Comments by "Bruce Tucker" (@brucetucker4847) on "Why Japan had NO Chance in WW2" video.

@browncoat697 It wasn't Hawaii that the war was fought over, it was the Pacific Fleet. The UK might not have cared much about Norfolk Island or Tahiti, but if the Japanese had sunk half the Royal Navy at anchor in Ceylon or Singapore the British would have reacted the same way the US did after Pearl Harbor. The reason the Pacific Fleet was in Pearl Harbor to begin with was, of course, China. China was much too important economically for any of the great powers to just sit back and watch another try to conquer the whole country. And mass atrocities like Nanjing weren't making Japan any more popular. Majestic Oak, the US didn't go all-out in those wars because they were not major threats. If the Japanese had looked a little further back to see how the Union states responded to Fort Sumter, they might have thought twice about attacking the "soft" US. What Sherman did to Georgia might have been a useful indicator of what LeMay was likely to do to Tokyo.
14
And more fleet carriers than enemy heavy cruisers.
13
@azopeopaz3059 "usa fight against 10 maximun div in west front the rest surender the moment they meet" You are absolutely out of your mind. By December 1944 the Germans had 76 of their 211 active divisions deployed on the Western Front, about 35%, and at least 2/3 of those troops were facing the Americans. And even before D-Day something like 3/4 of the Luftwaffe's fighter and AA strength was deployed in the west. The US, which you claim sent 98% of its strength to the Pacific, had 68 divisions in combat in Western Europe by 1945 and around 20 (including Marines) in the Pacific and Burma. The US Navy was much more heavily deployed in the Pacific but the Army Air Force was even more heavily deployed in Europe than the ground forces, so probably something like 2/3 of total US combat forces were deployed against Germany. I had five uncles who served in WW2: two in the Pacific, two in Europe, and one on convoys in the Atlantic. If any of the latter three were still alive to hear you say the US' share of fighting against Germany was insignificant they'd probably punch you in the teeth even at 98 years of age. Over a quarter of a million American soldiers, sailors, and airmen gave their lives to free Europe from Nazi tyranny and you are spitting on the sacrifices made by those men.
6
@user-pn3im5sm7k Nobody was fighting for "global bankers," whatever that's supposed to mean. Let me guess, you mean the "you know hews".
5
@joelgrosschmidt5507 China was the main front for the IJA but the war there made almost no difference to the outcome of the larger war in Asia and the Pacific. Had China just surrendered in 1942 Japan would still have lost at about the same time. They had no way to deploy all those troops to the South or Central Pacific and no way to supply them there if they could transport them. It probably would have made an Allied invasion of Japan impossible and the Soviet invasion of Manchuria much more difficult, but the Allied blockade and strategic bombing would have forced a Japanese surrender in 1945 or early 1946, and that's not even considering the A-bombs. In short, for the US and its allies the war against Japan was primarily a naval and air war with the ground forces mostly engaging Japanese units that had been cut off from reinforcement and resupply, and in the naval and air war the front line for Japan was in the Pacific and China was a costly but largely indecisive sideshow. The Japanese Empire effectively died in the seas around and the skies above the Solomon, Marianas, and Philippine Islands.
3
Maybe if you slow the video down so it takes a month or two... and even then, you're not going to remember much of the month or two.
2
It worked for the North Vietnamese, but it was a very, very costly victory.
1
@danielhughes5932 I mean, not all that many torpeckers survived long enough to drop them. You do have a few extras from submarines, though.
1
Another factor was that Japan, unlike the US and UK, was heavily dependent on foreign shipping before the war, and most of that foreign shipping was owned and operated by the countries they attacked. Something like 40% of the shipping that had supplied Japanese industry in peacetime effectively evaporated the moment they started the war. And of course the war economy vastly increased the demand for cargo ships. Japan would never have been able to make up that loss with its own shipbuilding, let alone even begin to replace the ships lost to enemy action. So the Allied war against Japanese commerce shipping effectively started on 2nd base. That's not to minimize what Allied, primarily American, submarines accomplished, they turned what would already have been an economic disaster into an utter catastrophe that completely crippled Japanese industry by the end of the war.
1
@edfrawley4356 Yeah, it was more like 1944 -- rot, crumble.
1