Timeline for Why didn’t Japan attack the West Coast of the United States during World War II?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
Post Revisions
36 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 6, 2017 at 16:29 | history | edited | T.E.D.♦ |
edited tags
|
|
| Dec 29, 2016 at 22:53 | history | edited | George A. Solodun |
edited tags
|
|
| Dec 15, 2016 at 15:28 | history | edited | George A. Solodun |
edited tags
|
|
| Dec 8, 2016 at 18:58 | history | edited | George A. Solodun | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 8 characters in body
|
| Nov 6, 2016 at 0:39 | comment | added | Doctor Zhivago | There was a massive amount of oil back then in Southern California. Also all US Warships were provisioned in San Francisco so certainly the question raised is sound. As I've said below attacking Pearl Harbor required Japan to follow up with an attack on Panama as the totality of the US Navy had to pass through that to get to the Pacific Ocean...which had the oil of Venezuela and the fresh water of Lake Gatun. This Japan failed to do...leading to catastrophic consequences for Imperial Japan. Germany was lying in wait off of Cape Hatteras I might add. Modern US does not need the Panama Canal now | |
| Nov 5, 2016 at 11:43 | comment | added | NoDataDumpNoContribution | Just try to estimate the invasion force neccessary and then the neccessary landing gear and you easily see why they didn't attack more pronouncedly. | |
| Nov 5, 2016 at 5:09 | comment | added | DrZ214 | @Luaan Neutralizing major ports at Seattle, San Diego, & Pearl Harbor would have forced the Americans to service their ships on the East Coast, greatly increasing logistical problems for the USA. There were plenty of naval battles which almost sunk American Carriers, but they were able to repair relatively quickly. So attacking the West Coast would have helped just like strategic bombing of Germany helped in Europe. The problem is logistics on the Japanese side, because the West Coast is far away even from Hawaii, and the fact that America could heavily defend their own territory. | |
| Nov 4, 2016 at 7:24 | answer | added | Richard Careaga | timeline score: 5 | |
| Nov 3, 2016 at 17:41 | history | edited | George A. Solodun | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| Nov 3, 2016 at 11:45 | answer | added | TechZen | timeline score: 6 | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 15:44 | comment | added | Luaan | How would attacking the west coast help the Japanese win the war? I think that's the main issue you have with your question. There was barely anything at the west coast, and supplying an army trying to invade the USA-as-a-whole from the west coast would have been a logistical nightmare. Japan barely had the ability to put a soldier on the west coast - and there was nothing there to warrant that expense. They focused on the islands, because those were crucial for logistics of the US Navy - they really wanted to deter the US from getting involved in their campaign, not conquer the US. | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 14:50 | comment | added | George A. Solodun | @NeMo, Your comment in no way accounts for the Japanese determination to win the War; besides, Japan did attack targets as far away from the home islands as the United States. (for example, Australia.) | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 14:03 | answer | added | Keller | timeline score: 2 | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 10:40 | comment | added | CptEric | i thought they did.. youtube.com/watch?v=6_KOLqpo7z8 | |
| Nov 2, 2016 at 8:37 | comment | added | Mazura | @NeMo and Dan, agreed. - Please see any of the answers that broach logistics, instead of the ones that talk about the few times they did poke us with a stick that wasn't long enough. | |
| Nov 1, 2016 at 22:50 | answer | added | Schwern | timeline score: 3 | |
| Nov 1, 2016 at 19:43 | answer | added | mharper | timeline score: 3 | |
| Nov 1, 2016 at 19:09 | comment | added | Ne Mo | -1. Common sense would suggest the reason: it was too far away | |
| Nov 1, 2016 at 18:59 | answer | added | rm -rf slash | timeline score: 4 | |
| Nov 1, 2016 at 17:51 | history | edited | George A. Solodun | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 9 characters in body
|
| Nov 1, 2016 at 1:35 | answer | added | Shane Van Winkle | timeline score: 4 | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 21:40 | comment | added | George A. Solodun | @DavidRicherby Excellent! Thanks for the photograph! | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 21:33 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackHistory/status/793204154403426304 | ||
| Oct 31, 2016 at 20:52 | answer | added | March Ho | timeline score: 3 | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 18:26 | comment | added | Dan Is Fiddling By Firelight | Amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics. Japan didn't launch any sort of large scale attacks against the continental US because we were too far away for them to support a major operation. | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 18:21 | answer | added | Tom Au | timeline score: 19 | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 17:51 | comment | added | OrangeDog | Do you mean the early months of the USA's involvement in WWII? | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 17:48 | comment | added | David Richerby | @georgestrieby I've been there and there's a brass plaque on a wall, of which I took a photograph. It seems the bomb actually exploded in the air over the town, so I'm not sure it was accurate of me to say it "fell on Dundee." | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 17:25 | comment | added | George A. Solodun | @DavidRicherby I didn't know that; thank you for drawing my attention to this. However, could you explain how you found this out? | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 17:23 | vote | accept | George A. Solodun | ||
| Oct 31, 2016 at 16:24 | comment | added | David Richerby | "a couple thousand bomb-filled balloons across the Pacific (all of which fell on sparsely inhabited areas)" They didn't all fall on sparsely inhabited areas. One fell on Dundee, a suburb of Omaha. | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 14:42 | comment | added | MCW♦ | What would be the strategic objective of such an attack? | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 14:01 | answer | added | Rathony | timeline score: 100 | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 13:54 | comment | added | User999999 | Define Attacks: Air raids, submarine attacks, land invasion, ... in almost all cases the answer will be logistics and the absence of major support & logistical ports controlled by Japan in the central pacific. | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 13:46 | answer | added | Smith | timeline score: 7 | |
| Oct 31, 2016 at 13:28 | history | asked | George A. Solodun | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
