![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Hugo S. Cunningham" wrote in message ... Perhaps they would have done better to take a defensive attitude toward the US fleet at Pearl Harbor while seizing the oil fields in Indonesia. Pearl Harbor vaporized isolationist sentiment in the USA, while a far-off colonial war might not have. IMO opinion that was their best credible move, but not a good one - they had no good options, given the revulsion the Japs had generated in the USA over Nanking and the atrocity prone nature of the Japanese military, attacking south where these atrocities would inevitably be directed against whites (the race would have mattered a lot back then), throw in the fact that it would be a pretty clear defiance of the purpose of the embargo and the US would probably have come in anyway. The big difference is that the US fleet would have been intact and the PI would have been a lot more secure, also the USA might not have been at war with Germany (unless Hitler repeated his idiot declaration). Honestly, Japans best bet was probably to side with the Allies against Germany and hope that by supporting them, they could buy silence on the Chinese front, but I doubt it was politically feasible in Japan or USA. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|