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

Bruce Williams and the Japanese invasion of California

Discussion in 'War in the Pacific' started by McMark, Dec 24, 2009.

  1. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    No kidding. I think half would have committed sepuku when they crested the Sierras and saw nothing but alklai desert and the Great Nevada Basin rockpile.

    Taking a southern route through the Chocolate and Superstition mountains would have brought them right through present day Ft. Irwin, which was the home base of non other than a little fire cracker named George S. Patton. Then if you consider that any flat non inhabitted expanse was used for dropping bombs by either the Aircorps or the Navy or for artillery practice by the Army and Marine Corps the invasion force would be walking through the "Alpha Bravo Range" of nothing but pre planned indirect fire targets.
     
  2. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    And there's always the possibility that the Native Americans would decide they hated the Japanese more than they hated the white man. Then the Japanese would learn to fear the night.
     
  3. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    The American Indians do not have a great track record at defending against amphibious assaults. The Pilgrims had no problems establishing a beach head at Plymouth Rock.

    The first major revision to the American Indian Amphibious doctrine wasn't until after WW2 when they incorporated Casinos in their layered beach defense matrix.
     
    A-58 likes this.
  4. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    Okay, they're not beach bunnies. In the Sierra Nevadas, on the other hand.
     
  5. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    :deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse:

    Da_n It still looks like something that may once have been organic ....

    :deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse:



    Somewhere I've seen a more energetic version of this ....
     
  6. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,006
    Sierra Nevadas and the plains are a different story, maybe, it would all depend on if the Japanese made them a better offer than shiny trinkets and wool blankets. I don't see Native Americans giving up beef and maze for fish heads and rice.
     
  7. LRusso216

    LRusso216 Graybeard Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2009
    Messages:
    14,288
    Likes Received:
    2,605
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    The Rockies were my first thought when I read the original post. Just how were the Japanese supposed to send enough men and equipment across that range to take the Plains all the way to the Mississippi? Of course, I can't see them having the ability to even get to the Rockies in the first place. Does the broadcaster suppose that the American military (as weakened as it was) was going to sit idly by while the Japanese roamed up and down the coast looking for a way across the mountains? There was plenty of industrial capability in the US, IMO, to quickly respond to any such invasion. Let's not even talk about the supply line across the Pacific. There is so much nonsense in the original premise that it's hard to know where to begin in deconstructing it.
     
  8. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    Let's keep it simple. Could they "take" the West Coast? If so, how much, how long and at what price? Based on their known capabilities at the time.
     
  9. McMark

    McMark Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2008
    Messages:
    19
    Likes Received:
    1
    How much? Very very little
    How long? About 2 weeks

    Basically, they could have established an ineffective beach head somewhere near LA, or maybe Illwaco. It could have been held for a short time. But they lacked anywhere near the logistical means to make their landing anything other than a worthless waste of troops
     
  10. Biak

    Biak Boy from Illinois Staff Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    9,077
    Likes Received:
    2,473
    I don't remember the movie.................Oops sorry I thought it said Bruce Willis.
     
  11. formerjughead

    formerjughead The Cooler King

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2008
    Messages:
    5,627
    Likes Received:
    1,006

    Nope. Naval Airship patrols and Coastal Defense improvements and modernization would have prevented it. The west coast was virtually bristling with Coastal Artillery in the years up to WW2, and the skies were under constant patrol by Lighter Than Aircraft flying patrols from Tustin, Moffet and Tillamook.
     
  12. Devilsadvocate

    Devilsadvocate Ace

    Joined:
    May 6, 2008
    Messages:
    2,194
    Likes Received:
    346
    A lot depends on the time frame; if it's December, 1941, the answer is quite simply, no.

    According to H. P. Willmott, it required of the Japanese the equivalent of 11 divisions to subdue the Philippines, Borneo, Malaya/Singapore and the NEI. But those campaigns were spaced out over nearly six months, and most of the logistical shipping, and a good portion of the naval combatants, involved did double, triple, and even quadruple, duty to accomplish it. Had the Japanese been required to move even as few as six divisions at one time over a distance of say, 5,000 NM, they just couldn't have done it.

    I would guess the Japanese would need at least the same number of divisions (twelve) that they calculated were required for the conquest of Australia, plus aircraft, artillery, armor, and lots more transport (trucks, horses, or whatever). Thats not to mention service and support units, base troops, etc. Aircraft might be initially supplied by the IJN carriers, but here there is another problem; the carriers advanced at something like 18-20 knots, the troop convoys at 8-10 knots, coordinating the two so that they arrive in the correct time intervals would be extremely difficult. If the carriers arrive too soon, their offensive power would be blunted before the troops arrive. If the troop transports arrive before the carriers have had time to neutralize American land-based air, they would be decimated; the timing has to be precise and it is based on factors that would be all but impossible to calculate ahead of time.

    In addition, the longest time period the IJN carriers ever spent on operations at sea was in December, 1941, when the Hiryu and Soryu spent 33 continuous days at sea on the Pearl Harbor mission. An attack on the West Coast of the US would require at least twice that time, and probably more like three months. The IJN carriers just couldn't remain operational that long, even with adequate fleet oilers, which the Japanese didn't have.

    No matter where they attempt to land (and there aren't any really good choices), the US air power in that region has to be destroyed. That means the IJN carriers have to move in and neutralize US air power before the troop transports can operate there. This makes the carriers vulnerable to counter attack by US naval units including subs and carriers and attack by land-based air. It would be the Midway conundrum all over again, but on a much more massive scale.

    If the Japanese carriers cannot guarantee air superiority over the landing beaches, there is no point in bringing in the transports to initiate a landing. Given the ability of the US to pour air reinforcements into West Coast bases at a fairly short notice, I can't imagine the limited number of Japanese naval aircraft achieving air superiority for more than few hours.

    All of this, of course, assumes that there is no Japanese attack on the Asian Pacific possessions of the US, Britain, and the Netherlands, and no attack on Pearl Harbor. These attacks, in themselves, would preclude any attempt to attack the US West Coast, as they would alert the West Coast defenses and make an invasion impossible.
     
  13. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    I think they could have held out siginficantly longer if they landed at Yellow Banks. It's my favorite beach. Even today it's about a 10 mile hike in from the nearest road up near the tip of the Olympic Penninsuala. Of course what the utility of holding it is a very good question.
     
  14. Gromit801

    Gromit801 Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,247
    Likes Received:
    134
    I think any Japanese forces that landed on the West Coast, would have lasted about two weeks. Counter attacks, and a heavily armed citizenry would have made short work of them. Remember, there were actually a lot of Thompsons, BAR's and even some Browning .30's in the hands of private owners back then. Then add all the hunters.... all these things the Japanese never had to face anywhere else.
     
  15. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    I belong to a gun club that was founded before Missouri became a state. We have well over a thousand rifles between the various members. One of our senior members is "very high" in the National Guard. He says he'd rather not take us on in a fire fight. We average a lot more trigger time than his troopers.
     
  16. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    I'm not sure "irregulars" are going to stop a major Japanese offensive or push them back into the sea. However they would be a big thorn in the side. Especially as locals are likely to have hunted the areas and be very familiar with them. In the heavy woods of the North West to include Northern California this could be a huge factor as it would could make scouting, patroling, and even supply runs extremely hazardous. While they were on the beach it might not matter that much but once they try to get inland ...

    Probably not as much of a factor in Southern California until they reach the Sierras. Although the sheer number of armed citizens might make it very difficult for the Japanese to tell just where regular US units were concentrated.
     
  17. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    We'd be much like the Russian partisans, intent on raised as much Caine as we could. We had a bunch of WWI vets back then, the Springfields would have been taken down from over the fireplaces.
     
  18. lwd

    lwd Ace

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    12,322
    Likes Received:
    1,245
    Location:
    Michigan
    From the stories I've heard of that time few had relegated their rifles to "over the mantel" deer hunting indeed hunting of all types was almost as much a "occupation" as it was a "sport" putting food on the table of any kind in the 30's was not taken trivially. I still remember my dad being able to drop 2 or 3 ducks from a flock of ducks almost every time he opened up on one and that was with only 3 rounds. I also don't recall him being accounted all that great a shot among his contemporaries.
     
  19. OpanaPointer

    OpanaPointer I Point at Opana Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2008
    Messages:
    18,246
    Likes Received:
    5,669
    Three gentlemen were hired to reduce the squirrel population in a New England town back in the late 1700s. They shot a few of them. Over 5,000 squirrels in a 72 hour period. This was with muzzle loaders. (I'm pretty sure they had help with the loading and were using more than one gun each.)
     
  20. brndirt1

    brndirt1 Saddle Tramp

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2008
    Messages:
    9,713
    Likes Received:
    1,501
    In the western USA it wouldn't be just Springfields and Remingtons that came off the wall, or out of the closets. My Dad and Grandpa were excellent shots with their Winchesters, as well as their Remington model 10 12 gauge pumps. And they weren't the "best" shots in the locale either, just dang good. I never saw either of them ever take more than one shot at a running deer in the 100-150 yard range. With OPEN SIGHTS!

    Having a quite well armed "civilian" populace would be a new experience for the Japanese, or even the Germans as an invasion force in/on the North American land-mass. The Canadians are no slouches at hunting/shooting either.
     

Share This Page