Easy to refer to Pearl Harbor by itself, but the bigger question is, "What if Japan never did anything to cause America to break its neutrality?" If Japan ignored Hawaii, the P.I. and other American territories, and takes the Dutch East Indies and the various British holdings, would the U.S. have intervened?
The thing about the attack on Pearl Harbor (and I fell into this trap when I read the title) is that it wasn't a discrete event. It was part of the Japanese offensive campaign across the Pacific. It's like saying, "What if the US didn't land on Omaha Beach?"
Yes it was part of an overall Japanese offensive into So East Asia but so? They did not mean they had to 100% ENSURE a USA entry into that conflict by attack on PH. Militarily it made sense to attack PH but politically it was stupid. It guaranteed that FDR no longer had to contend with an isolationists movement at home that had been hamstringing his room to maneuver. Politically, the Japanese did what FDR could not: it killed the isolationist movement at home and BTW I believe the original plans for Overlord did not have a landing by anyone at what is called Omaha Beach so that is not a crazy question.
@@Wannes_ Yes. There was a military logic behind attacking PH as part of Imperial Japan's So. Asia move but NOT a political logic. Politically it was a gift to FDR cuz it knocked out the isolationist movement in one blow.
The McCollum Memo: The Smoking Gun of Pearl Harbor The memo detailed an 8 step plan to provoke Japan into attacking the United States. President Roosevelt, over the course of 1941, implemented all 8 of the recommendations contained in the McCollum memo. Following the eighth provocation, Japan attacked. The public was told that it was a complete surprise, an "intelligence failure", and America entered WorldWar2.
Bravo! I'm with Jon Parshall: "what ifs" are of limited value, but, the way you've done this one, and the one on Midway, give us, to my mind, a deeper insight into the knock-on effects of what actually did happen. Great video.
The video is supposed to be about the what ifs to show what alternative strategies Japan had. It is just one more video about Pearl Harbor with nothing new.
You can tell Jon knows his subject when he can correct a retired Rear Admiral and get away with it. Or maybe it says something about the retired Rear Admiral.
They are all clickbait, They promise to explore other directions that historic events could have gone and deliver information we have already and hundreds of other videos have already done.
The freezing of their assets and oil embargo backed them into a corner. If Japan did not attack Pearl Harbor, they had to back down. They had to give up their ambition to create their colonial empire in Asia. The entire ruling class would go crazy because they would be totally shamed. They had been winning and expanding and defeating others for decades. They convinced themselves that they were the superior race. And then back down without a fight?
Sooo... Who are you guys? I've watched 3 shows now with Jon Parshall, all very thought provoking, but I've never seen or heard of your channel before. No judgement yet on my part as to subscribing, however, after 3 shows it seems more than probable at this time given the quality of guest you have attracted. Well done!
Jon, you made it all the way thru without saying Kidō Butai or Kantai Kessen !!! Sincerely, Lenny Hendricks, An Unauthorized Pacific Fan, say hi to Seth and Bill for me.
Richardson’s objections was well taken. San Diego was out of reach of the IJN, the IJN carriers did not have the range to attack San Diego and had not developed at sea refueling. Had the US pacific fleet not been forward deployed, Japan could not attack them.
You have to remember Hawaii was 'just some islands' then. It didn't become a State until almost 20 years after the attack. It's still hard to fathom i was born in the 48 State USA in 1958
Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor was to protect the flank of its drive through SE Asia and the Phillipines. If Japan hadn't attacked Pearl Harbor an intact American fleet would have sallied forth from Hawaii, and possibly, probably, been destroyed by the vastly more experienced Japanese.
It was obviously not true. The Battle of the Coral Sea in May 1942 and the Battle of Midway in June 1942 demonstrated that the Japanese fleets were quite vulnerable in fleet actions in open seas despite their "vastly more experienced" crews.
@@tvgerbil1984As the US battlewagons would have been the spearhead, not the carriers. The results could be very very different. There is also the changes in command structure with the Battleships along. So it would still be a very big question mark how it would have gone.
People always comment on the radar crew reporting the incoming aircraft and consider it a missed opportunity to stop the Japanese. Even if the Americans believed the radar report and took action, there is little that could be accomplished in the approximately 40 minutes before the Japanese aircraft reached Hawaii. It would take all that time just to go through the chain of command and wake up Kimmel and report the planes. The same with the sighting of the midget submarines. There simply wasn’t time to do anything. Very different than MacArther letting his B-17s get destroyed on the ground.
macarthur planes lost because japanese bases on taiwan fogged in for 3 hour Macarthur pilots take when first word of the attack oh pearl island after 3 hour the planes need to landjust as the strike from taiwan arrives the planes on ground refueling
What if Japan didn't attack Pearl Harbor? They would have pulled a 911 inland with sleeper cells attacking military installations, infrastructure, etc.
@@brucenadeau2172 If MacArthur had talked to Lewis Brereton who was trying to talk to him but being told not to bother MacArthur by Sutherland, MacArthur's chief of staff, MacArthur would know his planes had to land sometime while he was deliberating for long hours on what to do. As it was, by the time he decided to bomb the Japanese in Formosa and ordered a reconnaissance flight, the Japanese were only minutes away from Clarke Field and all MacArthur's planes had to land to refuel and re-arm. For the Japanese, it was like shooting fish in a barrel.
Part of the strategy was also that Pearl Harbor was thought too shallow for torpedoes to work. Torpedo planes drop torpedoes and they go down 50-60 feet and PH has half that at best. The solution that the Japanese happened on was to adapt the torpedoes with a wooden sabot that keep the torp from falling too deep in the water and it survives the shallow water drop.
@noneofyourbusiness2997 The concept of attacking ships in port with carrier torpedo planes was first used by the Brits at Taranto. But the problem was to make such an attack feasible for Pearl Harbor, where it was too shallow for torpedoes launched from planes to work. Their solution was to install wooden fins on torpedoes, making them more buoyant so they didn't dive as deep.
Here's a big What If for your consideration: What if FDR authorized CNO Admiral Stark to inform Pacific Fleet's Admiral Kimmel that the Japanese Combined Fleet had basically disappeared. "They're out there somewhere but we have no idea where." I have no doubt in my mind that the Pacific Fleet would have sailed within 36 hours, for Kimmel's fleet had trained for it.
Perhaps even a warning to the officer in charge of the radar station at Oahu of Hawaii on any large formation of aircrafts approaching the island would have given the air defense a chance to put up a fight.
The American plan Orange was to gather up what they could and drive towards the Philippines seeking a decisive battle. The Japanese naval aviation, superior optics for rangefinding and night actions and their effective torpedoes would have been a nasty surprise. The. Japanese naval attack on pearl was partly prestige and without it the navy wasnt actually required to do very much. Its probably best left to wargamers, like other what iffs like sealion etc.
No I think it was a political not a miliary issue. The Japan error was political; They did for FDR what he could not: by attacking PH they killed the US isolationist movement in one blow.
Good discussion, but I don't think there was any way that Admiral Kimmel could have sent the fleet back to San Diego in the face of a Japanese attack. He would have faced a huge political outcry, probably worse than what he faced after the actual attack.
Kimmel couldn't have moved the fleet back to the West Coast because FDR would not allow him to do so. Remember, it was FDR that ordered the fleet to move from the West Coast to Pearl Harbor. Admiral Richardson, commander of the Pacific Fleet at the time of FDR's order, vehemently disagreed with the order and flew to Washington to argue with FDR. FDR fired him and replaced him with Kimmel. Richardson turned out to be absolutely correct.
Then there would have been a massive Battle of Midway that included many battleships on both sides. Japan would try to lure the US Pacific fleet into a massive battleship and carrier battle.
Have you done an episode examining Eisenhower not deciding to use a broad front strategy in Europe in the fall of '44 and concentrating logistics to one or the other of Bradley or Montgomery? I think it would be worth a look into both.
Great series, excellent episode. Noticed that you twice used a bit of footage of American dive-bombers (Dauntlesses?) during the raid footage. Bit incongruous, with the bright white stars on the fuselage! Anyway, really interesting, keep up the good work!
They use American dive bombers in the Pearl Harbor attack because they don't have actual video footage of Japanese dive bombers in action. If you watch the full video, you will see American TBF Avenger torpedo bombers playing the part of Japanese torpedo bombers.
Undoing history by acknowledging the Japanese impact would have been greater if the raid came o/a 25 December with every ship in harbor. The American posture would have been even lower followed up by massive shore bombardment to complete destroying military facilities in Hawaii, thus severely crippling American capabilities in the Pacific for a significant period of time.
John, you said that the battleship was the coin of the realm at the time. But didn't Pearl Harbor itself prove that the aircraft carrier is the naval weapon of the future (in 1941).
Strike four: the Tripartite Pact called for Germany to assist Japan if Japan were attacked by a non-Axis power. Japan, famously, did not join Germany in attacking the USSR.
Japan didn't join Germany in attacking the U.S.S.R. because Hitler made a Non-aggression pact with the U.S.S.R. in order to attack Poland. This voided the the Anti-Comintern Pact against the U.S.S.R. and the Japanese made peace with the U.S.S.R. bc of the Germany political and military move. Had Germany attacked Poland, the Russians/Soviets would have entered Poland to push the Germans out.
What if the Japanese hadn't sailed home again, but instead made an educated guess at the US carriers' whereabouts and turned west, aiming between Wake and Midway, scouting for them ?
another reason they didn't believe japan would not have attacked, pearl is a shallow harbor, the us never believed the torpedoes would work as well as they did
At the time the US torpedo situation was a complete mess, sub, surface and air, and surely those inferior Japanese couldn't do any better than them ... were they in for a nasty surprise !
It is interesting that Kimmel and Short kept pushing for more planes, more equipment, more of everything etc. Nimitz came in and instead complaining about the resources allocated to his command, he started fighting with what he had on hands. Kimmel claimed later that if he had the decoded messages he would have acted differently. Maybe, but I think Pearl Harbor was a failure of imagination.
I would agree with the thought that if the US knew of the attack then they should bring the fleet to readiness with all AA positions manned and tried to tough it out in Pearl. They would have had the added bonus of being able to scramble all the land based fighters they have at hand for support. I think that would have been better then putting to sea with no carriers, no air cover and trying to run down the Japanese fleet.
It hurts to hear someone say that the Japanese did us a favor by attacking Pearl Harbor the way they did, but I understand what they mean. They are right, but it doesn't make it hurt less.
If the Japanese didn't attack Pearl Harbor, they would still invade the Philippines because the Philippines located at the strategic center of the expanded Japanese Empire. It was an obstacle the Japanese had to remove on their way to conquer Southeast Asia. The attacks on US forces in the Philippines would be just as sneaky as in Pearl Harbor. It would have galvanized the US just the same.
One thing that the Japanese over looked on there pilots side. Is the fuel storage... if they would of detonated 1 fuel tank that wpuld of set us back another year or 2 in range and refueling on top of loosing the fleet..
What I want to hear is a discussion about what if the US didn't know that the Japanese planned to attack Midway? How would Nimitz have responded to the news that the Aleutians were under attack? Would this decoy have worked? Would the Yorktown be out of commission in dry dock leaving them with only two carriers?
*I have not watched this video yet, but my understanding is that Japan attacked Pearl Harbor because there was an American oil embargo against Japan for two reasons: Japan had already joined the "Axis Powers," along with Germany and Italy--and perhaps more importantly, the US did not want Japan to horn in on the natural resources to be gotten from various parts of the South Pacific, such as rubber from Malaysia.*
Seriously...... Japan attacked every one in Asia and the Pacific ON THE SAME DAY...... They had to get through the Philippines... So they needed America out of the way....
The US sat by and watched France fall, China get mauled, and Britain bombed. If the IJN ignored Hawaii and Philippines, they see nothing but more embargoes. The IJN would have been mostly out of a job, which is why they attacked.
True, as Russia would be put in a pincer of sorts and yet the Japanese would be put in the same meat grinder as Germany did as Russia had put enough troops to make Japan regret entering Russia to begin with. Also, Japan needed oil to defeat China in order to get to the oil fields in Russia.... which is why they needed the oil in the first place. Same if they are going through Russia with even more distance and natural/ manmade obstacles in their way than the Germans would be going through.
@@tiercel5561 Japan doesn't have to conduct a complete invasion of Siberia. They merely need to blockade the USSR. If we look at the battles of Kalkin Gol and Lake Kasan as a reference, the Japanese would most likely have been able to defeat the Soviet Far Eastern army group in detail by taking the trans-Siberian railway. They could then simply wait out the Soviets in Vladivostok while the Soviets would be focusing on Germany in Europe. Vladivostok would probably be put under operational encirclement (no supplies from Europe or America) within a matter of 6 weeks, and would probably surrender within a matter of months.
Massive error! No fire was set off on the fuel and ammo supplies so the aircraft carriers came home and were supplied. Also only 2 sunk ships were lost.
I came here because of the court marshal of Colonel Billy Mitchell, who predicted this attack in 1923 and then again in the 1930s. What if they had listened to him and acted accordingly?
I do believe the US would have been very redfaced on August 10th, 1945 when we had to explain why Hiroshima and Nagasaki looked a bit different than from the 5th of August 1945.
If the carriers had been sunk in December, Midway wouldn't have happened because the Japanese wouldn't have sent their carriers to Midway because Doolittle's raid wouldn't have taken place and the Japanese wouldn't have felt the need to extend the empire.
I used to work at CUSP (Decom Crew) and CINPACFLT. Road the transport to and from Ford Island twice a day past The USS Arizona and Battleship row. I stood at the front entrance to the Admiral's office and looked at Pearl Harbor, as a Sailor who has family who died that day, it was indescribable. My final Re-enlistment was over the USS Arizona Memorial, with my Retired Sailor Husband (20 years) and two children (aged 4 and 2 yrs.) for a total of 22 years 6 months and 22 days of continuous service, retiring out of Naval Legal Services Office Pacific Detachment Guam (and I met people who were on the beach when the Japanese flew over prior to the invasion of Guam and I hope they took my advice and wrote down their memoires of that time in history). This is a very informative 'what if'.
Now there's an interesting question. Because a political settlement may have been possible. Nobody in the West really cared about China, Korea and number of other Japanese occupations. In fact those may have benefited from a united Asian empire. But Japan attacked American, British and French "possessions". And though eventually they would have become independent the attack on western allies and interests was bound to provoke retaliation.
Thanks for another interesting video. One question that has rattled around in my head since I first heard about the alternative Northern Doctrine/Road is what would have happened if that choice had been made instead. I never understood with Operation Barbarossa already a massive success at the time why they wouldn't choose instead to attack the already weakened USSR instead. If the Northern Doctrine was actually viable and would get them the natural resources they need, it would seem like an easy way to bypass the US.
What happens is the attack on the Soviet Union is a disaster, as Japan rapidly runs out of oil, and the IJN and the IJA argue about the Navy having to give the Army their oil reserves. Additionally, there has been no oil found in Siberia in 1941, nor rubber, nor anything else Japan needs.
@@ianwhitchurch864 The Japanese ststained a serious defeat when they attacked the Soviets in the late 1930's. The best Soviet Divisions were still facing them in Mongolia at the time of Pearl Harbour. Stalin was able to gain a victory at Stalingrad using these troops when his intelligence people were able to tell him that the Japanese were no longer a threat in 1942.
Radar installation to protect Pearl Harbor actually detected and tracked the incoming Japanese planes 45 minutes before the planes arrived at Pearl Harbor. An inexperienced officer failed to raise alert and the rest was history.
Not cut off the Japanese oil and not got the Dutch and other nations to refuse to trade with them. The Japanese tried multiple times with the Dutch, for example. The Japanese planned invasion of the USSR was cancelled on the 9th of august 1941 after the USA oil embargo on the 1st the Japanese literally did a 180 less then a month before this campaign was to start ( Kantokuen ) They wasted considerable resources building up men and equipment in Manchuria for them to have to move the majority of it out for staging areas for the Pacific campaign.
What if the Japanese only attacked Malaya and Dutch East Indies, but not the Philippines or any US territories? Would Roosevelt be able to convince the country to go fight for European colonial possessions?
The war in the pacific was a guarantee, The timing didn't matter, Japan was an ally of Germany. When Germany declared war on the US, Japan became part of the problem, plus Japan needed to invade the Philippines and that was part of the US control. Pearl did nothing outside create a way to drop nukes on Japan, without Peral Harbor, the USA might not have had enough support to drop nukes on Japan
Nobody seems to focus on the what if they US was able to get its aircraft aloft - providing the opportunity to disrupt the attack and very few aircraft destroyed on the ground -
They could not avoid the Philippines. It would have blocked their transport of oil from Java, Sumatra, and Borneo back to Japan and the U.S. would have come to the aid of the British and Dutch. The Philippines had to be neutralized for Japan's plan to seize oil to have worked.
@@bobnewby9129 you clearly do not know how strong the isolationists in the US were. Lend Lease was not terribly popular. Remember that the draft was only continued by one vote. IF Japan had not attacked the US, they would have been able to even more quickly taken the prizes they most sought. And the Philippines were no threat to anyone; we did not have much of a fleet there or much in the way of air power compared to what Japan had. So claiming they were able to block anything is total horsecrap. THE only reason that the attack was delayed that long was because Yammoto wanted the last two carriers activated first. Otherwise they could have attacked the British and Dutch months earlier.
@@johnhallett5846 Gallup Poll, September 1941 Do you approve or disapprove of having the United States shoot at German submarines or warships on sight? September 26, 1941 Approve 56% Disapprove 34% No opinion 10%
When one plays the "what if" scenario, one has infinite possibilities. The fact is the Japanese did attack Pearl Harbor. The US could not accept that the Japanese could pull off such a bold plan. Sun Tzu warns, "Never underestimate your enemy. Expect the unexpected."
17:38 So a guy called Kermit ended up being the 'muppet of the century' decades before the muppet show even came into existence. With the naming similarity I have to wonder if he was being chased by a 'miss piggy' type character...
Lets face it, there would have been no ultimatum if they had decided not to attack US holdings. no need for it. They would be getting pretty much everything they needed without ut
Please God no. We've had Midway in which Pearl Harbour was mentioned. Every which way that WW2 could've been different. I know it's hard to grasp but there have been other significant wars in History before WW2
How about a show on "what if the Japanese had withdrawn from China proper, while staying in Manchukuo (their puppet state, where they were well established)?"
Great stuff. America never pardoned Kimmel or Short and I call it the Captain 👩✈️ Smith & Admiral Kimmel Syndrome; at Pearl Harbor 7 December 1941 not one airplane in the air; not one anti aircraft gun manned; not one radar protocol to follow. They had time to TEST THE RADAR and determine the difference between 12 B-17s and 100s of airplanes approaching from the North West and a dozen slow bombers coming from the East. Kimmel and Short should have been court martialed
@p38cobra Actually, both Kimmel and Short demanded courts martial, but were denied. Both felt they weren't given an opportunity to make their case to the American public.
Allot of people critique Yamamoto's decision to attack pearl harbor... but it really was the best of the bad options. If not for extremely bad luck and Americans aggressiveness it would have bought Japan 1 or 2 years....
@@jackaubrey8435 it was just starting. The two ocean bill was great but we had to build the shipyards FIRST and then the fleet,. most of the NAVY did not start showing up until 1943.
@@johnhallett5846 I think you're overplaying 'just starting'. All the fast battleships the US built in WWII were laid down by December 1941. Also, three Essex class and one Alaska class. I'm not sure how much shipyard expansion for heavy ships was needed, although I am aware there is considerable increase in the building of smaller ships.
None of the usn warships had adequate AAA, and all would have been sunk with no chance of repair. Japan would have eventually lost in 48 or 49. Russia and Great Britain would still turn to Japan in June 45, plus Japan had no defensevagainst the F4U-4 or the F8F Bearcat, which was already en route to Japan when they surrendered.
(3:22) positioning our navy at pearl harbor was in response to Theodore Roosevelt's intuition that we (the US of A) would have future issues with the Japanese during and after he negotiated the peace between the Russo-Japanese war...I think that was when he won his Nobel prize (Roosevelt).
Start off with a thumbs down. As an educated historian, to say Americans over fixate on Pearl Harbor is akin to saying the world fixated on the invasion of Poland that sparked off WWII. It is absolutely disingenuous to dismiss PH as an American issue. It was a sucker punch and deserves the fixation it is given from Americans.
