AnimeSuki Forums

newmarduk · 2006-04-03, 11:09

How history would have changed if the 1867 purchase of Alaska by the United States from Russia never have happened? Add to that the pro-U.S. coup in Hawaii, then an independent kingdom, never occured in 1893, which otherwise led to the United States obtaining Hawaii in 1900.

Alaska would still have it's 1898 gold rush, but the Russian government would make sure that most of the prospectors were Russian citizens, though the Alaskan population still grows at least twentyfold at this time.

The 1904-1905 Russian-Japanese War sees the Japanese seize control of Alaska from the Russians, and this leads to an influx of Japanese colonists and industry to the northern territory.

Meanwhile, Hawaii is still largely controlled by it's monarchy, though the Pacific island nation still has a partially elected parliament and written constitution. Hawaii in the early 20th Century is officially neutral during World War I (1914-1918), though before, during, and after the conflict it attempts to play off the United States, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan off against each other.

After the March and October coups in Russia in 1917 that overthrew the rule of the Czar and installed the Bolsheviks in power, respectively, the imperial family and many thousands of other Russian political refugees are settled by the Japanese in Alaska, and the deposed Czar Nicholas II is allowed by the Japanese government to control the local Alaskan government as Imperial Governor, though still with Japanese military bases (army and naval) in the territory to keep Japan's hold on Alaska.

By the 1930s decade, facing a more militaristic Japanese Empire, the Hawaiian monarch, prime minister, cabinet, and parliament are briefly invaded by the Japanese and forced to accept a naval base at Pearl Harbor and occupation troops in Honolulu and other Hawaiian cities.

In 1941, on December 7th, when World War II is just two years old, Japanese troops in Alaska invade Canada in a surprise attack, and Japanese naval task forces leave Alaska and Hawaii, including aircraft carriers, and this leads to Japanese planes bombing the U.S. cities of Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego, including American naval bases.

Of course, at the same time, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy still declare war on the USA. With Japanese troops on North American soil (mainly Canadian), U.S. infantry and armored units are forced across the U.S.-Canadian border to combat Japanese infantry and armored units in the Northwest Territory and the provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan.

In this scenario, World War II lasts longer than 1945 since it takes longer for the Americans to aid the British and Soviet Russians against Nazi Germany and the Japanese are not ousted from Canadian soil until late 1943, and Alaska is not liberated from Japanese control until 1945, when Soviet Russia finally declares war on Japan and invades Alaska via Siberia almost at the same time a joint American-Canadian task force is also invading Alaska.

The invasion of continental Europe by the Americans and Brits finally takes place in September 1945, but the Allies (Brits, U.S., and Soviets) do not reach the borders of Germany itself until early 1947.

Meanwhile, a rebuilt U.S. Navy helps the Americans to liberate Hawaii from Japanese occupation in July 1946, and other Pacific islands during late 1946 and into 1947.

Of course, it is revealed by the Allies that the Nazis were killing off the Jews by the millions, and this spurs the collapse of the Germany Nazi regime by the invaders by August 1947. Hitler himself still commits suicide at the same time his government falls and the allies have reached Berlin.

The war against Japan continues in 1948 and 1949 as American and Russian troops by February 1949 have invaded Korea and Japan itself simultaneously, and fighting on Japanese soil continues well into 1950. Emperor Hirohito himself commits suicide to prevent the Allies from capturing him, but the rest of the imperial family is caught by either the Russians or the Americans as prisoners of war. The remnants of the Japanese government officially surrender in April 1950, but Japanese military remnants still wage a geurrilla war into 1951 and 1952.

Komataguri · 2006-04-03, 13:20

Why does this sound like the plot for a kickass RTS game.

kj1980 · 2006-04-03, 15:40

I cannot fathom where you are trying to go from here. It's analogous to someone saying "what if the colonists lost the American Revolutionary War with Britain," or "what if Hitler was admitted to the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna?" Maybe in a a parallel world such alternate history exists. Who knows? Maybe in an alternate world, BETAs may have invaded the earth and we are faced with extinction and a top-secret project called Alternative 4 is our last hope for human survival (if you are wondering, I'm making a reference to the ero-game "MuvLuv Alternative.")

Luminare · 2006-04-03, 15:42

I'm a little more interested in what would have happened in the afermath of WWII in this scenario. Given that the Soviets helped invade mainland Japan, how would the US and the USSR have divided Japan? And how would this have affected the dynamics of the Cold War?

Other than that, there's one point I find kind of odd in your storyline. I don't think a surprise attack on Canada would have allowed Japan to advance into three provinces. Despite most people's impressions, the Canadian military at the time was a force to be reckoned with. And fighting on homeground (Canadians) vs. fighting several time zones away from home on unfamiliar territory (Japanese) will give significant advantages to the Canadians. In addition, the Americans would not think kindly to a hostile power (the Americans weren't exactly on friendly terms with the Japanese to begin with, unless not having Alaska and Hawaii made some changes to foreign policy) being on the same continent--the basis of isolationism comes from the fact that there was the Pacific and the Atlantic to isolate the country.

It would probably take severe underestimation (more so than what allowed the Japanese success in Pearl Harbor) on the part of two different countries to allow the Japanese to actually seize territory from the Canadians. The point of Pearl Harbor was destroying the American Pacific fleet--not to gain ground. I think a similar slap in the face would be more likely in this alternate history, rather than spreading forces across a wide area.

Kamui4356 · 2006-04-03, 16:38

I'd just like to point out that invading canada from alaska in the middle of winter is a bad idea. When you consider the equipment the Japanese army had, I'd expect the same thing to happen to them that happened to the german army in russia.

Also, Japan didn't have enough carriers to successfully attack 4 US cities simultaniously. They'd be stretching their forces very thin, and wouldn't be able to do much damage. If they were to work their way down the coast, the US fleet, which without Hawaii would be based in san fransico, would be given time to sail out and meet them in an open battle, with support from land based aircraft. The japanese fleet might win, but they would have lost their core fighting strength, and the US would be able to make good their losses a lot sooner.

Also, Japan didn't have the forces to invade north america and hold conquered territory in china. This scenerio will do nothing to change that.

sorvani · 2006-04-03, 17:47

Quote:

Originally Posted by kj1980

I cannot fathom where you are trying to go from here. It's analogous to someone saying "what if the colonists lost the American Revolutionary War with Britain," or "what if Hitler was admitted to the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna?"

as a fan of Harry Turtledove's works i have to point out alternate histories told with a bit more forethought than that write up are very interesting to read and think about.

but even an off the cuff what if can be fun to think about.

on topic: this scenario gives Japan too much more military might than it had in 1941, with no reason as to why. so that makes it hard to speculate.

Thelastguardian · 2006-04-04, 01:03

Blah. I dislike people trying to guess what would happen if someone does something differently. A Chinese proverb says it best- know beforehand, no beggers.

Where do I start.

The "purchase" of Alsaka has never been "endeared" by western Canadians. Let's just say US took more than they deserved (look up a Canadian history book yourself). Canadians were just too wimpy to go to war.

Meanwhile, the idea of Japan invading Canada during WWII has formally replaced Hitler's proponents proclaiming Hitler's mid-winter assault on Russia is "a good plan" as the most idiotic plan ever suggested ever.

Rockie mountain range...Japan's arial/naval superiority...rapid infantry deployment speed...gone. The only corridor that allows rapid movement of troops into midwest is through Seattle on land. However, there were no major highway at that time. (and most of the landtroops were not even close to North America)

uh-oh.

Yes, the Canadian west coast force was (and still is) weak. Japan could had taken it no problem. Yet they didn't, why? Once the force gets into mainland, they can't get out easily. If you look on a ocean current map, you will notice that the Canadian west coast is not easy to nevigate. In fact, a ferry (!!) sunk just last week. There are many hidden currents, rocks, islands, and what-have-you-not. Also there is Vancouver Island protecting and blocking access to the mainland. Finally there are no natural resources other than timber. This means a. no food b. no processed goods c. no metalic factories.

Meanwhile, Hawaii is still standing. Therefore you get a situation that is ghastly similar to US' 2nd invasion to Iraq- supply line getting cut off.

Now you are screwed. What is Japan supposed to do, by way of ice bridge though Berling Sea?

Ok, so you will need to get Hawaii first. Not that the Japanese didn't try. However the you are missing the strength of the US army at early 20th century- resources + numbers. US didn't have the best equipments. German had the best tanks, Britain had the best planes (and computer scientists), Russia had the weather and homeland advantage. US had none of that; but they did have the most soilders and resources because of its vast lands. Thus, they mess produced tens of thousands of craptasic Liberty class warships in a few years.

Can Japan keeps up with the "disposable" US forces for more than a few months? Hardly. Japan had their land and air troops station throughout East Asia. Their resources were strained.

Objectively if I were the Emperor, I would have called it a day after I took Asia. Sign a treaty with US, and try to recover from the war first. There is nothing more damaging to a country than a war.

Can someone close this thread?

hooliganj · 2006-04-04, 14:28

Other serious faults with this scenario: Japan wrests Alaska from the Ruskies in 1905? How did they pull that off? Why would they even want it? Even at the height of their imperial ambitions I doubt they would have wanted such a useless piece of territory so far from any of their other holdings.

Also, given that the US was nuclear capable in 1945, and nothing in your scenario changes that, what makes you think any kind of resistance would have kept WWII going for another 5 years?

dan88 · 2006-04-04, 15:28

In 1905 Japan only gained limited Russian territorary and their focus was probably already on China. They probably would have had little interest in Alaska. After the 1st world war the allies landed forces in northern Russia at Arkhangelsk and the USA did the same at Vladivostok. It would also seem plausible that the Canadians and US would have landed forces in Alaska. With their support and being a long way from central Russia it would probably have broken away to form a country similar in nature to Finland. At the time of the 2nd World War Alaska probably did not have anything Japan wanted and there are more attractive targets in south east asia.

If the US had not taken over the Hawaii after american citizens over through the Hawaiian's then it seems probably that they would have strengthened their already strong ties with Great Britain (note British Union Jack on Hawaiian flag).
The British handed over a number of military bases to the American to pay for Lend-Lease war supplies and this may well have included the harbour in Hawaii. Thus Japan attacks US warships in 1941 in Hawaii and the Philippines.

Thus no real change in the path of history.

Sakaki · 2006-04-04, 16:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by hooliganj

Other serious faults with this scenario: Japan wrests Alaska from the Ruskies in 1905? How did they pull that off? Why would they even want it? Even at the height of their imperial ambitions I doubt they would have wanted such a useless piece of territory so far from any of their other holdings.

Actually the Japanese did invade Alaska in '42.

Battle of the Aleutian Islands

HoboGod · 2006-04-05, 03:03

I agree with hooliganj, the increased power of Japan would have no effect on the Manhattan Project, death of President Roosevelt, and bold decision of President Truman to use the atomic bomb against Japan. The bomb may have been dropped on Alaska instead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but the war would have ended the same.

I think a more interesting scenerio would be our tactics if we owned neither Hawaii or the Phillipines. Could we still firebomb the wooden cities and sink their great battleships?

2006-04-03, 11:09	Link #1
newmarduk Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2006	Alternate History: what if U.S. never got Alaska and Hawaii? How history would have changed if the 1867 purchase of Alaska by the United States from Russia never have happened? Add to that the pro-U.S. coup in Hawaii, then an independent kingdom, never occured in 1893, which otherwise led to the United States obtaining Hawaii in 1900. Alaska would still have it's 1898 gold rush, but the Russian government would make sure that most of the prospectors were Russian citizens, though the Alaskan population still grows at least twentyfold at this time. The 1904-1905 Russian-Japanese War sees the Japanese seize control of Alaska from the Russians, and this leads to an influx of Japanese colonists and industry to the northern territory. Meanwhile, Hawaii is still largely controlled by it's monarchy, though the Pacific island nation still has a partially elected parliament and written constitution. Hawaii in the early 20th Century is officially neutral during World War I (1914-1918), though before, during, and after the conflict it attempts to play off the United States, Russia, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan off against each other. After the March and October coups in Russia in 1917 that overthrew the rule of the Czar and installed the Bolsheviks in power, respectively, the imperial family and many thousands of other Russian political refugees are settled by the Japanese in Alaska, and the deposed Czar Nicholas II is allowed by the Japanese government to control the local Alaskan government as Imperial Governor, though still with Japanese military bases (army and naval) in the territory to keep Japan's hold on Alaska. By the 1930s decade, facing a more militaristic Japanese Empire, the Hawaiian monarch, prime minister, cabinet, and parliament are briefly invaded by the Japanese and forced to accept a naval base at Pearl Harbor and occupation troops in Honolulu and other Hawaiian cities. In 1941, on December 7th, when World War II is just two years old, Japanese troops in Alaska invade Canada in a surprise attack, and Japanese naval task forces leave Alaska and Hawaii, including aircraft carriers, and this leads to Japanese planes bombing the U.S. cities of Seattle, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and San Diego, including American naval bases. Of course, at the same time, Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy still declare war on the USA. With Japanese troops on North American soil (mainly Canadian), U.S. infantry and armored units are forced across the U.S.-Canadian border to combat Japanese infantry and armored units in the Northwest Territory and the provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, and Saskatchewan. In this scenario, World War II lasts longer than 1945 since it takes longer for the Americans to aid the British and Soviet Russians against Nazi Germany and the Japanese are not ousted from Canadian soil until late 1943, and Alaska is not liberated from Japanese control until 1945, when Soviet Russia finally declares war on Japan and invades Alaska via Siberia almost at the same time a joint American-Canadian task force is also invading Alaska. The invasion of continental Europe by the Americans and Brits finally takes place in September 1945, but the Allies (Brits, U.S., and Soviets) do not reach the borders of Germany itself until early 1947. Meanwhile, a rebuilt U.S. Navy helps the Americans to liberate Hawaii from Japanese occupation in July 1946, and other Pacific islands during late 1946 and into 1947. Of course, it is revealed by the Allies that the Nazis were killing off the Jews by the millions, and this spurs the collapse of the Germany Nazi regime by the invaders by August 1947. Hitler himself still commits suicide at the same time his government falls and the allies have reached Berlin. The war against Japan continues in 1948 and 1949 as American and Russian troops by February 1949 have invaded Korea and Japan itself simultaneously, and fighting on Japanese soil continues well into 1950. Emperor Hirohito himself commits suicide to prevent the Allies from capturing him, but the rest of the imperial family is caught by either the Russians or the Americans as prisoners of war. The remnants of the Japanese government officially surrender in April 1950, but Japanese military remnants still wage a geurrilla war into 1951 and 1952. Last edited by Catgirls; 2006-04-03 at 15:44.

2006-04-03, 16:38	Link #5
Kamui4356 Aria Company Join Date: Nov 2003	I'd just like to point out that invading canada from alaska in the middle of winter is a bad idea. When you consider the equipment the Japanese army had, I'd expect the same thing to happen to them that happened to the german army in russia. Also, Japan didn't have enough carriers to successfully attack 4 US cities simultaniously. They'd be stretching their forces very thin, and wouldn't be able to do much damage. If they were to work their way down the coast, the US fleet, which without Hawaii would be based in san fransico, would be given time to sail out and meet them in an open battle, with support from land based aircraft. The japanese fleet might win, but they would have lost their core fighting strength, and the US would be able to make good their losses a lot sooner. Also, Japan didn't have the forces to invade north america and hold conquered territory in china. This scenerio will do nothing to change that. __________________

2006-04-04, 01:03	Link #7
Thelastguardian ... Join Date: Nov 2003	Blah. I dislike people trying to guess what would happen if someone does something differently. A Chinese proverb says it best- know beforehand, no beggers. Where do I start. The "purchase" of Alsaka has never been "endeared" by western Canadians. Let's just say US took more than they deserved (look up a Canadian history book yourself). Canadians were just too wimpy to go to war. Meanwhile, the idea of Japan invading Canada during WWII has formally replaced Hitler's proponents proclaiming Hitler's mid-winter assault on Russia is "a good plan" as the most idiotic plan ever suggested ever. Rockie mountain range...Japan's arial/naval superiority...rapid infantry deployment speed...gone. The only corridor that allows rapid movement of troops into midwest is through Seattle on land. However, there were no major highway at that time. (and most of the landtroops were not even close to North America) uh-oh. Yes, the Canadian west coast force was (and still is) weak. Japan could had taken it no problem. Yet they didn't, why? Once the force gets into mainland, they can't get out easily. If you look on a ocean current map, you will notice that the Canadian west coast is not easy to nevigate. In fact, a ferry (!!) sunk just last week. There are many hidden currents, rocks, islands, and what-have-you-not. Also there is Vancouver Island protecting and blocking access to the mainland. Finally there are no natural resources other than timber. This means a. no food b. no processed goods c. no metalic factories. Meanwhile, Hawaii is still standing. Therefore you get a situation that is ghastly similar to US' 2nd invasion to Iraq- supply line getting cut off. Now you are screwed. What is Japan supposed to do, by way of ice bridge though Berling Sea? Ok, so you will need to get Hawaii first. Not that the Japanese didn't try. However the you are missing the strength of the US army at early 20th century- resources + numbers. US didn't have the best equipments. German had the best tanks, Britain had the best planes (and computer scientists), Russia had the weather and homeland advantage. US had none of that; but they did have the most soilders and resources because of its vast lands. Thus, they mess produced tens of thousands of craptasic Liberty class warships in a few years. Can Japan keeps up with the "disposable" US forces for more than a few months? Hardly. Japan had their land and air troops station throughout East Asia. Their resources were strained. Objectively if I were the Emperor, I would have called it a day after I took Asia. Sign a treaty with US, and try to recover from the war first. There is nothing more damaging to a country than a war. Can someone close this thread? __________________ Last edited by Thelastguardian; 2006-04-04 at 01:18.

2006-04-04, 15:28	Link #9
dan88 Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: NZ Age: 49	In 1905 Japan only gained limited Russian territorary and their focus was probably already on China. They probably would have had little interest in Alaska. After the 1st world war the allies landed forces in northern Russia at Arkhangelsk and the USA did the same at Vladivostok. It would also seem plausible that the Canadians and US would have landed forces in Alaska. With their support and being a long way from central Russia it would probably have broken away to form a country similar in nature to Finland. At the time of the 2nd World War Alaska probably did not have anything Japan wanted and there are more attractive targets in south east asia. If the US had not taken over the Hawaii after american citizens over through the Hawaiian's then it seems probably that they would have strengthened their already strong ties with Great Britain (note British Union Jack on Hawaiian flag). The British handed over a number of military bases to the American to pay for Lend-Lease war supplies and this may well have included the harbour in Hawaii. Thus Japan attacks US warships in 1941 in Hawaii and the Philippines. Thus no real change in the path of history. Last edited by dan88; 2006-04-04 at 15:56.

2006-04-03, 13:20	Link #2
Komataguri Reverend K-Rist Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: America's Wang. Age: 40	Why does this sound like the plot for a kickass RTS game.

2006-04-03, 15:40	Link #3
kj1980 Gomen asobase desuwa! Join Date: Nov 2003 Age: 43	I cannot fathom where you are trying to go from here. It's analogous to someone saying "what if the colonists lost the American Revolutionary War with Britain," or "what if Hitler was admitted to the Academy of Fine Arts in Vienna?" Maybe in a a parallel world such alternate history exists. Who knows? Maybe in an alternate world, BETAs may have invaded the earth and we are faced with extinction and a top-secret project called Alternative 4 is our last hope for human survival (if you are wondering, I'm making a reference to the ero-game "MuvLuv Alternative.")

2006-04-03, 15:42	Link #4
Luminare Member Join Date: Dec 2005	I'm a little more interested in what would have happened in the afermath of WWII in this scenario. Given that the Soviets helped invade mainland Japan, how would the US and the USSR have divided Japan? And how would this have affected the dynamics of the Cold War? Other than that, there's one point I find kind of odd in your storyline. I don't think a surprise attack on Canada would have allowed Japan to advance into three provinces. Despite most people's impressions, the Canadian military at the time was a force to be reckoned with. And fighting on homeground (Canadians) vs. fighting several time zones away from home on unfamiliar territory (Japanese) will give significant advantages to the Canadians. In addition, the Americans would not think kindly to a hostile power (the Americans weren't exactly on friendly terms with the Japanese to begin with, unless not having Alaska and Hawaii made some changes to foreign policy) being on the same continent--the basis of isolationism comes from the fact that there was the Pacific and the Atlantic to isolate the country. It would probably take severe underestimation (more so than what allowed the Japanese success in Pearl Harbor) on the part of two different countries to allow the Japanese to actually seize territory from the Canadians. The point of Pearl Harbor was destroying the American Pacific fleet--not to gain ground. I think a similar slap in the face would be more likely in this alternate history, rather than spreading forces across a wide area.

2006-04-04, 14:28	Link #8
hooliganj Team Player Join Date: Apr 2004	Other serious faults with this scenario: Japan wrests Alaska from the Ruskies in 1905? How did they pull that off? Why would they even want it? Even at the height of their imperial ambitions I doubt they would have wanted such a useless piece of territory so far from any of their other holdings. Also, given that the US was nuclear capable in 1945, and nothing in your scenario changes that, what makes you think any kind of resistance would have kept WWII going for another 5 years?

2006-04-05, 03:03	Link #11
HoboGod Necromancer Join Date: May 2003 Location: Cardboard Box Age: 38	I agree with hooliganj, the increased power of Japan would have no effect on the Manhattan Project, death of President Roosevelt, and bold decision of President Truman to use the atomic bomb against Japan. The bomb may have been dropped on Alaska instead of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but the war would have ended the same. I think a more interesting scenerio would be our tactics if we owned neither Hawaii or the Phillipines. Could we still firebomb the wooden cities and sink their great battleships?