|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
 Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2014 7:59 am Post subject: |
 |
|
[quote="aq8knyus"]
| Steelrails wrote: |
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Steelrails, Maybe its the Kloud talking, but I kinda wish I didn't have this whole apologist deal going on so I could just post on here about CE stuff and Korean military-related affairs without people worrying about my agenda and people in the "real world" finding out who I am and the Dave's psycho lurker randomly taking issue with me. What a crappy bed I made for myself. |
I just want to say thanks for the discussion, apologies if I have been a bit disrespectful, I do tend to forget that I am talking with a real person.
I studied military history at uni and although I would run a million miles in the other direction from a real war I do enjoy the subject.
Personally these types of threads are the ones I like best. |
Dude, in no way, shape, or form have you been disrespectful. And I would likewise want to apologize if I have been in anyway disrespectful.
Yeah, you've definitely done well. I think personally, I was a little bit flippant about the Azores-Canaries route. While I think it might come to pass in an extended, ugly war, as an early option it would have dire diplomatic consequences for the US. While Spain and Portugal wouldn't be core allies or contribute much, the sheer effect of popular opinion would make such a move difficult diplomatically.
The Panama Canal move is an interesting one that I hadn't considered much. While the U.S. could probably retake the position, to shut it off even temporarily could certainly put a major wrench in US plans and do much to limit its advantages. It could be a "low-cost, high-gain" maneuver.
I would also be intrigued by what role the British submarine service could play at the start. Obviously at the beginning ASW efforts by both sides would be limited, but I think this might end up favoring the British. Could they pull off a Gunther Prien and pull off a spectacular sinking at Newport News or the like? Even if the act was largely symbolic it still might be enough of an edge to make things more dicey for the Americans.
Another factor is the early British edge in aircraft engine design, particularly for fighter aircraft. While the British were hampered by flaws in Fleet Air Arm fighter doctrine, they certainly had the edge in engines with the legendary Merlin. The US did not get its premier engine- the Pratt & Whitney R-2800 Double Wasp into its aircraft until 1943. Only the twin-engine supercharged Allison P-38 offered excellent performance early in the war, at numbers, and the type was unsuitable as a pure dogfighter.
There is one question I would like to go back to that we left aside- What would the Japanese do? Would they return to the Anglo-Japanese alliance after being spurned or would they turn to the U.S.? I'd lean towards them turning to the U.S., as they might be deeply offended by the collapse of their alliance, but then again, its a lot easier to mend fences in peacetime when no blood has been spilled. Or would they perhaps sit this one out?
Anyways, cheer on a good discussion. Also, if anyone else wants to comment and speculate, feel free to join the fun! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Newbie
Joined: 07 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Apr 29, 2014 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is all well and good, but what you all are forgetting is that your debate is completely unnecceary: Canada would have kicked US butt if they tried to invade. We would then have marched south and now woulld have an entire continent of hockey players. The rise of the mightly Canadian Empire would have taken place 100 years prior to when we all know it's actually going to happen.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
aq8knyus
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Location: London
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2014 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| The Panama Canal move is an interesting one that I hadn't considered much. While the U.S. could probably retake the position, to shut it off even temporarily could certainly put a major wrench in US plans and do much to limit its advantages. It could be a "low-cost, high-gain" maneuver. |
I think for Britian the big problem is that they cannot land the killer blow to knock the US out of the war. At least the US has something to aim for ie. the killing off of Britain's connection with its empire.
Also the political ramifications of a long war would have meant that whilst they could conceivably survive a conflict, it would be the death knell for the empire.
The Panaman option is a good one that I hadn't thought of and with control of the Falklands and the Indian Ocean it could prove a major headache for the US. However, maintaining supplies to Canada, defending the routes to Britian and an offensive in the Caribbean might have been a bridge too far.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| There is one question I would like to go back to that we left aside- What would the Japanese do? Would they return to the Anglo-Japanese alliance after being spurned or would they turn to the U.S.? I'd lean towards them turning to the U.S., as they might be deeply offended by the collapse of their alliance, but then again, its a lot easier to mend fences in peacetime when no blood has been spilled. Or would they perhaps sit this one out? |
I think it would come down to which side would be more genorous and who could live with the consequences. The British could help the Japanese in China and sort out their supply problem, but the US could ok a Japanese land grab of rich and poorly defended British colonies in the east.
Also the Japanese know that an attack on the US would grant them very little material gains and even worse the hatred of power that they cannot overwhelm.
However, would the US go so far as to green light a plan that would effectively make the Japanese a major Asian land power? As Britain is not really a major threat in the Pacific, they might not pursue an alliance so strongly.
In a post war world an even stronger Japan isn't as much of an issue for the British planners. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
