Historical Fantasy: Pearl Harbor Attack Fails

[Whoha]

Re: Historical Fantasy: Pearl Harbor Attack Fails

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Suppose on the day of the attack, the American battleship fleet wasn't in the harbor (or a most, on a couple of battleships), but had actually gone to sea for excercises. As a result, the Japanese attack flotilla shows up, but has very little to attack. How is history changed?

they hit the drydock instead which would have had more effect.

[Qilue]

Originally posted by snoopy369
An interesting question - if they don't sink a good number of our existing ships, do we fail to build as many new ones (and focus as much on carriers), and end up doing *worse*?

Worse? Come on, almost all these alternate history discusions are just variations of US victory.

[CerberusIV]

The Pearl Harbor attack did fail. The US carriers weren't damaged/destroyed. The Japanese failed to launch a follow up strike to destroy the dockyard facilities. If either of those had happened then the Japanese run of victories would have gone on longer and there might have been no Coral Sea or Midway for an extra year.

It would not have changed the result provided the US was still willing to fight through to the defeat of Japan.

[Tattila the Hun]

Originally posted by Qilue


Worse? Come on, almost all these alternate history discusions are just variations of US victory.

"Well, we still have lot of these BB's, so I doubt we will need to build anymore, certainly not these "carry-ers". See how well the japs did with them..."

[BeBMan]

Pearl Harbor wasn't the only battle proving the value of carriers. Just look what the Royal Navy did with a single carrier at Taranto in Nov. 1940.

[molly bloom]

'Pearl Harbour' film with Ben Affleck fails to get financing.


Now that's a counterfactual I'd pay to be in.

General: Mr. President, with all due respect, sir... what you're asking can't be done.

If only they'd said that about the film.

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by CerberusIV
The Pearl Harbor attack did fail. The US carriers weren't damaged/destroyed. The Japanese failed to launch a follow up strike to destroy the dockyard facilities. If either of those had happened then the Japanese run of victories would have gone on longer and there might have been no Coral Sea or Midway for an extra year.

It would not have changed the result provided the US was still willing to fight through to the defeat of Japan.

Exactly.
If not even the battleships would have been hit, the war probably would have been somewhat shorter and probably there wouldn´t be any nuked japanese cities.
Within the USA there would probably be lesser repressions against citizens with japanese origins (probably there wouldn´t even be an executive order 9066 which resulted in internment camps for citizens with japanese origins).

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
thanks

The spelling is still wrong

[Darius871]

Re: Historical Fantasy: Pearl Harbor Attack Fails

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Suppose on the day of the attack, the American battleship fleet wasn't in the harbor (or a most, on a couple of battleships), but had actually gone to sea for excercises. As a result, the Japanese attack flotilla shows up, but has very little to attack. How is history changed?

Clearly workers' strikes would have toppled governments throughout the industrialized world, as in any counterfactual scenario.

[Sandman]

Molly

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Jaguar
We'd need new carriers to do it, still. Doolittle used a carrier.

Building a new carrier would take less time than building the bomb.

[chequita guevara]

I'm thinking without the capital ships to concentrate on, the planes attack the facilities instead, such as the dry docks, the oil depots, and the sub base.

We primarily talk about how the loss of the capital ships forced us to learn carrier warfare, but one of the main factors bringing down Japan was the fact that our sub fleet ravaged Japanese shipping. Without the Pearl facilities, that leaves the Philippines (which falls soon) and Freemantle, at least until the base can be repaired. I have no idea how long that would take, but it leaves Japan in a stronger position until then. Coupled with a couple major naval victories on the part of Japan, maybe the Japanese complete the occupation of the Solomons and cut Australia off.

Ultiamtely, I think without occupying Hawaii, there is no scenario in which Japan doesn't lose the war.

[Qilue]

Why are you even bothering to discuss this when clearly the US will always emerge triumphant no matter what happens.