Invasion Of North America???

Hello forum, im sorry if theres a thread about this already just link me the thread if too lazy yo answer......But would a german invasion of North America seem realistic? Or was this just impossible back then? If so did the Germans purpose plans on it at all? thank you!

 

The Germans weren't logistically capable of crossing the English Channel. Me thinks they had zero capability of landing any sizeable force across the Atlantic Ocean as well.

The Japanese however...

 

I was being somewhat facetious...

However, the Japanese DID invade North America and hold territory there for an extended period of time on a small scale before being evicted by the Americans. See Kiska and Attu.

In 1941 the Japanese did possess the transports and warships neccesary to launch an invasion of the lower 48 with a sizeable military force, however, like you stated the ability to supply and sustain such an operation was just not there.

Had the Japanese caught the American carriers at Pearl Harbor and sent transports and infantry to Hawaii in December 1941, built up supplies for a few years, island hopped the rest of the islands in the Pacific, and then launched a west coast invasion in say in 1944 or 1945, maybe... But then again by that time Americas industrial might would have kicked in, there probably would have been a Japanese first strategy, and their time would have been numbered anyway. Perhaps a political solution may have arisen after the fall of Hawaii. Too many what ifs.

I'll hang my hat on Kiska and Attu and say that on a limited scale, the Japanese did successfully invade North America and stay there for awhile.

Cheers!

 

Hitler did possess some grandiose plans for attacking the US based upon the 'Z' plan for naval rearmament. If completed, Germany would have 4 superbattleships (somewhere between a US Iowa and a Yamato) 6-8 'Bismarks', 4-6 'Sharnhorst's (up-gunned to 6-15' cannon's), 2-3 Aircraft Carriers and other smaller fleet units. These ships were supposed to be ready by 1948-50. The first problem was unless Germany spent nearly all her steel production on this project it could not even come close to being done on time. The second problem there was that pesky war with England and Russia to be won which devoured most of German production and halting any shipbuilding save U-Boats.

It is also doubtfull that Germany had enough shipyards to build all these ships in the timeframe even without a war in 1939. Of course by the time they had completed these ships the day of the battleship would have passed, and the three carriers planned (roughly equivilent to US light carriers of the Independence class) would not be enough. It was all a pipedream.

 

If you want to hang your hat on the Japanese Invasion of Kiska and Attu as being proof that the Japanese successfully invaded North America you go right ahead. I will; however, encourage you to look at a map before you walk to far away from your hat.

Granted Attu and Kiska are both on the North American Continental Plate you need to take into account that so is Vladivostok and a good portion of Siberia.

Another thing to consider is the weather in Attu and Kiska: there is only a 3 month window that allows for any kind of regular air travel into either of the islands and sea conditions only allow for about 6 months of operations before things start to freeze over.

Then we can also say that Attu and Kiska are actually further away from any type of beach that would suitable for an amphibious assault that provide anything close to a route inland than the Hawaiian Islands.

So that leaves us with the Hawaiian Islands as a staging point for the Japanese to invade the Mainland. 3,000+/- miles from Hawaii to California that they would have had to fight their way through going to and coming from the invasion beaches.

A silly proposition at best with little foundation of probability.

 

An invasion of the US belongs to the realms of scifi IMO...even if the Germans would have been able to construe a sizeable navy there would still be a lot of problems. As is often stated on this board the German naval doctrine, experience and technical ability were lacking...see message #24 from this thread for an example; http://www.ww2f.com/what-if-europea...-germany-had-built-7-carriers-before-war.html

@Emmerson_Bigguns: about the islands of Kiska and Attu...extrapolating from your case the Germans held territories from the British Isles, i.e. the Channel Islands...would you say that on a limited scale the Germans were succesful in invading the British Isles? Perhaps we have to define limited scale, but it surely is very, VERY limited...;-)

 

Japan, as a naval power, had more of the resources needed to pull off an invasion of the US, but also greater problems as well. As formerjughead points out distance is the largest, followed by the limits of Japans army with heavy guns and armor. Finally the rockies are a natural barrier to hold them long enough to gather the men and supplies to counterattack.

 

I've seen a fair amount of debate in various "what if" forums about Japanese invasions of Hawaii. The general conclusion seems to be that they never had the capabiltiy to have any sort of reasonable chance at a successful invasion there. Indeed there is considerable merit to the argument that had the US carriers not contested Midway that that invasion would have failed as well. This would indicate a Japanese invasion of the lower 48 would have ~0 probability of success. The Germans had even less capability in that regard than the Japanese.

 

Again, being somewhat facetious in the spirit of a 'what if' kind of thread...

The Japanese DID successfully invade North America. Yes, Kiska and Attu are on the North American plate, which as was pointed out included some Russian territory as well, however, Kiska and Attu are also considered part of Alaska, which at the time was a territory of the United States, located on the continent of North America. The Japanese did land a force of over 8000 and occupy the territory with open supply lines (to some extent anyway) for nearly one year. I'd consider this an invasion.


Why was the Alaskan Highway built? Because the United States was concerned with a very real Japanese threat to the Aleutian Islands, which was already underway, and perhaps further mainland Alaska, which in not inplausible given the circumstances.


While the the Japanese occupation of Kiska and Attu most certainly didn't serve as anything more than an attempt to widen their perimeter defense, the Japanese existence there was deemed enough of a threat to send several Allied Divisions to the islands in May 1943 to evict the Japanese.


Also, this operation can be considered a bit more than just a raid by the Japanese since in January 1943 they attempted to reinforce the garrison there, intending to stay for awhile I guess.


A Japanese force, using Kiska and Attu as a jumping off point, if the supply lines were kept open (more than somewhat) and able to be reinforced, could have concieveably begun a campaign up the Aleutian Island chain towards Dutch Harbor (already attacked by the Japanese previously) and eventually taken Anchorage, had the opportunities presented themselves.


Most of the history of the Aleutian Campaign I have read thus far does consider this to be an invasion of the North American continent. The precedent is out there even if one disagrees with it. Kiska and Attu were the only American territory on the North American continent which were invaded and occupied by the Japanese during World War II despite their obvious distance from the West Coast of the mainland United States or even Alaska proper.


As for the invasion of the west coast of the mainland United States. In December 1941 the Japanese did possess a half a dozen aircraft carriers, enough transports, and adequate cruisers, subs, destroyers, etc... to send a sizeable invasion force and put it on the beaches in California, Oregon, Washington.


But as has been stated why? It would be nearly impossible to supply and maintain such a sizeable force so far away from the home islands. The real problem lies not just invading the United States, it lies in occuping it. Which for any army in 1941 would have been an impossible task. The best the Japanese could have hope for was the capture of a major city for a few days, weeks, maybe months (but unlikely) and then perhaps a political settlement.


Also, keep in mind that when the Allies invaded North Africa, many of the ships that dropped men and material on those beaches sailed directly from Norfolk, Virginia. Granted, there were different conditions which allowed the Allies to do this that differed from what the Japanese had to deal with in the Aleutians, but, it does demonstrate that it is possible to move a sizeable invasion force a significant distance by sea and be successful.


The Japanese invasion of mainland America a ridculous proposition? Absolutely. But an argument can still be made. Even if its a bit disingenious. The Japanese did have the capability to do it. The question is, based on the obvious reasons already stated and probably many, many, more which haven't, why would they?


As for defining 'limited scale', perhaps it would also be prudent to define 'invasion' as well. What constitutes an invasion? How big does the force have to be and how long do they have to stay there to be considered an invasion? Is there a standard to compare to or is it based entirely on the circumstances of the situation. History remembers Dieppe as a raid. What if they had been able to capture the port and hold onto to for a few hours, days, weeks, etc... Would that have made it an invasion? Perhaps the definition lies entirely not in the size of the operation or the length of the stay, but on the stated intention of the mission. The British assault on St. Nazaire had no intention of capturing and keeping the harbor, thus its a raid. The Japanese had every intent to occupy Midway Island before they were rebuked. A failed invasion?


Based on the fact that the Germans landed a force on Guernsey Islands and occupied them until the end of the war I'd say that at the very least that there was an invasion and that it was succesful in relation to the Guernsey Islands without a doubt. Was it a successful invasion of the British Isles? I think that argument could be made as well, but it too would be somewhat disingenuous. I'm certain the British don't think so.


To be completely irrational in this matter, (bet yet hopefully avoiding the aforementioned 'moonbat' status), I personally would consider Kiska and Attu an invasion of North America, but, I don't think I would also consider the Guernsey Islands an invasion of the British Isles. However, given ample time to conduct adequate research on the subject, I'm certain I could convince myself otherwise.


Cheers!


Edit: I typed this on a Blackberry Mobile so please excuse the grammatical errors above.

 

Methinks that if one measures air or sea miles, it would be found that Attu and Kiska are closer to Tokyo than they are to Anchorage. Not much of and invasion effort in my mind. As stated by others, they (Japanese) had zero chance of invading mainland US. Lou pointed out just one, supply distances. And let's not forget that the Japanese were so strapped for fuel they had no chance of transported the supplies they didn't have over that vast ocean.

The Germans had even less chance, they couldn't get across twenty miles of English Channel, and they knew it and didn't even try.

 

During the War Kiska and Attu were part of the "Territory of Alaska" just as Pearl Harbor was the "Territory of Hawaii"..........it's not like they invaded and occupied Catalina Island. Kiska and Attu are about 1200-1500 miles from Anchorage and then another 1500 miles to Seattle.

The ALCAN Highway was completed in Sept. 1942 and the Japanese landed on Kiska and Attu in June of 1942. My opinion is that the invasion of Kiska and Attu was more a reposnse of the US building the ALCAN, providing a route for possible occupation of the Kuril Islands, than it was an attempt at invading North Amreica through Alaska.

 

According to Google Earth, as the crow flies...

Attu to Tokyo is roughly 2000 miles west. Attu to Anchorage is roughly 1500 miles east. Kiska is located to the east some 200 miles. Dutch Harbor is about 1000 miles east of Attu.

A quick peak at the National Park Service website considers the attack on Dutch Harbor a 'raid', and the attack on Kiska and Attu an 'invasion'. They also claim: "Attu Island is the site of the only World War II land battle in North America."

I know, I know...I'm spinning my wheels. It may not be a good argument, but the argument can be made.

As to the attack on the west coast... I still say they had the available resources to have undertaken it, but it had zero chance of being sustainable or successful.

 

They may have had the ships (or not) did they have the oil? If they had the oil did they have enough to do this and do anything else afterwards?
This article makes a case for oil impacting thier support operations in the Solomons:
http://www.combinedfleet.com/guadoil1.htm

 

Here is a link to that article Jeff.

Goto:

The Hawaiian Invasion, and other Nonsense

Pearl Harbor invasion and other nonsense.

 

I don't and haven't contended that the invasion of Kiska and Attu was an invasion aimed at advancing down the North American continent through Canada into the lower 48. At best it could have been used as a base for continued action in the Aleutians with at the very limits of its reach a stab at Anchorage. I do still contend, however, that the invasion of Kiska and Attu WAS an invasion of North America.

Approval for construction of the Alaska Highway was given in February 1942. The occupation of Kiska and Attu and the attack at Dutch Harbor were 4 months later. The Alaska Highway was most certainly not a response to the Japanese attacks on Kiska and Attu. It was an earlier response to the threat of attacks on the Aleutians and Alaska.

 

Hitler did conceive of eventual world dominion by the Germans. However, he didn't anticipate that it would culminate in his lifetime.
The Z Plan took no account of the US and had no application to a conquest of the US. The Z Plan fleet was not particularly powerful in comparison with the US or British fleets that would have opposed it. Only ten battleships total--I'm sure that seemed a lot to 1930's Germans, but the Americans completed that many between 1941 and 1944 alone. As for carriers, the plan included only four, and the Germans were so far behind in carrier development, it's almost comical.
The battle fleet is only one issue. The capacity to transport invaders and the requisite logistical forces were so deficient that it needs no discussion. Germany showed no inkling whatsoever of a trans-Atlantic invasion capability.

 

The US begins construction in Feb. 1942
Japan Invades and Occupies Kiska and Attu in June 1942
ALCAN Complete in Sept. 1942
May 1943 Japanese leave the Aleutians.

My argument is that the invasion of Kiska and Attu was a Japanese response to the building of the ALCAN Highway as it was anything else.