Why Japan had NO Chance in WW2

What people said

yborg · 2020-01 · Strong recommendation

[VIDEO] One of the best visualizations I've come across of just how dominant the US industrial base was in the 1940s under full mobilization.

Read the original HN comment ↗

hirundo · 2022-11 · Recommendation

I had no idea how asymmetrical naval production was in the Pacific theater of WWII until I watched this: [VIDEO] With these numbers the relative merits of the actual warfighters had little effect on the outcome. The war with Japan was won in U.S. shipyards.

Read the original HN comment ↗

DuskStar · 2020-01 · Recommendation

My understanding is that while the US losing her carriers at Midway would have allowed Japan free reign in the South Pacific for a few months, that was already the case for anywhere that all 6 fleet carriers showed up. Nothing the US had - combined, worldwide - could match those 6. Killing the US carriers at Midway was just to turn it from a 6v3 to a 6v0 - instead it ended up 2v2, but so goes war. Japan invading Hawaii would have caused a famine if they succeeded - it'd be even harder to keep supplied than Midway, but with dozens of times the population. In my opinion Midway marked the turning point of the war in the Pacific, but that turning point was inevitable as long as the US could credibly say "we're going to commission 6 fleet carriers with a full suite of aircraft over a 12 month period". There's a great video here [0] that illustrates the differences in production over the course of the war. For instance, the US commissioned 17 fleet carriers and 9 light carriers from 1941 on - Japan commissioned 7 and 1, respectively. 0: [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗