marco Polo Bridge Incident was the actual prelude to the Sino-Japanese War, which had already confirmed the invasion of the Japanese Kwantung Army into northeastern China under the pretext of security in Manchukuo, and from which the Japanese military never took a step back.
The day of the Pearl Harbor attack on December 7, 1941, which President Roosevelt called the DAY OF INFAMY, was really nothing more than an extension of the Sino-Japanese War!
Japan already had experience in World War I, where it intervened at the end of the war and, as the victor, took over the Chinese territory of the defeated Germany. Because they knew that devouring other people's colonies during a war was very profitable and low risk, they targeted European colonies in Southern Asia.
Moreover, since the United States openly supported the Chinese Nationalist government during the Sino-Japanese War, Japan had no choice but to engage in a confrontation with the United States in order to prevent this!
But the problem is that too many resources and lives have been lost in the four years of war with China.
Japan's Southern War was a resource war. However, although it was possible to obtain resources through it, it was difficult to obtain war manpower. That's why Japan cosplays as a liberator.
As Japan invaded French Indochina, it called for liberation from France and advertised that it had saved Singapore from British imperialism.
And another factor in the defeat was that Japan did not have a winning strategy. The reason Japan started World War II was not for Japan to win against the United States.
During the interwar period, Japan had already sent many military officers to study in the United States and Europe, allowing them to learn about each country's situation. In particular, America's industrial productivity and responsiveness became engraved in our bones. However, as mentioned earlier, it was important to leverage southern resources and American public support for victory in the Sino-Japanese War.
So they start a war with the goal of ending the war at the right time, not victory.
The reason Japan targeted Pearl Harbor was not simply because the U.S. naval force was there, but because of the mistaken belief that if it were removed, it could tie up the U.S. for a considerable period of time, and this protection was attached to the premise of sinking all of Pearl Harbor's available ships. . And according to the original plan (for example, the aircraft carrier arrived late due to a storm), the aircraft carrier had to be anchored in Pearl Harbor.
In other words, Japan would make it impossible for the U.S. naval power at Pearl Harbor to recover, while at the same time attacking south, quickly dropping European colonies and forming a defensive line. And since he clearly knew that the United States would focus its efforts on the European theater rather than the Pacific theater, he expected the United States to end the war on favorable terms for Japan, just as the Soviet Union did with Germany during World War I.
Yes! Again, Japan's goal was to reach a favorable end-of-war agreement. As the fight began without the will, ability, or goal to win, the Japanese imperialist leadership, intoxicated by the initial victory, was unable to respond in any way even after winning, and so it was dragged along by the United States from the middle of the war.
And we overlooked how much the United States is dominated by the body rather than the mind, and how much the fighting spirit can be burned for a tangible victory! If the United States fought anywhere, it had to win. The fate of the regime depends on it.
There were four factors indeed, but it was not battles:
1. Deadly competition between Japanese Army and IJN (that forced the IJN to start WWII involvement too early).
2. Relatively low, import dependent heavy industrial base in combination with the inability to set-up a proper convoy/anti-submarine system.
3. Desperate technological disadvantage against US that grew exponentially in the war years (radar, plane design, AA proximity grenades...).
4. Stubborn/unimaginative military leaders that had no idea of flexible modern warfare and tried to counter technology by human sacrifice.
The US fleet was significantly weakened by Pearl Harbor, that is why the the Japanese expanded so quick the first months of the war. Midway took any short term advantage they enjoyed, and they could not produce and replace at nearly the rate as the US
I think the loss of Guadalcanal was a major factor as well
"What If" Germany had not signed a non-aggression pact with the USSR? Might Japan have sought material support for their imperial ambitions by continuing their offensive momentum from Manchukuo into Siberia reserving their Naval power for defensive purposes?
Well, the Japanese fought and lost major battles in mainland Asia such as in China, Kohima, Manchuria and others. China was Japan's oldest wartime nemesis and most persistent. The Japanese suffered heavy casualties in their campaign against the Chinese who in turn tied down many imperial divisions away from the island campaigns. The Allies drove them from southern India and through Burma, plans were already developing to land in Malaysia. The Red Army smashing through Manchuria was enough to persuade Japan to give in since they were on the defensive on all fronts.
The nukes convinced them to surrender
@@jerrymiller9039 it was the USSR invasion that had a bigger impact because Japan was now fighting another major power which convinced them to give up. Not to mention they were on the defensive on multiple fronts such as in mainland Asia.
Japan was on the defensive because we had fought our way to the home islands and destroyed their fleet and had destroyed most of their cities and proven the capability to vaporize any large area we wanted to.
The Soviets did not have any aircraft carriers and only limited naval capability so they were not set up to fight an island war. Mostly, the Soviets could just free up the Japanese forces that may have gone to or stayed on the mainland.
The US estimated that we would get half a million Americans killed invading the home islands and no the Soviets did not have anywhere near that size of an amphibious force.
We were in the process of shifting people and ships and aircraft from the European theater to the Pacific. @@CLARKE176
@@jerrymiller9039 you didn't mention that the Japanese were retreating in China, Burma and India because the Allies had launched major offensives offensives. The Soviets may have had limited aircraft and naval limited capability, but what they had more than the west were men on the ground which smashed the Japanese in Manchuria. The bombing had major impact on morale but the Japanese still held out for a while due to their culture of no surrender. Also believing the propaganda of how the allies wanting to destroy their country increased their will to resist. The British Commonwealth, Dutch etc also inflicted losses on the Japanese naval and merchant navies as well.
@@CLARKE176 no they didn't have more men on the ground. They had men in Europe and they some men in the Eastern half of their country. They didn't have men in the home islands or serious ways of landing them in Japan. As for Japanese troops on the mainland it didn't matter. The home islands were important and Japan no longer had the means to bring their men back to defend the home islands or send resources to them. They didn't matter
The way I learned it, Isoroku Yamamoto (did I spell it right?) told his superiors something along the lines of, "Uh, guys....I wouldn't be effing with them if I were you. This is a really, really, *BAD* idea." He saw, first hand, the innovation and industrial capacity of the United States and said said that he could kick butt for about 6 months to a year, after which they would be effed. It turns out that he was right. The 850 pound Gorilla (United States) turned the war in about 9 months (right?) and by May-ish 1945, Boeing's factories were delivering something like a HUNDRED B-29 bombers EACH MONTH to bomb the island of Japan. And that's not all. The Alaskan Highway was being built to get more war supplies up to "nearby" Alaska to aid in the campaign.
And supposedly, the Japanese army was told that if they did a bayonet charge towards the enemy, the enemy would simply run away. This idea carried on all the way to 1945 as the soviets were knocking on the back door to Japan. They did their bayonet charges towards the red army who proceeded to mow them all down.
What I cannot understand is why Imperial Japan thought that a single battle would overturn the entire world order. They were well aware of the United States' industrial power. Admiral Yamamoto warned them of it before the war started! The idea that a single battle would win the war was ludicrous!
@@petersantos991 That's kind of what baffles me, sir. The idea of the Kantai Kessen, in the face of an enemy that could. and were, in the midst of arming themselves at such an alarming degree.
In one word - Wingate
One has to credit Franklin Roosevelt, the US Congress, United States Industry and especially the American people for putting together a stupefying war making effort after what was a very slow and often disastrous start. That disastrous start extended to the British and Dutch military efforts in Asia as well.
regarding Pearl Harbor, in addition of not destroying US carriers, they didn't destroyed their fuel depots either.
You should have mentioned the battle of Leyte Gulf.
The Japanese lacked the merchant shipping to both exploit the captured natural resources and to significantly reinforce their empire's spread out defenses.
The US Navy's resilience and aggressiveness really upset the Japanese plans for creating a defensive barrier over two years.
Proximity fuses
self sealing fuel tanks
The Japanese practice of training pilots, which was very picky and hard (according to Sakai) left them with smaller numbers and unlike the Americans who rotated pilots for training, by 1944 their pilots were not that good.
I think the Japanese and Germans jumped the gun, in similar ways, at the same time. Had the Japanese consolidated victory in China, and the Germans secured all of Europe including the British Isles (Before attacking Stalin), they could have assailed the USSR from both sides. I don't know if the US would have stayed out forever, but Japan and Germany had active diplomatic relations with them right up to Pearl Harbor. It was a foolish gamble for Japan to kick the giant awake....
Germany and Japan were terrible allies for each other.
Germany signed a non aggression pact with the USSR at the same time Japan was fighting battles with the USSR.
And Japan signed a non aggression pact with the USSR just two months before Germany invaded.
Yeah well, which German navy was going to invade the UK? Because it sure as hell wasn't going to be the one Raeder commanded.
@@JB-yb4wn My scenario contains a LOT of "What if's". Like "What if" Hitler hadn't screwed-up the Battle of Britain, in a way that would have left the Royal Navy without air cover? You'll agree that that could have easily happened. Thank God British operational security was so good, and German intel was so BAD....
@@johnathandavis3693
I think instead of making uninformed opinions, that maybe you should consult a couple of these UA-camrs:
Hardthrasher has an excellent 3 part detailed series on how the Germans bungled the Battle of Britain to make this battle unwinnable for them.
Military History Visualized "Sea Lion: Why not just invade the UK in 1940?" It breaks down even if the Germans managed to get local air superiority, they had neither the ships or the manpower to invade the UK. "Naval Strategy is Built Strategy" which means naval resources are not like cars, ships take months to build and have to fit an overall plan.
@@JB-yb4wn "Wait... What navy?" - Every time I hear Germany have a navy
The single biggest reason (even with the nuke off the table) is that the U.S. was physically isolated from attack by two huge oceans, plus it was too big with a ridiculously huge manufacturing capacity that was only on simmer in Dec '41. Once the machinery started rolling, the U.S. was producing far more planes and boats than it was losing. Every month the disparity grew. Even with first supplying and then committing troops and war materiel to Europe, the U.S. got up off the mat in early '42 and started pounding Japan into a defensive position within 6 months. Imagine if the U.S. stayed out of the European theater?
I disagree about pearl harbor what is destroying a few hundred aircraft when your enemy has the ability to produce 90000 aircraft? Picking a fight w such an enemy is a guarantee of defeat. Btw the us sent most production and huge numbers of troops to Europe what if 100 percent was directed against Japan?
japan could've actually won the battle of midway but not only did american intelligence pick up on their plan but also yamamoto employed a very complex plan on top of that wrongly assumed he could take the americans by full surprise.
The Japanese Navy had 10 aircraft carriers in 1941, not six. One of the many errors in this video.
Every one of the Axis powers underestimated America. Fighting Russia was like fighting Evander Holyfield for 6 rounds, then when America joined it was like fighting a fresh Mike Tyson for another 6.
"Coordination with its allies". It sounds as though you are considering an 'alternative-history' episode.
The Japanese losing the battles of Khalkhin Gol to the Soviets and their Mongolian allies which took place from May 11th to September 16th, 1939 should not be overlooked. It was this defeat that caused the Japanese to focus on the South Strike Group, which was the strategy favored by the IJN, in order to obtain the raw materials and fuels that were needed to fight the war. The Kwantung army had incurred the wrath of the Japanese government because they initiated the battles without authorization from Tokyo. This lack of discipline, coupled with their losing the battle decisively, caused the Japanese to abandon the North Strike Group strategies. Had the Kwantung army prevailed, the Soviet Union could very well have been defeated by Germany, since they would have been forced to defend their far east areas against the Japanese. The entire course of WW2 would have been altered if this scenario would have played out.
Japan expected a surprise naval victory would result in a quick negotiated peace, as with the Russo-Japanese war. Yamamoto disagreed but was overruled. Japan could never have won a prolonged war but assumed that would never happen.
Japan was no economic match for the america. As an example, u.s. steel(the largest american steel company) was making more steel in ONE month than all of japan did in a whole year.
The US Navy fleet submarines had sunk 5.2 million tons of mostly merchant shipping and less but significant naval warships. Japan imported nearly all its oil, much of its coal, iron ore, vital industrial raw materials and 20 percent of its food from overseas. All of these item required many millions of tons of shipping. The Japanese merchant marine was destroyed in 1944. It is important to note that in the last six months of the war not a single tanker ship made it to or from the Japanese Home Islands. Japan imported nearly all or 80 percent its fuel oil and aviation fuel from the United States. The Japanese were highly dependent upon the Dutch. East Indies for its oil during the war. Once the U.S. Navy got its Mark XIV torpedo issues mostly resolved, the radar equipped Gato class submarines annihilated the Japanese merchant fleet.
Many American bombing raids in 1945 were bombing industries either shutdown or operating at greatly reduced capacity. Let us say for instance that no atomic bombs or an American invasion had occurregd. It seems impossible to conceive how Japan could have continued on with the war into 1946 with no fuel imports, famine and an imploding industrial economy. The US Navy sank almost 8 million tons of Japanese naval and merchant shipping during WW2. Japan lost both of its Navy and its merchant fleet at the end of the Leyte Gulf battle and Luzon landings in 1944.
Reason #2:
To give you an idea how bad this could be, the Japanese Army and their Navy each had their own small arms. PLUS, not only did they have 6.5 & 7.7 (.26 & .303) caliber firearms, but they also had: Rimmed, Semi-Rimmed, and Rimless cartridges in each caliber! So, at some points in the war, you could have literally over a 1,000 rounds of ammo next to you but only a few firearms could use it!
Reason #3:
You have to remember what the Japanese "knew" going into the Midway Campaign (and more importantly after it!!). They knew that a Lexington class carrier (CV-3 USS Saratoga) was in Dry Dock for extensive repairs, and that they had sunk the other Lexington at Coral Sea. They also "knew" that they had sunk a Yorktown class carrier at the Coral Sea. This "meant" that there would be only 2 US carriers (USS Enterprise & USS Hornet which were the 2nd & 3rd ships of the 3 ship Yorktown class) to oppose their 4! (Since USS Ranger & USS Wasp were in the Atlantic) Afterwards, they "knew" that they had sunk the last two Yorktown carriers. And although they were still recovering from the Coral Sea (repairing 1 carrier and rebuilding the other carrier's air group), they also had a new carrier coming into service.
The one thing this did NOT Mention was how much the Japanese Army and the Japanese Navy HATED Each Other!!!
The initial attack on Pearl Harbor left fuel stores and repair facilities intact which meant that many of the ships damaged could be repaired.
Any further damage to ships from other battles could also be repaired faster. The carrier Yorktown was damaged in a battle went back to Pearl for a fast repair to be available at Midway three days later.
A major mistake on Japan's part was to not arrange a second or even a third strike to knock out the American repair and fuel facilities at Pearl Harbor.
Yorktown was sunk at Midway and the US lost Lexington at Battle of Coral Sea.
The IJN had the US right where they wanted them at Midway and they blew it.
Had they approached with surface ships first with carriers behind there was really nothing the US could do.
@@f430ferrari5 Yes sunk at Midway after being repaired in facilities left available for use because there wasn't a second strike by Japan at Pearl H.
There were three major mistakes at the command/ National Leadership level that doomed Japan. Even if everything went well in 1942 for the Japanese eventually they would have lost.
1. The Imperial Leadership failed to understand the ability of the United States to rapidly gear up for war. While Imperial Japan in late 1941 had both a qualitative and quantitative advantage over the US it took the Americans about a year to ramp up in a way that the Imperial Japanese could never match. Within two years of the attack on Pearl Harbor the Japanese were outpaced both in numbers and quality of literally everything war related. And this was with the US essentially supporting a three front war with helping Eastern and Western Europe.
2. The Japanese failed to realize how fast the US could train up and create competent war fighters. This is an often overlooked aspect of the rise of the US military in Ww2 but the ability consistently train competent pilots, sailors and war fighters as well as create the leaders to take them into battle is amazing; especially when you consider that many of these leaders learned all their skills in a short time.
3. Obviously the Japanese failed to understand American resolve. Yamamoto recognized it but few looked at the US as much different than Russia in 1905. This anger fueled the US and drove them in their pursuit of Japan’s destruction.
If one of these three had been absent in 1941 Japan might have prevailed but all three meant the United States would keep coming.
Japan's #1 mistake was going to war at all, knowing all the things we know now. The US had as much warmaking potential as the next three down the list added together (Germany, UK, and the Soviets). The US had over 40% of the warmaking potential. Japan had...3.5%. Yeah. Where do you go from there?
Midway could have gone very differently - wouldn't have changed the war, but probably altered it a lot.
Plus, the click between chapters is annoying as it's reminiscent of a PC camera's snaps.
Seems to me they believed their own nonsense. They pursued a geopolitical strategy of 1800's against modern-day empires
You didn't add the battle of Leyte gulf the biggest battleship battle ever fought
The USSR did not enter the Pacific war until August 9, 1945 - three days after the atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima and the same day the atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki - by invading Manchuria. Japan MIGHT have known about or anticipated the USSR's impending entry, but the USSR was not relevant to virtually any of the fighting in the Pacific.
USSR helped China at the beginning of the Japanese invasion of China also the Soviets and Japanese signed a neutral pact deal after the Japanese defeat in Khalkhin Gol to the USSR also the Soviets made Japanese surrender more quickly
I'm referring to the "Pacific war" as having started in December 1941. USSR assistance to China in the Second Sino-Japanese War and Khalkhin Gol were years earlier, and the neutrality treaty was signed 7 or 8 months earlier. As for the Soviets having hastened the Japanese surrender, the Red Army attacked Manchuria on the same day the second atomic bomb was dropped on Nagasaki. That Soviet action had little, if any, influence on Japan's surrender. The USAF bombing campaign, USN submarine campaign, loss of territory in the Pacific, atomic bombs, and prospect of the home islands, in combination, were the more or less exclusive factors. Setting up puppet governments in Eastern Europe and moving significant Red Army forces from Eastern Europe and Russia were major accomplishments, just not significant in the defeat of Japan.
@@petestorz172 bro Japanese didn't surrender until the Soveits were near Hokkaido seeing the potential Soviet invasion of Japan the emperor surrendered otherwise Russians would be marching to Tokyo
They must have been amazing swimmers.@@JDDC-tq7qm
Japan's greatest need was a Great Navy and tons of quality airmen and planes. Once they lost a couple good battles and lost most well trained pilots It was over just a matter of how long they could hold out. Without the Navy Japan had no chance
In addition to all of the factors mentioned in the video, one must consider that the US was able to produce war materiel at a rate far exceeding anything that Japan's factories could manufacture. Japan was out-manned, out-produced, and out-maneuvered.
Their Army and Navy also didn't cooperate very well.
There's nothing between Hawaii and the U.S. mainland, while the Western Pacific is dotted with stepping stones of islands leading toward Japan. Japan's defeat in naval battles was a huge factor in the war, as was the American invasions of islands that the SeaBees turned into air bases to provide air cover for the next invasion. Eventually there were huge fleets of long range B-29s and their island air bases that were methodically turning Japan into ashes and rubble without the atomic bomb..
If only Japan had listened to the ministers and military leaders that spent years in the US. They told them the monsterous industrial might the US had and would use like a sledgehammer against them.
I can't think of any realistic way that the Japanese could have ensured that aricraft carriers were in Pearl Harbor. They were in position and could not have waited.
A major fleet was turned away from Leyte Gulf facing almost no serious threat but, destroyers & escort carriers. (Taffy 3) Why?