Is it really unbelieveable that Japan hoped for sucess in Pacific?
Their production capabilities were small, true, but they did manage to amass a formidable naval force prior to war. They had combat experience vs. Russians, a major world power. They have designed aircraft that have brotally outmatched anything enemy could place in the air.
Also, to their credit, they have initially completelly wiped out large numbers of enemy military assets, be it air, anval or ground forces. In Singapore campaign japanese completelly owned numerically superior English.
Also, who could predict that USA will actually be efficient? The could be just a bit better USSR or China as far as war goes. Also, with hard isolatioanism ruling the US politics at the time, was it really insane to believe USA would take a few jabs at the enemy, lose hard (as it did in term of units lost at Pearl and Guadalcanal) and withdraw from the conflict?
>Is it really unbelieveable that Japan hoped for sucess in Pacific?
It's not unbelievable that they believed they could win, it's unbelievable that the German high command never told them they'd get #rekt if they attacked us and never made any great effort to give the Japs advice on logistics/A well-coordinated and officer corps
Since the 1905s Imperial Japanese navy had beaten everyone else besides the U.S so that there was actually an Asian continental foothold as well as oceanic expansion and fortification 40 years later. I would not be surprised at the time they thought they were going to win anyway.
>German high command
>Not asking mein fuhrer what to do.
The Japanese version of "success" was disabling Pearl Harbor and knocking the US out of the Pacific so that Japan could have unimpeded access to the East Indies. They didn't want a full out war with the US.
Once they fucked up the assault by calling off the third wave, they had to defend their territory. They were never a match for the US, and the US even had a Germany first policy because of it.
>lose hard (as it did in term of units lost at Pearl and Guadalcanal
USN lost 2 light cruisers and 7 destroyers at Guadalcanal. IJN lost 2 battleships, 3 destroyers, and twice the number of aircraft. How did the US lose hard at Guadalcanal?
>they fucked up the assault by calling off the third wave
There was no third wave planned. Any third wave would have been improvised on the spot by Nagumo, which wasn't going to happen.
"In the first six to twelve months of a war with the United States and Great Britain I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success."
And what happened exactly 7 months after Pearl harbor?
>The only footage we ever saw of them is grainy, black and white and sometimes out of focus
Battle of Savo island.
Casualties and losses
3 heavy cruisers sunk,
1 heavy cruiser heavily damaged (later scuttled),
2 destroyers damaged,
3 cruisers lightly damaged,
> it's unbelievable that the German high command never told them they'd get #rekt if they attacked us and never made any great effort to give the Japs advice on logistics/A well-coordinated and officer corps
How is that unbelievable? Why would the German high command ever tell them that, and if they did, why would the Japanese listen to them?
Why is every thread about "what if"-scenarios involving the Japanese in WW2 full of retards who assume that the Germans somehow controlled/had a say in what the Japanese did and how they did it?
The small fleet left at the Philippines was expected to lose and did. If after 70 years you are shaking your head and wondering why the US didn't surrender because of Savo Island, I don't know what to tell you.
Thought you were talking about Java for a sec. Savo Island happened in August, and was one bright spot for the Japs in the midst of a string of embarrassing setbacks. It's even crazier to claim that the US should've given up after Savo than Java Sea.