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

American Invasion

Discussion in 'What If - Other' started by Hawkerace, May 30, 2007.

  1. FramerT

    FramerT Ace

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,570
    Likes Received:
    38
    <As for Germany well they would have to secure Iceland and Greenland, Bermuda and all of the American and British Islands in the Caribbian and St. Pierre and Miquelon. Germany would have to spend several years building up her forces on these locations as would Japan.>

    For every year Germany spent, the US could spend arming herself,too.

    <Japan and Germany would have to start launching air raids as early as possible> IMO. This would be another BOB. Axis powers with limited air time over the continent, while US fighters not.
     
  2. von_noobie

    von_noobie Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,079
    Likes Received:
    73
    FramerT, If Japan or Germany were to attempt an invasion with outh build up of forces on a fairly close location they would fail, To build the necessary ships to do such an operation would take a good 10 years for Germany.

    Yes the axis airtime over the U.S would be a big problem but would you really go and invade a country with out doing some sort of damage to the invasion area wether it be destroying bunkers, naval facilities, or air fields etc.
     
  3. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    18,054
    Likes Received:
    2,376
    Location:
    Alabama
    The US did not have anything analogous to the Home Guard. I guess the closest we would come to having an organization like that would be the air raid wardens, Civil Air Patrol and the other volunteer observation groups.

    I guess our remoteness from any significant fighting precluded the need to organize a 'home guard'. Most of the US National Guard were in the United States from mobilization in 1940 until they embarked for forward areas, mostly in 1943. I don't know how effective their fighting strength would have been as they were poorly armed and were undgoing 'triangulaization', producing large number of orphaned regiments. (The Americal Division was formed from such regiments). During this time, there was very little risk of direct invasion and the presence of large numbers of in-country armed forces did not demonstrate the need to form units out of old and infirmed men.

    I do not doubt that if a 'home guard' were to be formed now, the opposition would find itself facing a well armed group of fighters. Supplying the varying weapons would be problematic, but there would be a lot of small arms firepower. I suspect it would have been the same in the 1940s.
     
  4. von Poop

    von Poop Waspish

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Messages:
    6,309
    Likes Received:
    1,924
    Location:
    Perfidious Albion
    Thanks SD, that's pretty much what I'd imagined.
    It's an intriguing thought, the sheer amount of civilian firepower the US could potentially generate if the need had arisen. Probably the best armed partisans the world had ever seen...

    Cheers,
    Adam.
     
  5. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    18,054
    Likes Received:
    2,376
    Location:
    Alabama
    I see no way the Axis Powers could have EVER landed troops on the North American continent, much less conquer the US and Canada. They simply did not have the naval power and, more importantly, shipping to accomplish it.

    The Japanese were heavily occupied in China and it was presenting a drain on their manpower. They were fighting a large backward enemy right next door on a large land mass and after nearly 10 years of fighting they could not deliver the knockout punch. I see no way that they could have dug up the necessary men to conduct even a limited North American campaign. They had problems providing men for the Solomons campaign in late 1942, and it was relatively close to established bases, when compared to how far the US and Canada are from useful bases.

    The only successful anti-shipping campaign was conducted by the US Navy against the Japanese. Greater than 70% of Japanese ships sunk during the war, fighting ships included, were sunk by subs. What a field day the sub captains would have had against the Japanese. To transport one US Marine division in 1944 required around 20 transports. I doubt the Japanese would have needed very many fewer, given the smaller size of the average Japanese maru. With the reduced submarine turnaround time presented by an attacking enemy, it would have been a blood bath on the Japanese transports, if not during the assaults, then during the support phases of the operation. Add to this the Japanese’s atrocious ASW tactics and equipment, plus they were in worse shape for ASW ships than the US was in 1942.

    The IJN also had to supply all the far flung island garrisons and they started the war with insufficient transport to do this and conduct island offensive operations adequately. These island operations usually only meant the transport of a division or two at most. I don’t think a two or three divisions would have been adequate to invest North America. At some point, they would have had to move some of their under-strength armor across, eating up even more shipping, only to see it taken out larger gunned and heavily armored US tanks and anti-tank guns. This dilema figured in their decision not land on Australia.

    As for Germany, they essentially had no Navy, other than commerce raiders. The Bismarck and Tirpitz were a bust because they did not have adequate escorts and support ships. Plus, the presence of the British Navy would (and did) present major, major deterrents to blue water activities of the DKM. The Italian Navy was an insular navy that could really play no real part outside of the Med Sea. Their range was simply too short. And imagining a loss of the British Isle, I doubt the Bulldog would have allowed the British fleet to fall into German hands. The Germans also had *NO* naval air arm.

    But wait, but wait, what about the U-boats? While the U-boats were successful in US waters in early 1942, their “Happy Time” was essentially over by late 1942 and by mid 1943, they were losing subs faster than they could build them (Brute Force, Ellis, Table 37). They had major difficulties supplying forces in North Africa and it was practically on their doorstep. I see no way that the Germans could be anything other than a continental force, unable to exert any meaningful power beyond Europe. Which brings us to European Powers. Even without picking a fight with Joe Stalin, Germany would have to maintain large numbers of troops on the border with the Soviet Union. This and inadequate sea transport would have made it difficult to conduct even minor armor operations on the North American continent. You gotta get them first and I see no reason that the US naval forces, not to mention the Air Forces, would not have had as good of a time against the Germans as they did against the Japanese from 1942 on. The German Navy, other than the sub force, was a non-issue by 1941 and the sub force was mostly irrelevant by 1944. Although they did have a few success after 1943, the German sub force did not influence the war in any meaninful way later in the war.

    I could go on and on.
     
  6. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    18,054
    Likes Received:
    2,376
    Location:
    Alabama
    VonP, looking at my family alone, weapons of all size and caliber abound. And this is replicated many, many times over in every community throughout the South, Midwest and West.
    I have neighbors who have full auto AR-15s and AK-47s. They're all legal.
    One has an Uzi. It's not my favorite weapon. I really could not hit the broad side of barn with it. It handles like a boat anchor (about as heavy too) and is very hard to hold on target. After about the third round, I'm shooting the sky with it.
     
  7. Carl W Schwamberger

    Carl W Schwamberger Ace

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2007
    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    81
    I'd recomend a look at Ellis's book 'Brute Force' summarizes and provides a bit of guidance for analyzing the production of the various principles of WWII, and their combat power. One crtical point Ellis makes is that US production exceeded the the peak capacity of all the Axis nation combined, by a large margin.

    Ellis extrapolates to a limited extent the additional capacity Germany may have gained through increasing effciency and exploitation of conquored territory in Europe and Africa. This still does not challenge the capacity of the US. Tooze in his book 'Wages of Destruction' anayzes the multipule failures and problems of German industrial policy and ability. From these and other sources it becomes clear that Germany in 1942 was unable to support the vast army & airforce it had attempted to create. Slave labor and forced production from conquored territorys was insuffcient to make up the difference. And, it seems that some of Germanys gains cost more to keep than they returned.

    German use of Latin America is problematic. While there many Germans and decendants of German immigrants living in those nations they were balanced by similar immigrants from Britian, France, ect... From 1939 the British had been waging a underground war against the German diplomats and agents in Latin America, and in 1940 the US joined this. Even in 1941 the Germans were losing this diplomatic & 'agent' war.

    US ground strength in the US by mid 1941 consisted of 30+ divsions. By the spring of 1942 there were appox fifty with manpower for another thirty in the training pipeline. Most of these remained in the US in 1942 and the bulk did not leave until the latter half of 1943. Even in 1944 there werre well over one million US Army personnel remaining in the US in various capacitys

    In 1941 the US Army conducted a study that outlined three stratigic plans. the first assumed both the USSR and Britian would remain in the war vs Germany. The second assumed either one would be knocked out, the third that both would be conquored. In the first case the resources for a ground army of 100 divsions and 100 airwings were identified, in the second case resources for 200 divsions and proportional airforces were identified, and in the third a 300 divsion force was proposed.

    As it was the US Army activated approx 89 divsions, and sustained another 20 to 25 divsions of US Marines Free French, Chinese under Stillwells command, and a few others. Enough additional equipment and supply was sent to the USSR and China to supply a dozen more divsions. So it does not seem difficult for the US, without the need to maintain vast supply lines, to provide up to 200 divsions for continental defense.

    However the offensive strength of the US was in its navy and airforces. To defeat the Axis it might not be necessary to expand the ground forces beyond 150 divsions, with the balance placed in building a even larger fleet and airforce.
     
  8. von_noobie

    von_noobie Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,079
    Likes Received:
    73
    Ok, America would probaly have the best armed Partisans in the world but i can tell you know no one wants to ever attempt an invasion of Australia, We may not have lots of guns but we sure can improvise and still KICK ASS :):):):):):)

    Hell, me and me mates already have several plans in place to deal with an invasion. hehehehehehehe.
     
  9. Za Rodinu

    Za Rodinu Aquila non capit muscas

    Joined:
    May 12, 2003
    Messages:
    8,809
    Likes Received:
    372
    Location:
    Portugal
    Can we agree that this thread doesn't have a leg to stand on? ;)
     
  10. Slipdigit

    Slipdigit Good Ol' Boy Staff Member WW2|ORG Editor

    Joined:
    May 21, 2007
    Messages:
    18,054
    Likes Received:
    2,376
    Location:
    Alabama
    Za Rodinu, you'll get no argument from me.

    I couldn't help but notice that the Japanese Empire passed on invading Australia when most of your army was in North Africa. They KNEW better.

    Brute Force is a very good book, that I have read several times. I referenced it in my way too long post yesterday. I get something out if it every time I read every time that I missed before. One fact from it that amazies me was that the city of Pittsburgh alone produced more iron and steel that Japan, Italy and Germany combined. I highly recommend the book.
     
  11. Hawkerace

    Hawkerace Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2006
    Messages:
    844
    Likes Received:
    28
    Its always interesting to see the experts at there work, :p
     
  12. FramerT

    FramerT Ace

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Messages:
    1,570
    Likes Received:
    38
    Uhn?? You talking to me? Re-read my post. I was quoting someone else. And I said, for every year Germany spends building up, like wise the U.S. would. They were'nt about to stand idly by letting Germany mass 10-20 divisions without doing the same.

    The whole invasion thing does'nt have a plan. Do they capture Washingon DC or maybe NY? What is the plan?
     
  13. T. A. Gardner

    T. A. Gardner Genuine Chief

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    6,207
    Likes Received:
    934
    Location:
    Phoenix Arizona
    What I would like to see on this thread is:

    1. When is the proposed start date of the scenario? About the beginning of 1942? 1943?

    2. The proposed means by which the Germans will move their forces to the Americas and where the initial landings will occur. Or, the alternatives to this.

    These are basic to the whole issue. Right now just some vague notion of these two items has been presented in the finest traditional use of lots of PFM! (see board acryomyms for explaination)....
     
  14. Roddoss72

    Roddoss72 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2006
    Messages:
    364
    Likes Received:
    5
    If i was to invade Aussie i would do it at the time of the Melbourne Cup, many would be to p1ssed to fight.
     
  15. von_noobie

    von_noobie Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2007
    Messages:
    1,079
    Likes Received:
    73
    One problem there, I haven proven with my mates that i am a much better fighter when im pissed.....:) :) :) .....good luck with invading your self anyway.
     
  16. tinmanl19

    tinmanl19 Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    ok I am going to think about this one tonight, I will post my answer tomorrow with out reading any previous answers. I will say this however. The answer lies in Germany beating England in 1940, and either the Japanese holding off on bombing Pearl Harbor until 1942 or Germany not declaring war on the USA on Dec8th 1941.
     
  17. mikebatzel

    mikebatzel Dreadnaught

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2007
    Messages:
    3,185
    Likes Received:
    406
    Given this extremly unlikely scenario taking place in mid to late 43 in place of Barbarossa
    Has anyone ever watched Red Dawn? Here in Pa. every year 1.5 miilion hunters enter the woods for opening day. That's just ONE state:eek:
    There a far to many gun owners in the US. Any Invasion attempt would be hit with casualties faster than they can come across the ocean. Without German or Japanese assistance Mexico crumbles and become the 51st state

    You too huh. As most weapons owned by civilians are for hunting purposses I would say that the Germans would be in for the worst snipping activity known to man
     
  18. T. A. Gardner

    T. A. Gardner Genuine Chief

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2003
    Messages:
    6,207
    Likes Received:
    934
    Location:
    Phoenix Arizona
    While I don't know the numbers in 1940, today in the US there are just shy of a quarter million privately owned machineguns not to mention automatic weapons, artillery, mortars, and even armored vehicles running around the country.
    Back then it was still possible to buy antitank rifles like the Solothurn, BARs, Thompsons, and many other purely military firearms with little effort. And, many did (and do) exist in the US then and now. Aside from that, the US was the most motorized nation on the planet. The US civil population was better equipped with motor vehicles than the German military was!
    As for invading from Mexico, the "front" is nearly 1500 miles long. It is almost totally devoid of roads (in the 40's), suitable rail systems (eg., north-south versus east-west), towns and cities, and anything else necessary to support the movement of large armies. I could just see the Germans trying to cross the lower Sonorian desert between Yuma and Nogales AZ or East of El Paso TX back then. Southern Arizona is perfect ground for defenders. The small mountian ranges make perfect locations for defenders to direct air strikes and artillery onto any unit trying to move through the relatively flat valleys between them. The whole area is criss-crossed with arroyos that would work just like an anti tank ditch along virtually their entire lengths. With next to no roads and no usable rail net to speak of just trying to keep the advance supplied would be a nightmare.
    A US invasion is just not in the cards.
     
  19. Joe

    Joe Ace

    Joined:
    May 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,948
    Likes Received:
    125
    I have something to add. What is Stalin going to do while Hitler is occupied across the Atlantic?
     
  20. skunk works

    skunk works Ace

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2005
    Messages:
    2,156
    Likes Received:
    104
    What if "Superman" flew for the Germans?

    "Es ist ein Vogel, es ist ein Flache, es ist UBER-MAN !!
     
    Skipper likes this.

Share This Page