Because any loss they'd suffer would be worse than what they saw in WW2. And unlike the US did, China would not help them rebuild. Perhaps even prevent and undermine them from being able to do so. Given the geographical proximity and likely balance of forces post-war, it wouldn't be out of the question for China to simply blockade them entirely until they committed to complete and unconditional surrender.
US Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
my impression is that the japanese seem to particularly loathe the notion of chinese and russian retribution. to submit to either equates to the undoing of whatever victories they had against them (e.g. the victory at tsushima, so central to japan's notion of peerage among the powers), and in the process, a lowering of their status amongst the 'hierarchy of world.' it is notable to me for example, that in the last days of ww2, despite americans killing far more japanese than russians ever did, japan favored surrendering to america rather than the russians who had already pushed into manchuria.
so with that being my baseline assumption, how would the japanese see themselves best avoiding retribution? if they believe that, without american protection, that russian and chinese retribution are merely a matter of time, then wouldn't they still feel more incentivized to aid the us, because that is the only chance they would ever have at forestalling retribution?
so with that being my baseline assumption, how would the japanese see themselves best avoiding retribution? if they believe that, without american protection, that russian and chinese retribution are merely a matter of time, then wouldn't they still feel more incentivized to aid the us, because that is the only chance they would ever have at forestalling retribution?
Last edited:
Incorrect. If they aid the US, the US will still lose. And in so doing, Japan will become the remaining active target in war. Even after there are no more US targets to hit in Asia, Japan will still be stuck geographically exactly where it is now. The military hostilities against Japan would not stop just because the US withdraws. If anything, that would only mark the escalation of military action against Japan as it would be completely vulnerable without US protection.
okay maybe conversely, how exactly do you see them saying 'no' to the us?
your argument appeals to rationality. however, considering the manner the dutch have committed suicide when told to jump by the us, i'm really not particularly convinced that we can depend on anyone behaving rationally.
your argument appeals to rationality. however, considering the manner the dutch have committed suicide when told to jump by the us, i'm really not particularly convinced that we can depend on anyone behaving rationally.
Fair enough. I think compelling the Dutch to seize a Chinese company is still quite a different hurdle vs compelling Japan to die by the tens of millions (starvation via embargo), but yes, I see and agree with your point.
If they had any brains they wouldn't, but decisions like this are rarely objective.
China = very close
USA = very far away
The strategic calculus should really convince all of America's allies in the region to hedge their bets and be a fence-sitter until it's obvious who's going to win. It's really bad to be on the losing side.