After WWII? Or 19th century?
What if the Japanese and Germans had resisted allied occupation?
- Thread starter Disgustipated
- Start date
After WWII? Or 19th century?
ParkCungHee
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2006
- Messages
- 12,921
Not in any real manner. I was talking about aid to resistance movements in Indochina and Indonesia, and resistance against ChiCom units in China. Oh, and the fighting against the Soviets spurted on for a bit.
amadeus
Bishop of Bio-Dome
I suppose there'd be a whole heck of a lot more dead Germans and Japanese.
They'd probably just go through with the Morgenthau Plan in Germany. In Japan they'd likely come up with something similar as well. That would cause a couple of million civilian deaths, nicely.
Except all of Prussia would still be given to Poland/USSR
The US would have began to route out the guerrillas by systematically nuking the forests and country side.
I don't actually believe this, but the United States used the A-bombs on the Japan with the justification of saving American lives. It was estimated half a million Americans could have died in a greater invasion of the Japanese home islands. If the Japanese or Germans were to resist occupation after the war, then I think American military officials would have easily made the decision to remove a few more cities from the map. This includes nuclear attacks in Germany. This sounds preposterous to me, but it is entirely plausible because British and Americans were focused on winning the war, but without losing millions of lives. This could come at the expense of a few million more Japanese or German citizens.
I don't actually believe this, but the United States used the A-bombs on the Japan with the justification of saving American lives. It was estimated half a million Americans could have died in a greater invasion of the Japanese home islands. If the Japanese or Germans were to resist occupation after the war, then I think American military officials would have easily made the decision to remove a few more cities from the map. This includes nuclear attacks in Germany. This sounds preposterous to me, but it is entirely plausible because British and Americans were focused on winning the war, but without losing millions of lives. This could come at the expense of a few million more Japanese or German citizens.
Where exactly do you think they'd nuke? The Black Forest? The Bavarian Alps? Nuclear devices in that era were pretty much useless against anything other than a city or a massed attack.
Racsoviale
Smoke me a kipper!
Also. using nuclear weapons for crowd control seems just a bit excesive.
That's practically the definition of mini-nuclear weapon use in Fallout games.
I bet Gaddafi wishes he'd continued his nuclear program right now.
Disgustipated
Deity
*deleted*
JanissaryRush
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2008
- Messages
- 124
Poland had strong guerilla resistance of German occupation when the Soviets were pressing closer. The Soviets stopped right in front of them to wait for the Germans to kill all the forces before coming in. They also resisted the idea of Allies sending planes to drop off food for them, Nazy were starving people.
Germany was able to kill the poles off with very few forces.
Germany and Japan are too completely different ones. Germany would be incredibly easy. Not as sure about Japan.
Only a small percentage of the population engage in guerilla resistance when a country is conquered. In Afghanistan the US had them dead, US just ignored them for years until they could rebuild. Iraq if proper troops would have been much easier then it was.
In Germany Allies had way, way more troops then would be needed and the Soviets definitely wouldn't stop until all rebels were killed.
In Vietnam the North was government ran, well organized, that leads to having many more forces. They got lots of weapons and supplies easily shipped.
Japan would be similar at first. Army would start out with lots of weapons, though would be very hard to get more as it went on. Unlike Iraq where will weapons get smuggled in from? US would have to destroy of capture ammunition factories or supplies to them.
Japan would depend on how many forces US sent in. If too few like Iraq it would get very bogged down. If it sent lots from German front shouldn't be that hard, though not certain.
Japanese were more fanatical back then. So they should have had way more rebels willing to fight much longer. How long would many of them stay like this?
Would Soviets send troops and how many?
Germany was able to kill the poles off with very few forces.
Germany and Japan are too completely different ones. Germany would be incredibly easy. Not as sure about Japan.
Only a small percentage of the population engage in guerilla resistance when a country is conquered. In Afghanistan the US had them dead, US just ignored them for years until they could rebuild. Iraq if proper troops would have been much easier then it was.
In Germany Allies had way, way more troops then would be needed and the Soviets definitely wouldn't stop until all rebels were killed.
In Vietnam the North was government ran, well organized, that leads to having many more forces. They got lots of weapons and supplies easily shipped.
Japan would be similar at first. Army would start out with lots of weapons, though would be very hard to get more as it went on. Unlike Iraq where will weapons get smuggled in from? US would have to destroy of capture ammunition factories or supplies to them.
Japan would depend on how many forces US sent in. If too few like Iraq it would get very bogged down. If it sent lots from German front shouldn't be that hard, though not certain.
Japanese were more fanatical back then. So they should have had way more rebels willing to fight much longer. How long would many of them stay like this?
Would Soviets send troops and how many?
There was an excess of bombing civilians from both sides. The Germans started it with their intentional bombing of civilians throughout Europe via their Luftwaffe (sp?) and their rocket attacks against Britain, but the Allies held no punches. The allies firebombed a number of cities, probably most notoriously Hamburg.
Also, going back to the OP, its a bit ignorant and insulting to state that resistance wasn't "invented" until after WW2. A lot of Axis-occupied nations had underground resistance movements, probably the most renowned being France. Resisting invaders and uprising against tyrannical leaders has been a part of history for millennia.
It can be taken disgustingly far, though. If you listened to the stories told in France after the war, every French person in the country and several thousand that weren't even born yet took part in the underground war against the Nazis. Collaboration was always done by Somebody Else.
Racsoviale
Smoke me a kipper!
I think you forgot the part where we are not discussing what happened during the war
Allied and Axis war atrocities are everywhere in that conflict, but they were WAR atrocities. The rules change when you are at peace(unless you are Gadaffi, as Lord Baal mentioned) and I stick to my point that nuclear weapons are quite are jump from watercannons and riotpolice.
Dachs: That was exactly my point about the danish resistance in the historical myths thread
Dragonlord
Fantasy Warlord
Bite your tongue! Luckily the Allies didn't repeat the mistakes of the Treaty of Versailles and lay the seeds of yet another bout of revanchism. I very much doubt we would have a peaceful Europe today if the Morgenthau Plan had been realized.
Please. That is far too simplistic. First, the intentional bombing of civilians was NOT a widespread or 'normal' practice of the Luftwaffe at the beginning of the war. Targetting was almost exclusively on military or industrial targets, though due to the imprecise targetting of the time, civilians did get hit all the time - but this was on both sides, not just the Luftwaffe.
The only exception I can think of offhand is Warsaw - and even that was seen as a military measure to facilitate the simultaneous ground campaign.
Also, please note that the 'rocket attacks against Britain', the V1 and V2, didn't even start until the Allied terror bombing had already been in full swing for years. The very letter 'V' stood for 'Vergeltungswaffe' = 'vengeance weapon', because they were supposed to be a reply to the Allied bombings.
The Soviets stopped right in front of 4 German panzer and 1 infantry divisions, after they surrounded and destroyed 3-rd Soviet tank corps under Wolomin.
More than ten thousand of well equipped and prepared German troops of Warsaw garrison, not to mention SS panzer divisions which repelled initial Soviet advance.
Similar threads
