Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Relations between Germany and Japan Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 18:46 |
As everyone is well aware of, Germany and Japan took on the whole world
together in World War II. My question is how close was this alliance?
Was it an alliance of convenience, or something deeper? What would have
happened if they succeeded in conquering the world? Which would have
been the capital of the world, Tokyo or Berlin?
|
|
Thegeneral
Chieftain
Joined: 05-Mar-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1117
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 19:01 |
I believe Hitler never wanted the deal. He had considered the oriental to also be inferior. He had wanted an alliance with Britain because of the anglo ancectry. And we see how well that worked.
The deal was made because one of Hitlers aids or generals (it was a while since I last saw this) went to Tokyo and became obsesed with their culture. Hitler finally agreed to peace.
But I am wondering why they did not help eachother more. When Germany attacked Russia, didn't Japan sit by and do nothing?
|
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 19:07 |
From what I understand, Japan never invaded Russia because of two
things. The obvious one was that they were occupied in subjugating
China and the defeating the United States. The other reason was because
of oil shortages because of the American sanction. When the United
States first imposed the sanction, experts guaranteed that the Japanese
would last six months before experiencing shortages in oil. This worked
very well and Japan only experienced six more months of victories. All
this accounted for, it would have been impossible for Japan to invade
another giant.
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 19:51 |
Again looking for logic and consistancy with anything Hitler said or did is pointless. He divided Europe up on a flawed racial theory then contradicted it with his every decision he made.
For Japan I believe it was never more than a marriage of convenience, they weren't Nazi. didn't believe in the deal and signed a perfectly standard treaty with Germany, like a million before and since. When one Nato Treaty country these days goes to war, the others aren't obliged to scream gung ho and join without reason, and neither was Japan.
|
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 19:57 |
So what was Hitler's plan after he succeeded in taking over the world? How did Japan fit into it?
|
|
Paul
General
AE Immoderator
Joined: 21-Aug-2004
Location: Hyperborea
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 952
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 21:12 |
He had no designs on Asia. Originally he wanted Britain to keep it, but later on I guess he'd have been pretty happy Japan having it instead.
|
|
|
Belisarius
Chieftain
Suspended
Joined: 09-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1296
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 21:26 |
So he would have allowed these 'inferior' people to own half of the world? Typical totalitarian hypocrisy.
|
|
Thegeneral
Chieftain
Joined: 05-Mar-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1117
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 05-Aug-2005 at 21:50 |
Hitler actually had his allies planned out and who would get what.
He decided Italy would regain all territory from the Roman Empire. Britain (if they would ally with Germany, which they did not) would be allowed to keep its colonies it still sustained. Japan, since they became an ally, would receive the Pacific Islands (along with britain) and most of Asia. And of course Germany would keep most of Europe.
It failed right away; Britain did not join him.
|
|
|
Miller
Baron
Joined: 25-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 487
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Aug-2005 at 00:37 |
They would have probably started to fight each other after the victory or would have been cold war between Germany and Japan. World without counter balancing powers would have been unstable
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 06-Aug-2005 at 10:01 |
Japanese role in WWII was much simmilar to that of Italy: hey didn't
fight for World dominance, as Germany seemingly did, but for a share of
it only. Japan prosecuted kind of Rooseveltian policy: "Asia for the
Asians" (that is for the Japanese) and their ambitioned area of
interest would have not given them, at least short term world
dominance... still it threatened the interests of the USA and European
colonial powers, so they eventually started to fight. The USA didn't
enter the war against Hitler, but against Japan.
On the other side, Germany didn't attempt to control all the world,
just Europe and particularly Russia, which they wanted to make their India,
the super-colony from which they would get all the resources and cheap
labor. If Hitler wouldn't had been attacked by Britain-France when he
took Poland, he would have surely continued eastward against Russia
soon after (something that Stalin seemed not to realize). The Nazis
tried all the time to get a peace deal with the western powers,
specially with Britain, which they knew it would be hard to conquer as
they had no control of the seas.
Also, one have to remember that japan stood aside in Hitler's campaign
against Russia. There was never a Japanese-Soviet war till, in the late
months of the struggle, Russia declared war on Japan.
I guess that, would have German and Japanese plans worked (what is
quite unrealistic but anyhow) the output would have been a
German-dominated Europe with a very sad destiny for the peoples of
Eastern Europe, a Japanese controlled East Asia, a surviving British
Empire (with loses in East Asia), an also surviving but subservient
French Empire (with loses in East Asia too and maybe a restoration of
the old German colonies of Cameroun and Togo, along with cessions to
Italy) and a weakened USA, which would only control America and the
Philippines (I assume that no USA-Japan war would have happened).
|
|
yan.
Consul
Joined: 15-Apr-2005
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 352
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 08-Aug-2005 at 13:46 |
Also, one have to remember that japan stood aside in Hitler's campaign against Russia. There was never a Japanese-Soviet war till, in the late months of the struggle, Russia declared war on Japan. |
Not quite right, there was a series of border incidents in 1938/39, with the Halhin Gol/Nomonhan 'incident' (or incidents) claiming several 10.000 lives.
IMO it was the Japanese defeat at Halhin Gol, coupled with the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop treaty just at the time when several Japanese divisions were wiped out by the Russians, that led the Japanese military to avoid further conflict with Russia.
|
|
Temujin
King
Sirdar Bahadur
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: Eurasia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Aug-2005 at 18:11 |
exactly,a nd this is actually the crucial point here, read more here, especialyl the last chapter:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Halhin_Gol
it also has mention of Richard Sorge, a very interesting character indeed.
|
|
gcle2003
King
Suspended
Joined: 06-Dec-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7035
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 26-Aug-2005 at 05:42 |
Originally posted by Maju
If Hitler wouldn't had been attacked by Britain-France when he took Poland, he would have surely continued eastward against Russia soon after (something that Stalin seemed not to realize).
|
I think Stalin realised it. He just bought himself time and some space - the net effect of the Pact being to push Soviet borders - and its armies - eastward. If, in June 1941 (or indeed any time in 1940) the Soviet pre-1939 border had still been in effect, Moscow would have been much closer.
|
|