Welcome to the WWII Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the community.

British Blunders on the Pacific War

Discussion in 'Leaders of World War 2' started by me262 phpbb3, Feb 23, 2004.

  1. Phantasm

    Phantasm New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2004
    Messages:
    13
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    Ouch :eek:

    Thanks, Roel
     
  2. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    You're welcome. I can advise everyone to read 'And We Shall Shock Them' by David Fraser, which records every action of WW2 in which British army units participated on the three major fronts. It has a really solid analysis of the incapability of British command in the early years.
     
  3. FRIEND phpbb3

    FRIEND phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2004
    Messages:
    51
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    British blunders

    First blunder was committed before the war when Treasury officials refused enough monies for a proper defence structure till it was too late plus racial stereotyping and bigotry stated that the Japanese couldnt fight, fly modern planes and their ships were rubbish. Plus the British had very inferior (Leadership?)
     
  4. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Yes, South-East Asia was another one of those rear areas that didn't exactly get the best of men, equipment and leaders.
     
  5. johann phpbb3

    johann phpbb3 New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 5, 2004
    Messages:
    455
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Chicago
    via TanksinWW2
    Because of racial issues, like FRIEND said. I mean they were just Asians! Why should we be afraid of them?! They don't even look like us!

    The above is not my view, but the view of many Americans.
     
  6. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    Yes, as I said before the American propaganda institutes (and the British too for that matter) all tried to make the Japanese look like minor beings during WW2. They had posters saying "the enemy of mankind" showing a half naked berserk Jap with a rifle, bayonet fixed. Or a picture of eating Japanese POWs who look a bit like monkeys, perhaps a manipulated picture anyway, with an added text saying that the Japanese race is "represented by these low-browed, puzzled-looking little men".
     
  7. PMN1

    PMN1 recruit

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    1
    via TanksinWW2
  8. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    A sad fact. It has to be admitted that when the Japanese overran the European colonies in the Pacific, they were usually welcomed as liberators by the natives. This was until the natives discovered (the hard way) that they had just exchanged one set of masters for another.
     
  9. ray243

    ray243 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2004
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    but if the british counter attack in the last day, japs may not win singapore...
     
  10. Ricky

    Ricky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,974
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    Well, maybe.
    How well off were they for supplies?

    Plus - as far as they knew the Japanese were present in overwhelming strength. How else could they have done what they did?
    And with armour...

    Incompetant leadership at Singapore had already lost the garrison control of the reserviors (the only supply of fresh water on the island). The possible evacuation route was effectively closed with the sinking of Force Z, and the loss of control of the air.

    In terms of numbers, maybe a counter-attack could have succeeded - but throw in bad leadership, lack of supplies, no Military Intelligence worth having, no air cover, no armour, sod-all useful artillery, plummeting morale...
    I'm not so sure it would have worked. Maybe they should have tried, though.
     
  11. Roel

    Roel New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2003
    Messages:
    12,678
    Likes Received:
    3
    Location:
    Netherlands
    via TanksinWW2
    It would have had the same effect as the last Banzai charge on Iwo Jima. A temporary shock that doesn't achieve anything because it lacks any achievable goal and any support whatsoever. The Singapore defeat was just a continuous losing withdrawal.
     
  12. Ebar

    Ebar New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    On a space station in geosynchronous orbit above y
    via TanksinWW2
    The defence of Singapore could almost be described as the A to Z of how not to defend somewhere.

    1) The idea that the Guns at Singapore couldn't fire inland is a myth, they could but they didn't have any HE only AP for anti ship work.

    2) The fall of Singapore wasn't a dead cert. The Japanese came very close to having to withdraw because they out ran their supply lines.

    3) The commander of force Z was promised air support from land based fighters this failed to appear. As I understand the Japanese bomber didn't have fighter cover so even the limited fighters available might have been enough.

    4) Many Japanese aircraft had a much longer range than people thought. During the early period of the war in the east Japanese aircraft popped up in all sorts of places people didn't expect them. The force Z admiral didn't think he was in range.

    5) Up to force Z no battleship had been sunk at sea. Easy to be wise after the event.

    6) Unfortunately at this point in the war the British were under sever presure everywhere. The far east was basically at the end of the queue for resources.
     
  13. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    Very nice summation, Ebar. It's a shame that the RAF wouldn't send any squadrons of Spitfires or at least Hurricanes to Singapore, given the numbers of them they were wasting in the fighter sweeps over France. And some better bombers, too; Wellingtons at least.
     
  14. PMN1

    PMN1 recruit

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2004
    Messages:
    1,032
    Likes Received:
    1
    via TanksinWW2
    Hurricanes and Spitfires

    From what I've read the Hurricanes defending Columbo got a very rough handling from Nagumo's carriers Zeros in April '42 and Spitfires (flown by RAF BoB vets) found themsleves in trouble on more than one occasion though cant remember the version that was operational in the region at that time.
     
  15. Ricky

    Ricky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2004
    Messages:
    11,974
    Likes Received:
    105
    Location:
    Luton, UK
    via TanksinWW2
    This was largely because the RAF pilots were BoB veterans. Used to facing the Bf109, they tended to try and dogfight, which was not always a good idea against the Zero. 'Zoom & Boom' were far better tactics for Spit vs Zero combat, but it took a while to realise this...
     
  16. Ebar

    Ebar New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 27, 2004
    Messages:
    2,006
    Likes Received:
    1
    Location:
    On a space station in geosynchronous orbit above y
    via TanksinWW2
    I think the biggest advantage the Japanese army enjoyed in 41/42 was it reputation. From what I've read most of their equipment was at best nothing to write home about and supply lines were always a problem but they enjoyed a rep as asian supermen. The British didn't a lot better once they figured they could go toe to toe with the Japanese.

    I was always impressed with the way the British used Lee/Grants in some of the defensive battles in the second half of the war.
     
  17. corpcasselbury

    corpcasselbury New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2003
    Messages:
    4,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    High Point, North Carolina, USA
    via TanksinWW2
    I agree. The Japanese got a massive reputation because of their early victories, never mind that there were a lot of reasons they did win, most of them beyond the control of the Japanese, but still quite handy for them. Once the initial shock wore off and the Allies got their feet back under them, things changed dramatically. Japanese deficiencies became apparent and were exploited, and their tide of victory began receding. This took time, of course, because the Japanese were nothing if not tough. But they were hardly supermen.
     
  18. liang

    liang New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2003
    Messages:
    830
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    via TanksinWW2
    The sad part was, even if task force Z made it safely to Singapore. This small number of warships would have been annihilated by the powerful Japanese battleship squadrons and aircraft carriers tasks forces. Even though the mightly prince of whales went down unceremoniously, at least it held the distinction for being the first warship to score a hit on the dreaded Bismarck.
     
  19. ray243

    ray243 New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2004
    Messages:
    113
    Likes Received:
    0
    via TanksinWW2
    can they sent it in time, maybe it will take awhile, but given that the remainding five destoyers of force z had escape to java, i think the prince of wales and the repluse will do the same. If the japanese did not sent in more naval support, the allied force at battle of java sea will have more chance of defending java.

    Oh and i want to ask, what would happen if the british carrier( forgt which one) was able to reached singapore and provide air cover, would the british able to fair better?
     
  20. liang

    liang New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2003
    Messages:
    830
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    USA
    via TanksinWW2
    One flat top against a handful of Jap flattops, it's a mismatch. The British carriers are superior to the American carriers in one area: they have armored deck, not wooden ones, which meant they they can absorb more punishments from the air: whehter bombs or Kamikazees.
     

Share This Page