I thought the US weren't in WW2 until Pearl Harbor was bombed though ?Raven_Letters said:Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in order to destroy the U.S Navy based there, thereby eliminating the U.S's ability to wage war against Japan in the Pacific.
This is a very basic, crude outline of it; there are other major factors as well, but this is generally the starting point.
Not officially, but the possibility that they might was a big threat to the Japanese navy.MA7743W said:I thought the US weren't in WW2 until Pearl Harbor was bombed though ?Raven_Letters said:Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in order to destroy the U.S Navy based there, thereby eliminating the U.S's ability to wage war against Japan in the Pacific.
This is a very basic, crude outline of it; there are other major factors as well, but this is generally the starting point.
I mean they weren't planning to fight the Japanese anyway were they ?
I don't know much about this stuff obviously.
The japanese, italians and germans signed a tripartite treaty to take over the world between the 3 of them. The US were going to join the war sooner or later, also they were already supplying Britain with a lot of raw materials, weapons etc.MA7743W said:I thought the US weren't in WW2 until Pearl Harbor was bombed though ?Raven_Letters said:Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in order to destroy the U.S Navy based there, thereby eliminating the U.S's ability to wage war against Japan in the Pacific.
This is a very basic, crude outline of it; there are other major factors as well, but this is generally the starting point.
I mean they weren't planning to fight the Japanese anyway were they ?
I don't know much about this stuff obviously.
Well the issue is somewhat complicated by a number of factors. Firstly that the U.S saw the south pacific region as within its sphere of influence, and this directly came into Japan's plans for its "Co-Prosperity Sphere" - i.e Its head chopping time if you dont do what we say.MA7743W said:I thought the US weren't in WW2 until Pearl Harbor was bombed though ?Raven_Letters said:Japan bombed Pearl Harbor in order to destroy the U.S Navy based there, thereby eliminating the U.S's ability to wage war against Japan in the Pacific.
This is a very basic, crude outline of it; there are other major factors as well, but this is generally the starting point.
I mean they weren't planning to fight the Japanese anyway were they ?
I don't know much about this stuff obviously.
A strategic misunderstanding not a tactical one - which of course makes the matter far worse. As for Bravado - well not much. See "Total War" by Peter Calvocoressi (If memory serves me right) the Japanese werent exactly Gung-ho about the plan at the highest levels, they realized that they were taking a huge gamble by antagonizing the U.S, but given the circumstances they felt that had little room to maneuver.rossatdi said:I thought it was the traditional culture of warfare was to make a show strength and then sue for peace. Theoretically by crippling the US's pacific capability with a stunning show of strength Japan would demand control over the Pacific.
A tactical & cultural misunderstanding. Also bravado.
Yeah i was going to add. If i were to rank the 3 major powers of the axis forces in terms of military prowess it would be.fix-the-spade said:To damage or destroy the U.S Navy's Pacific Fleet.
Thereby cutting US forces in the Phillipines from any rapid reinforcement. As well as this it allowed the Japanese to commit their fleet and most of their army to fighting the Royal Navy/Commonwealth Army in the Burma campaign.
The plan was to advance quickly through the Phillipines, Burma and China, forcing peace with the US and British Empire once they had made enough gains. The entire war had to be fought and finished before America's production abilities could be brought to bare.
Of course the mission only half succeeded, the U.S carriers being out of port at the time. The Americans met the Japanese head on at Midway and the Commonwealth army stalled then defeated the Japanese at Kohima and Imphal. The rest is history (sorry).
Again the reality is a bit more complicated. The U.S Public for the most part did not want to be involved, (especially after WW1) but the U.S Government wished to once more take a more offensive footing. The attack on Pearl Harbor provided the Casus Belli for the U.S Government to declare war on not only Japan but the Axis in general.corroded said:The US was isolationist before the Pearl Harbor attacks, though i understand that Roosevelt wanted to join. The attacks altered public perception, as any pre-emptive strike does.
Worse because the carriers were out of port, and carriers are the most dangerous weapons in a modern navy. Plus, they didn't even sink close to everything that was actually in port.rossatdi said:I thought it was the traditional culture of warfare was to make a show strength and then sue for peace. Theoretically by crippling the US's pacific capability with a stunning show of strength Japan would demand control over the Pacific.
A tactical & cultural misunderstanding. Also bravado.
Was only going from what I can dimly remember from years ago at school for GCSE (8 years ago). Pretty close though. I forgot that they thought it was their only realistic chance of winning.Raven_Letters said:A strategic misunderstanding not a tactical one - which of course makes the matter far worse. As for Bravado - well not much. See "Total War" by Peter Calvocoressi (If memory serves me right) the Japanese werent exactly Gung-ho about the plan at the highest levels, they realized that they were taking a huge gamble by antagonizing the U.S, but given the circumstances they felt that had little room to maneuver.rossatdi said:I thought it was the traditional culture of warfare was to make a show strength and then sue for peace. Theoretically by crippling the US's pacific capability with a stunning show of strength Japan would demand control over the Pacific.
A tactical & cultural misunderstanding. Also bravado.