Quote:
Originally posted by aap1966
Once the US was involved, Japan had lost.
Remember, before Pearl Harbour large portions of the US Infantry were training with broomsticks because they had insufficent rifles, by the end of the war the US was launching aircraft carriers (on average) every 2 weeks.
In "total war" the biggest, most efficent economy wins.
Of course, back then the Democrats actually wanted the US to win wars, so that helped too.
|
While what you are saying is true, as far as Japan's beating America through warfare, there were plenty of rifles for the troops. The Springfield bolt actions were already well into being replaced by the Garand semi-auto's in 1940, aircraft production was already on a wartime footing, with one of the largest wargames ever held in the summer of 1941 at what is now Fort Polk, LA. The Japanese attack was not only not a "sneak attack", it was expected. All of the anti-aircraft batteries in the attacked area were in full use in considerable less than 10 minutes, they were in fact loaded with live ammo on a continuous basis for over a year leading up to the attack.
Had the US government concentrated 80% of the war effort in the Pacific against Japan, the end of warfare with Japan would have come two years earlier than it did, the actual war spending and troops in the Pacific theater were about 15% of the total, the european theater got the lion's share of the effort. A most unfortunate historical fact.