Why the Japanese attacked the United States: kzbin.info/www/bejne/sIHRZaCma95gatk Video on WW2 Ship Classes: kzbin.info/www/bejne/iZitfK2oea-YpNk If you like in-depth researched videos on Military History, consider supporting me on Patreon: patreon.com/mhv/
@copperhamster6 жыл бұрын
I remember a similar comment about how if all the US forces at Midway had been defeated and sunk, the USN would still outnumber the IJN in major fleet units before the end of that year.
@matijarasovic46276 жыл бұрын
@marios gianopoulos it would be hard to refute these numbers, while attrition and industrial inferiority can be worked around in a continental war, the naval one is mostly grand strategy and the game of numbers
@copperhamster6 жыл бұрын
@marios gianopoulos I used to chat on FidoNET with a Japanese woman with a Masters in 20th century History. She said Japanese history as taught in schools goes something like "We helped everyone win World War 1, there was some minor scuffles and stuff in China, and then one day for no real reason the US was dropping atomic bombs on us!"
@matijarasovic46276 жыл бұрын
@marios gianopoulos well that sounds... dangerous
@Sshooter4446 жыл бұрын
Their only chance was to bet that we would pussy out and Sue for peace. That was their plan. Major backfire. Took atomic bomb to make them figure out we were serious.
@ticotube25016 жыл бұрын
A destroyer a day keeps the enemy at bay?
@TeamRetroWorld6 жыл бұрын
best comment i've found yet. +1
@GrosserHund875 жыл бұрын
"...keeps the enemy in bay" and then the ultimate naval pun is complete.
@aaroncabatingan52385 жыл бұрын
@ミレニアルと日章旗 Propaganda doesn't really need to lie to influence the masses. Calling Pearl Harbor treachery isn't inaccurate, especially since they planned to deliver the declaration of war minutes before the attack begins(in every single nations present in South-East Asia). Propagandas that uses true facts are much more powerful than fake ones because fake information brings inconsistencies which would only confuse the reader, or watcher.
@nancysexton43645 жыл бұрын
@Call Me Ishmael God bless america
@andrewtaylor9405 жыл бұрын
I suspect the final invasion plan for Japan involved tying Destroyer and Destroyer escorts nose to tail and just walking across from Los Angeles
@Miketar24246 жыл бұрын
I liked the part when the United States commissioned a lot more ships than the Japanese Imperial Navy.
@mcglynn205 жыл бұрын
Which part was that? I think I missed it.
@ΔΓςΗΞΜΨώθΓκζ5 жыл бұрын
wut part lol haha
@jakebhenry22285 жыл бұрын
Which part, all I see is the Japanese growin- OHH, US is blue, Japan red, come on japan
@margraveofgadsden89974 жыл бұрын
Okay, one of us most of completely misinterpreted what was going on here, because that’s not what I got from it all.
@MrShadowofthewind4 жыл бұрын
@ZDProletariat Do you guys also close your eyes when you sleep ? 😲
@matijarasovic46276 жыл бұрын
I just want to point out how hard making thus video actually was, from collecting data to editing it all out, really great work... I can't state that enough
@Jordan-Ramses6 жыл бұрын
I agree with his conclusion as well. America would just keep building ships. The other problem is how does Japan win? The idea that Japan could just sink some ships and America would give up is nonsense. The British burned down the White House in the war of 1812 and America didn't give up. The North suffered defeat after defeat in the Civil War and didn't give up and then alternately the South fought on long after all hope was lost.
@jonttul5 жыл бұрын
@@Jordan-Ramses Because Americans were seriously afraid of a Japanese invasion of the West Coast in the early stages of the war. The Japanese were never going to win a long sustained war, which is why the plan at Pearl Harbor and Midway and the planned invasion of Hawaii was to knock out the Pacific fleet and bases and thus be able to negotiate peace from a position of power. The Japanese had the every advantage in the Pacific at the beginning and the US economy was not geared for war yet in 1941. It would take time for their industry to bring it's might to bear which is everything the Japanese relied on.
@enigmagrieshaber5555 Жыл бұрын
@@jonttul which is near impossible since japanese are also afraid of Americans Yamamoto even stated the freedom of Americans having guns and every equipment they could find and buy As well as the industrial might of US
@josephdestaubin74264 жыл бұрын
God, that was a great line: "you might walk from Berlin to Moscow, but you're not going to swim from Perl Harbor to Tokyo." Well said sir.
@jamesgoldring1052 Жыл бұрын
But you can with a short crossing from Russia to American Alaska, the Americans even graciously created a road across Canada to Alaska Ez Japanese Skill Issue
@gordo20225 жыл бұрын
Bruh he left his auto clicker on “build destroyer”
@justaglitch93874 жыл бұрын
Lol
@thomaskositzki94244 жыл бұрын
Macros are cheating! XD
@oh_no79383 жыл бұрын
us: MORE
@BeelzebubBeelzebub3 жыл бұрын
We need to increase production of our Naval Fleet. A Naval Fleet that relies on steam engines and coal. Irregardless of war, or not. Sustaining such a huge population requires allowing mass migration, saving our species from starvation, and allowing all ideologies and religions. God has spoken.
@ivorbellringer25633 жыл бұрын
@Rafael Enriquez 9p
@milkboy22285 жыл бұрын
If you can't swim from Pearl Harbor to Tokyo - just build a bridge. With the 600 Destroyers you built.
@Graymenn4 жыл бұрын
maybe 60km of destroyers... not quite there but still impressive
@liabilityvoid4 жыл бұрын
@@Graymenn we may have gona just a little bit overboard on ships. Just a little.
@kingad88694 жыл бұрын
@@liabilityvoid At least we were at war, nowadays we do this for the lols.
@marinewillis12024 жыл бұрын
when you think that the whole time we were simultaneously building tens of thousands of tanks, motorized, mechanized, fighters, bombers etc and all the while basically feeding all of the Allies, it truly becomes staggering
@DSiren4 жыл бұрын
you mean 2,710 liberty ships or 325km of liberty
@brachio10006 жыл бұрын
Before Pearl Harbor, it took an American shipyard three years to build a destroyer. Six months after the attack, it took only weeks from the laying down to commissioning. That's the U.S. when it's running on all eight.
@andrewp82845 жыл бұрын
Hence why contrary to the statements of some in the comments, Japan never did or could have issued a "quick decisive blow" to the US in basically any shape or form whatsoever. US industry would have crushed them even under the most favorable circumstances for Japan (killing carriers at Pearl Harbor), if a bit later than historically.
@manabouttongue5 жыл бұрын
You mean 16!
@ronansmith91484 жыл бұрын
One liberty ship every 3 hours. Cargo spam.
@justinsutton50054 жыл бұрын
@@andrewp8284 we were also just warming up
@alexh39744 жыл бұрын
Also liberty ships that sustained the vast forges of industry, ship yards, munition plants and kept the war ships fueled, fed and armed from thousands of miles away. Dozens of yards working on many ships simultaneously 24/7 365 days a year. So cheaply and easily produced by the end that a few voyages even only one voyage paid back the costs of a single ship.
@radishinglad9983 жыл бұрын
On top of all this, it should be remembered that in 1945, the United States Navy commissioned a transport ship into a mobile ice cream factory. While immobile, made of concrete, and having no weaponry, the barge produced 10 gallons (about 38L) of ice cream in 7 minutes, and had a series of smaller ships to deliver it to US navy and marines across the pacific. I think that speaks just as much as any number of destroyers. Not only can your enemy overwhelm and out perform you in every tangible way on the seas, he can do so while providing the entire crew of every ship with dessert.
@Albukhshi2 жыл бұрын
American production in WW2 was so insane, Germans on the other side of the world were finding abandoned camps with chocolate cake... The US was absolutely the wrong country Japan and German picked a fight with...
@Blox117 Жыл бұрын
why would they make ice cream when the ice cream could just be shipped pre made???
@collinwood6573 Жыл бұрын
@@Blox117 they did ship it pre made. The problem is warships don’t exactly have infinite ice cream storage and dedicating entire convoys worth of merchant shipping just to deliver ice cream would be a terrible idea. The solution to this is loading the warships up with as much ice cream as they could carry when they left port, have small ice cream making facilities on the larger warships, and make up the difference with a few dedicated ice cream production barges.
@Blox117 Жыл бұрын
@@collinwood6573 or just wrap all the ice cream up in buckets like everyone else does all the time?????? do you even think before typing?
@collinwood6573 Жыл бұрын
@@Blox117 you do realize that you can’t just “wrap all the ice cream up in buckets” and not refrigerate it, right? Both merchant ships and warships have limited refrigerated cargo space. This space is needed for cargo other than ice cream though, such as meat. This means there is basically nowhere to store frozen ice cream on a merchant ship. The solution that the US found was to ship dehydrated milk and ice cream flavoring using the much more spacious standard cargo storage on the merchant ships. These dry ingredients would then be mixed with water (sometimes milk) and ice on board the ice cream barges to create actual ice cream.
@alwayscurious33576 жыл бұрын
IJN: We got the Yamato! Kriegsmarine: We have the Bismarck! USN: We make warships like we make cars...
@alwayscurious33576 жыл бұрын
@marios gianopoulos Iowa: *Lives on to the Cold War - Gets it's own Helicopter. -Precision Shells -Tomahawk Cruise Missiles "Cool"
@asherkosmos43126 жыл бұрын
More like USN: We have Enterprise
@HaloFTW556 жыл бұрын
Sod Iowa and Enterprise. Just crank out hundreds of Light Carriers and overwhelm the enemy with more planes than they have guns to shoot back with... including small arms.
@22steve51506 жыл бұрын
We'll spam out enough Iowas, South Dakotas, and North Carolinas to double all the Yamato and Bismarks combined, and that's still with 2 more Iowas cancelled while half built and with us not even really focusing on building battleships anymore, cause we got 24 fleet carriers, 9 light carriers, and 74 escort carriers to build.
@xb0xisbetter5 жыл бұрын
And yet we never did take the Yamato on in ship-on-ship combat, instead opting to bombard it from the air (no less than 6 battleships were sicked on her, but later held back). It seems the U.S. Navy, as mighty as it was, was terrified of Yamato. I'm sure they took note of the fact that, even once crippled, Bismarck was nigh unsinkable (surviving crewman insist the ship was scuttled to prevent capture, as the entirety of the ship's superstructure was destroyed, but she was otherwise still seaworthy). Musashi had been hit by 19 torpedoes and 17 bombs, including 1,000 pound armor-piercing bombs, and it still took her hours to eventually sink after the fact. These ships were in an entirely different league from our Iowa class vessels.
@SonOfPatriots5 жыл бұрын
That moment Japan realized this game of war was over when America figured out the glitch of infinite destroyers
@matsv2015 жыл бұрын
Luckily they didnt hit the 1024 hardcode cap
@shronkler19944 жыл бұрын
japan just raged quit the game
@許進曾4 жыл бұрын
@@matsv201 I don't think so, consider the liberty fleet they have crank out from the dockyard.
@matsv2014 жыл бұрын
@@許進曾 transpodg ship is a difrent entity
@許進曾4 жыл бұрын
@@matsv201 even transport ship will still need ship yard to construct.
@historicalman18176 жыл бұрын
Japan: " Check out this Destroyer I made! " USA: *Proceeds to make 20 destroyers in response*
@RAKITHA96 жыл бұрын
Level 2 empire vs Level 5 empire
@paulbricker90776 жыл бұрын
Hello I stole your food 50*
@inkedseahear6 жыл бұрын
More like a panic response, IJN: Hey I launch a new ship USN: HOLY SHIT! WE NOT MAINTAINING A 10:1 NUMBER ADVANTAGE ANYMORE! WE NEED MORE SHIPS!
@CrazyNikel6 жыл бұрын
@@inkedseahear That's not how this works kid.
@ThatRatBastard6 жыл бұрын
@@inkedseahear it's not panic it's being pragmatic. Their 1 ship can't kill any of your ships if they're too busy sinking after being hit by all 300 of yours.
@Tishirobearcat5 жыл бұрын
Just to add to this. The US built 2700 10,000 ton displacement “liberty” general cargo ships. At a rate of three a day during full production. Plus hundreds and hundreds more tankers and victory ships.
@Bobis323 жыл бұрын
the record was 13 ships in a single day which is just ridiculous
@richardtaylor16523 жыл бұрын
On top of that, they were producing aircraft, tanks and small arms of all types for the Pacific, Atlantic, African/Italian fronts, the Western Front and supply further equipment via Lend-Lease. They did this all at the same time without any major supply or internal logistic issues.
@brianlong23345 ай бұрын
About half the liberty ships had major flaws in the hull / cracks and had to be repaired but still impressive. The USA produced about 5,000 to 6,000 cargo ships / tankers, and the Japanese built about 500. The USA Navy produced about 1,200 major navy vessels from destroyers to aircraft carriers and had about 300 before ww2 started. The Japanese produced about 350 and had about 350 before the war started. The USA produced about 17x the iron ore the Japanese did in ww2 and 40x the oil. The Japanese navy needed 18 million barrels a year to operate effectively against the USA it never had more then 7 million a year, the USA pacific fleet used 18 million in 1941 and 28 million barrels in 1942 by 45 it was about 50 million. The majority of the Japanese navy spent the war at Port at anchor, where almost half were sunk.
@rahadityap23752 ай бұрын
@@brianlong2334 The War Shipping Administration have estimated 11,000 Cargo Ship of the US Merchant Navy operated by end of WW2, Remember this is Merchant Marine/Navy while the US Navy have 7,601 Ships at total
@brianlong23342 ай бұрын
@rahadityap2375 From memory, only cargo ships of 1,000 tonnes or more are classified as it becomes very hard to distinguish. The British had a small fleet of aircraft carriers early on in the war to help protect cargo ships but it's not actually an aircraft carrier as it only had 1 to a few at best had 3 aircraft.. The Japanese lost about what 2,000 to 2,400 of its merchant fleet of 1,000 tonnes or more it still had almost 2,000 ships operating when it surrendered of 1,000 tonnes or more in its merchant fleet, it also lost some 15,000 civilian ships many of them fishing vessels but many had been used to transport cargo for the war effort also....
@donaldreynolds68576 жыл бұрын
The two scariest weapons America had. The American shipyard and the American factory,
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
no people who love to work
@VioletMilks5 жыл бұрын
john barrett stonks
@JGlennFL5 жыл бұрын
And our two best allies; Atlantic and Pacific.
@joker_season4 жыл бұрын
It will be oil, and food
@anathapindikahalim4 жыл бұрын
There was three you forgot The American's booming Economy
@budmeister6 жыл бұрын
Fletcher class destroyers are the Zerglings of WW2.
@Ralph-yn3gr6 жыл бұрын
No one ever expects the 11 shipyard 175 destroyer rush.
@Lehr-km5be6 жыл бұрын
Tbh T-34s or russian infantry seem like a better personification of Zerglings to me
@thomas.026 жыл бұрын
"we have more destroyers than you have bombs and torpedoes"
@Lehr-km5be6 жыл бұрын
@@thomas.02 Hah thats a good one :)
@oceanhome20236 жыл бұрын
Lehr9807 And to the Germans too !
@Scientist1186 жыл бұрын
That moment you realize you forgot to stop building destroyers.
@tremedar6 жыл бұрын
I have no gold for research...the hell is going on?? >check city maintenance....ok >check trade agreements....ok >check unit maintenance.....WTF?!
@CT--gs1wj6 жыл бұрын
When you commit 15 naval dockyards in producing Destroyers in HOI4
@robertjarman37036 жыл бұрын
Those weren't small destroyers either. The Fletchers were 115 metres long and 12 metres wide, could go 68 kmh, could go up to 8850 km away at a speed of 28 kmh, had 329 crew members, had five 127 mm guns, bigger than the guns on an upgraded M1A1 Abram tank today, ten 40 mm bofors guns, twelve 20 mm autocannons, 10 twenty one inch torpedo tubes, six depth charge projectors and two depth charge racks. And they had equipment like sonar and radar, which given their main opposition were not ships like the Yamato (and when they were, they had the help of their carriers and battleships), they were submarines, Zeros, and supporting amphibious assault missions, that many destroyers had a gold ROI.
@onetwothreefour39576 жыл бұрын
Robert Jarman great comment, thanks. i just wanted to drop that the japanese navy clearly invested heavily into submarines, so clearly to fight that force the usa has gone all out. which might have been overkill, but you can never be too sure about submarines.
@marxel44446 жыл бұрын
@@onetwothreefour3957 but you also needed to fight german subs in the atlantik at the same time and defend your troops you ship to africa and europe. also the leand lease. i know he said the main part was in the pazific but we shouldnt forget germany invested heavy into subs and pushing great britan to its limits
@hgbugalou4 жыл бұрын
Jesus, the US had to start naming ships after enlisted men at some point.
@HeIsAnAli4 жыл бұрын
DDs and DEs.
@egca21984 жыл бұрын
yes the Destroyer The Sullimans was named after enlisted brothers.
@littlepeep73804 жыл бұрын
@@egca2198 That's "The Sullivans " not sulliman
@thurin844 жыл бұрын
or people that looked at water once.
@TheAviationGuyID4 жыл бұрын
I saw a ship named "Harder" and "hoe"
@andromedaputraharyanto54205 жыл бұрын
"I swear admiral,we've sunk that ship twelve times alteady" -Some IJN Crew
@thelegacyshow42485 жыл бұрын
Shit
@thelegacyshow42485 жыл бұрын
"I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant, and fill him with a terrible resolve"
@VersusARCH5 жыл бұрын
"Soryu, admiral!"
@許進曾4 жыл бұрын
@Totally not the flash :3 IJN carrier group: I fear no man. But that thing (grey ghost steaming over the horizon). It scare me.
@HeIsAnAli4 жыл бұрын
@Totally not the flash :3 _OWARI DA!_
@willyreeves3195 жыл бұрын
if you think this was unbalanced you should see the aircraft production and the truck production and the ammo production and clothing production and the ...
@thurin844 жыл бұрын
my favorite (since i mostly collect helmets) total numbers of men and women who served in the us military in any capacity during ww2; 16 million. total number of m1 helmets produced; 22 million. total number of m1 helmet liners produced; 46 million. usa; "anything worth doing is worth overdoing. and then overdoing again"
@willyreeves3194 жыл бұрын
number of .45 ACP rounds produced 4.2 billion - . the US made 3.3 billion of that. world population was around 2.5 billion so we could have killed the entire planet with just the pistol ammo we made.
@andrewptob4 жыл бұрын
Yes, U.S. sent a ton of military aid to the Russians to help them against the German invasion
@marinewillis12024 жыл бұрын
throw in there the amount of food we were producing and shipping out also. We basically fed all of the Allies also.
@DSiren4 жыл бұрын
@@willyreeves319 .45ACP was the ammo used by the Thompson and the M3 "Grease Gun"
@enfield_the_enigmatic29896 жыл бұрын
This obviously took a lot of effort, I applaud your dedication to the topic!
@pantherace10005 жыл бұрын
at the end of this video you realize that "awoken a sleeping giant" simply does not begin to describe the situation, "awoken a war god" seems to be more accurate.
@stevekolarik28574 жыл бұрын
pantherace1000 and that he really never said that. NO documentation or witness that he said that. Even the historians on Yamamoto have nothing that he said that.
@robertgallagher77344 жыл бұрын
Absolutely- by the end of the Pacific war the USA was building ships faster than the Japanese could build torpedoes. Admiral Yamamoto was dead on right.
@stevekolarik28574 жыл бұрын
Robert Gallagher he never said it. No documentation or witnesses heard him said it. He never had a diary. Nothing!
@robertgallagher77344 жыл бұрын
@@stevekolarik2857 ok- doesnt change the fact that Yamamoto had spent more time in the U.S. and understood the American spirit much better than his superiors. Even if he didn't say it- I'm sure he knew it. But do wonder- why was such an insightful quote misattributed to him?
@MasterofBlitz4 жыл бұрын
@@robertgallagher7734 He has mentioned two statements. One to a Japanese ultra nationalist who wanted war "Should hostilities once break out between Japan and the United States, it would not be enough that we take Guam and the Philippines, nor even Hawaii and San Francisco. To make victory certain, we would have to march into Washington and dictate the terms of peace in the White House. I wonder if our politicians [who speak so lightly of a Japanese-American war] have confidence as to the final outcome and are prepared to make the necessary sacrifices." And a second quote to Prime Minister (at the time) Konoe "I shall run wild considerably for the first six months or a year, but I have utterly no confidence for the second and third years.". Yamamoto knew he had to win each battle decisively to win the war. Even Admiral Nagumo (the field commander for the Pearl Harbor Attack) said in a later carrier battle at Santa Cruz "This battle was a tactical win, but a shattering strategic loss for Japan ... Considering the great superiority of our enemy's industrial capacity, we must win every battle overwhelmingly in order to win this war. This last one, although a victory, unfortunately, was not an overwhelming victory."
@misterjag5 жыл бұрын
"In the first six to twelve months of a war with the United States and Great Britain I will run wild and win victory upon victory. But then, if the war continues after that, I have no expectation of success." -- Admiral Yamamoto
@tompayne88635 жыл бұрын
@@1racemate He was smart. He knew!
@StryderK5 жыл бұрын
Tom Payne cause he’s been to America and knew what would happen if American industrial might is unleashed.
@teebes20094 жыл бұрын
I am not sure they quite made it to 6 months.
@JoeSpringer974 жыл бұрын
@@teebes2009 If they came up short on 6 months, it was by a few days. Midway was in June of 1942.
@teebes20094 жыл бұрын
@@JoeSpringer97 The Battle of the Coral Sea was right at about the 6 month mark, and they did not quite run wild there. So, overall he was probably right as to 6 months.
@TheNightWatcher13855 жыл бұрын
For those wondering how the US didn’t run out of names for their ships: -Battleships were named after US states. -Submarines were named after fish species. -Destroyers were named after war heros. -Cruisers were named after US cities. -Aircraft Carriers were named after famous battles, presidents, one of the original 6 ships of the navy, or famous admirals. Plenty of material to pick from.
@FriedrichBarb5 жыл бұрын
I noticed the Battleships but not the rest. Thats interesting lol
@alexh39742 жыл бұрын
they had to start inventing Fish for the submarine fleet, for ones that sounded suitable to avoid US Gold fish etc.
@JamesWillmus Жыл бұрын
@@alexh3974 the USN Asian Carp
@thelettery6 Жыл бұрын
I just figured out what kitty hawk was named after the location of the first flight of the Wright Brothers
@jameshannagan42563 ай бұрын
@@alexh3974 Was there a US Carp I wonder?
@radishinglad9982 жыл бұрын
My grandfather worked in the shipyards. He said it was hard work to make this many ships, but everyone believed the Japanese were making them just as quickly While he passed in 2020 at the age of 103, I always come back to this video to remember that his touch, and the touch of millions of Americans in the shipyards, helped win the war.
@constantinethecataphract5949 Жыл бұрын
You should have showed him this vid
@concept5631 Жыл бұрын
May he rest in peace.
@ssss-e2m8s10 ай бұрын
The United States and the United Kingdom like to lie and exploit their workers during war
@KeterClass21557 ай бұрын
Your grandfather was every bit a hero as those in service.
@jameshannagan42563 ай бұрын
The US use of civilian expertise was really impressive.
@jameshar95925 жыл бұрын
Admiral Yamamoto studied in the US and warned the emperor that our concept of mass production could overwhelm japan...he was right!!
@asga26005 жыл бұрын
Well he's the only Japanese who has brain in that time... But he was overwhelmed by idiots
@jesusramirezromo20374 жыл бұрын
Its a shame Hirohito had no power at the time
@tfraggins3 жыл бұрын
He's just one of those few who really understand the implications of a war against US and despite knowing that, he went to war, and masterminded the greatest defeat of US in the entire war. His dedication to the empire is amazing, that might've cost him his life but he's going to stay a warrior and a hero. Screw their war council, full of jingoes who steered imperial japan into utter destruction.
@ItsSerialBoX3 жыл бұрын
Yamamoto studied in the United States. He traveled it quite extensively also. Even though the US was lazy in its 1930's mindset, he well knew the capability possible if you stirred the nest. He was not an overbearing self serving egotistical warrior like many in the Japanese military.
@johnfoster86433 жыл бұрын
@@asga2600 I don’t know if he was the only one. From what I’ve read the navy had its share of smart, rational leaders, but the army was full of complete lunatics.
@_datapoint6 жыл бұрын
Dayum. No wonder the US tested a nuke on its own ships. I’m sure there were plenty after the war.
@caif46 жыл бұрын
Also tested it on captured ships. Poor Nagato. F
@Spaceman404.6 жыл бұрын
@@caif4 and Prinz Eugen
@HaloFTW556 жыл бұрын
The US sold ships by the dozens after the war. There were so much surplus material that many even went on open market for civilians to get.
@Autechltd6 жыл бұрын
@@HaloFTW55 Its like that episode of Oprah where she gave away cars. SHIPS FOR EVERYBODY!!
@ericjamieson5 жыл бұрын
@@HaloFTW55 The Belgrano, the Argentinian cruiser that the British sank during the Falklands War, was originally a WWII ship called USS Phoenix that the US sold off after the war.
@williamreymond26695 жыл бұрын
What is interesting to note is that this video makes no attempt to list many classes of auxiliaries: destroyer tenders, oilers, supply ships, transports, hospital ships, repair ships and landing craft produced during the same time period. When you add in those tonnages of vessels produced, the American ship building program becomes nothing less than jaw dropping.
@johnlach37005 жыл бұрын
or planes for the carriers
@CM-ve1bz5 жыл бұрын
William Reymond By 1945 70% of all ships on the water around the world were American made.
@asga26005 жыл бұрын
Its just took damn manyyyyy.......tooo list...
@ez_company93255 жыл бұрын
your damn right it made no effort! this 13 minute video probably took more man hours then most hour long videos by a factor of 3
@nolanmosher87864 жыл бұрын
dont forget lliberty ships 1 ship a day from all 9 shipyards
@xchazz865 жыл бұрын
Japan: "How many ships are you going to make?" US: "Yes."
@sumponeighknotyew97575 жыл бұрын
Japan:"what's you favorite flavor?" US:"LARGE"
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
alot
@f430ferrari55 жыл бұрын
Toyo Masauce Japan - but how many are you going to bring to the Pacific US - Everyone Japan - what do you mean everyone? US - EVERYONE!!!
@gregoryhickok63004 жыл бұрын
@@1racemate in the Army we called it factor P. P=plenty
@BELCAN574 жыл бұрын
Japan "How many? " USA "ALL OF THEM"
@NguyenMinh-vs1vm4 жыл бұрын
Drinking game: take a shot for every destroyer commissioned
@MilitaryHistoryVisualized4 жыл бұрын
More like a suicide pact.
@protoculturejunkie4 жыл бұрын
Are you trying to kill someone? 😛
@ninjadejedi4 жыл бұрын
It is not a drinking game, it's just drinking.
@michaelnewton13324 жыл бұрын
I am currently at the hospital getting my stomach pumped. Hope you're happy, asshole!!!
@kennymendoza15813 жыл бұрын
Try drinking a glass of water every time a destroyer is produced, you will OD on water.
@barleysixseventwo66656 жыл бұрын
Alright America You've Made your point, time to stop building destroyers. ...America. ....America Stop! ...America what are you doing!? >When I have enough Fetchers to build a pontoon bridge from San Francisco to Tokyo, then and only then will I have enough destroyers.
@ineednochannelyoutube53846 жыл бұрын
A fletcher is approx 130m long, the pacific is approx 12000km across. Its 7.5 fletchers in a km. thats some 90 000 Fletchers.
@aethertech5 жыл бұрын
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 time to start building them inland, railroad them to the sea if we must!
@8vantor85 жыл бұрын
we where going to make it 5 thick so they could not stop it
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
no we like them we will make skii boat out of them put big blocks in them more power drag them Assy all over the seas they love to skii
@JediKnight198520025 жыл бұрын
@@ineednochannelyoutube5384 US Production to Roosevelt: The Navy and Marines are moving too quickly for Operation Fletcher Parallel to be achieved.
@glitch1646 жыл бұрын
Aug 16 1943: Escort destroyer “Hill” is commissioned. That was the ship my grandpa served on! So cool to see it mentioned on here. Thank you!
@theboom16944 жыл бұрын
Around 1:26 there was a ship commissioned called “Hoe” and one a little while earlier called “harder” who thought those where good names
@windwalker57654 жыл бұрын
She's in WoWs, too, and I have one! I'll sink a couple Axis boats for your grandpa...
@jamescodyjones4 жыл бұрын
Grateful for your grandfather's service.
@Troopertroll4 жыл бұрын
3:41 for mine, and she's still afloat as a museum ship c:
@glitch1644 жыл бұрын
@@n.m.8802 The general difference: Escort Destroyers were built with idea that they would escort both Pacific and Atlantic merchant fleets and logistics vessels like LSTs, Hospital ships and the like. Their primary foes were Submarines (Atlantic) and Aircraft (Pacific) they dealt with both in both theaters, but as German Aircraft were limited in range and Japanese Submarines hunted large military targets almost to the exclusion of all else until late war, this was the reality for these vessels. A Destroyer in WW2 parlance is an escort vessel which is fast enough to screen a fleet from potential threats. With Carriers, Cruisers and Battleships capable of around 30 knots, a Destroyer was a smaller, faster ship that would be used as a forward, side, or rearguard vessel which prevented the fleet from being set upon by a suprise attack. During combat their job is to charge in and distract, draw fire, and launch torpedo spreads against the enemy capital ships, and to use their gunnery to eliminate their counterparts in the enemies force.
@pac1fic0556 жыл бұрын
After lining up all American ships built during WW2 you could walk from Pearl Harbor to Tokyo.
@incendiarybullet35165 жыл бұрын
Pac1fic0 - Just the Destroyers is enough.
@Thai85215 жыл бұрын
@@incendiarybullet3516 Well should be more carriers. If the land is flat, the more you can tell how far you are from Tokyo, but destroyers are well enough XP
@Chironex_Fleckeri4 жыл бұрын
Is this true? Warships only?
@anoon-4 жыл бұрын
@@Chironex_Fleckeri not side by side but I would believe this if they were connected nose to rear
@g0ast4 жыл бұрын
"What should we name these destroyers, Keith?" "I don't know Scott, just pick something." "I got you, fam." 3:18
@moistronaut47554 жыл бұрын
Lmao😂
@GhostTrueCapitalist3 жыл бұрын
This one got me good
@martinXY3 жыл бұрын
My favourite name is Ray.
@VirgoShelter2 жыл бұрын
Destoryer were named after deceased American admiral and such
@ShaDOWDoG6676 жыл бұрын
All told the United States built 6755 major naval vessels over the course of the war. While, in stark contrast, the total major naval vessels produced by all of the Axis powers combined amounted to 1359 such vessels.
@Starwarsgeek-986 жыл бұрын
Thats including auxilary and merchant ships I believe Everything from cargo ships to minelayers
@CorsetGrace6 жыл бұрын
And only 6 USN capital ships, fleet carriers and battleships, were sunk.
@Starwarsgeek-985 жыл бұрын
@@AFT_05G The US produced nearly 500 dedicated Submarine chassers, add to that the already considerable destroyers and Destroyer escorts and uff. Thats not counting dedicated anti submarine aircraft and escort carriers
@ShaDOWDoG6675 жыл бұрын
@@AFT_05G The key phrase here being, "...over the course of the war." For reading on the subject www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download%3Fdoi%3D10.1.1.590.924%26rep%3Drep1%26type%3Dpdf&ved=2ahUKEwiJlYyXnsjgAhVph-AKHQeaAVoQFjAOegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0bxygP5pRLdGQtlpTBcSv4
@aaroncabatingan52385 жыл бұрын
Before the war, they were planning to build a navy larger than Japan, Germany, Italy, France and England combined. Its to secure their netutrality and make sure that if the Axis won, the US(and the Americas) will be a nightmare to invade
@username655856 жыл бұрын
There is a dude who is swimming across the pacific right now.
@MilitaryHistoryVisualized6 жыл бұрын
I prove you wrong mhv... Gets eaten by a shark.
@MostlyPennyCat6 жыл бұрын
@@MilitaryHistoryVisualized Do doooo - do doo - da do.
@Custerd16 жыл бұрын
Hulk swim! Hulk no scared!
@CT--gs1wj6 жыл бұрын
Chuck norris
@alwayscurious33575 жыл бұрын
@@CT--gs1wj Chuck Norris doesn't have to swim. He just have to jump to the other side of the Pacific
@emeryalmasy77276 жыл бұрын
Any military strategy that includes the phrase "but they lack the will to fight, so they will give in" is an exercise in wishful thinking, no matter what else is included. Both Germany and Japan started WWII with that assumption. The fact that some opponents had given up in the early stages of the war led to a general conclusion that was wildly optimistic: "they will all give in if we strike hard and fast!"
@hobmoor20426 жыл бұрын
Emery Almasy - You're right. Yanks, Canucks, Anzacs, Brits and Ruskies fight back if kicked. Leave us in peace and we'll be your friend (some see that as a weakness, until they find out otherwise).
@mjbull51566 жыл бұрын
And the way they conducted the raid on Pearl Harbor had the precisely opposite effect on the US public's willingness to see a war through. Instead of "fighting Japan is too hard" reaction they hoped for, they actually inspired a tremendous sense of righteous anger and vengence that wanted Japan utterly defeated.
@IrishCarney5 жыл бұрын
@@hobmoor2042 Not sure the Brits and their Imperial allies fought all THAT hard. Tobruk and Singapore come to mind as examples of large numbers of men in fighting condition with extant supplies and well defended positions surrendering to inferior numbers. Put the Soviets or Japanese in those fortresses and you'd have seen a lot more fight.
@J7Handle5 жыл бұрын
The strategy works in a purely defensive war. At least if you are as crazy as the Viet Cong.
@eodyn75 жыл бұрын
@@IrishCarney You definitely couldn't say that about the Americans.
@jotabe19844 жыл бұрын
Quantity its Quality by itself... but lets also remember that USN had: 1) Better Radar 2) WAY Better AA 3) Better Carrier Planes (From 1943 for shure) + WAY BETTER Pilots (again, since 1943) 4) WAY Better ASW 5) Better Equipped ground Forces (semi auto carabine + Efficient Tanks) 6) Better Admirals that adapted to newer doctrine faster While IJN had: 1) Better Night Optics, a usefull advantage maybe in 1942 but pointless by 1944 (as Surigao Straight battle showed) 2) Better Carrier Planes and pilots in 1941/1942 (the Planes ended up obsolete and their replacements weren't up to the task... but furthermore, IJN pilots were overused and IJN ended up without Pilots way before ending up without carriers). 3) WAY Better Torpedoes for surface units. Again, a starting war advantage neglected by USN doctrine changes So at the end of the day, USA had more advantages than just the ones provided by numbers. Battle of Midway is a testament of that... since a 24 ship force managed to overcome a 115 ship force
@grantaldrichaguilar56454 жыл бұрын
USN also had better intelligence unit that paved way in winning the war.
@WuzzyYT4 жыл бұрын
After midway the Japanese navy was destined to fail
@ulfenburg75394 жыл бұрын
Well, the Japanese never thought they would need a better plane then the zero so they just kept it. But they finally saw they were being outmatched they began to make a lot better designs compared to the zero. The Japanese were very capable in terms of making airplanes such as the ki 94 2 and the ki 83
@pahtar71894 жыл бұрын
The USN also had much better damage control, meaning their ships were much more likely to survive an attack than their IJN counterparts.
@ulfenburg75394 жыл бұрын
@@pahtar7189 That is not the only factor for survivability
@nerowulfee92106 жыл бұрын
- Sir! It appears that one of our destroyer`s crew got drunk and rammed their ship into rocks. - No problem, just give them another destroyer.
@MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized6 жыл бұрын
No, give em two.
@seanmac17935 жыл бұрын
You know that actually happened
@TheOtakuPrince5 жыл бұрын
Reminds me of the Soviets with one guy saying -Sir, one of our tanks got shot. -Is the crew still alive? -Yes sir, they are. -Good now give them another tank.
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
I love it just go kick there ass
@kyokyodisaster48424 жыл бұрын
@@Extraordinarylurker And, that is another crazy thing... Shermans/Jumbos/Easy Eights...had POSITIVE kill-to-death ratios... The only reason the German tank core was romanticized was because of the fact that they used defensive strategies that Model ordered constructed...even then, a bushed up Tiger tank was never going to stop the constant attacks by Allied tanks. In addition, most German tanks in the war where Panzer threes (which where already pretty damn dated by the beginning of Operation Barbarossa) and fours (which, while not COMPLETELY dated, and effective with the guns they had, where never going to make up with the heavily wall of steel and oil approaching them from east and west.
@RichardAndewSwayne6 жыл бұрын
Anyone who has seen the auto factories in Detroit and the oil fields in Texas knows that Japan lacks the national power for a naval race with America. Admiral Yamamoto
@Zarastro546 жыл бұрын
It's a shame most of those auto factories are now defunct and the population largely in abject poverty.
@windwalker57655 жыл бұрын
Yamamoto had seen it, he'd toured the US. And he told the Imperial command that starting a war with us was a bad idea. But Tojo went ahead, so he designed his plan to be devastating at the start, hoping to shock the US into surrendering when we weren't actually beaten.
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
@@Zarastro54 just wait
@stevenwolfe71013 жыл бұрын
Wolfelaw22: It did not help the Japanese side that naval warfare underwent a (no pun intended) a sea change. Before the war, most countries wanted battleships - but it was aircraft carriers that pursued new theories of offensive warfare at sea.
@jaccovermeulen27626 жыл бұрын
I expected the difference to be big but not THIS huge.
@JoshuaKevinPerry6 жыл бұрын
4 days ago? Oh do Patreons get a secret link?
@gordonlawrence47496 жыл бұрын
It would not have been that big a gap id the USA and UK did not get up to all sorts in China which denied the Japanese the oil they were getting there and other resources and thereby stopped the Japanese ramping up as much as they could have done. Oops forgot the Indians and Ghurkhas they took the bulk of the British fighting in the far east.
@vincentletzner86386 жыл бұрын
Well... people tend to forget that America's industrial output was way below their potential output at the start of the war. The USA was literally a sleeping industrial giant, Pearl Harbor woke it up.
@pola53926 жыл бұрын
The American numbers are from both the theatres, slash it in 2 and you get a more accurate picture
@gordonlawrence47496 жыл бұрын
@Call Me Ishmael however they did have control of large areas of China at the beginning of the war which did have oil etc.
@keithw49203 жыл бұрын
Long story short, Japan tried to play poker with 2x the chips of her opponent, forgetting that the opponent had 10 briefcases full of chips under the table and could also see the reflection of the cards on Japan's spectacles.
@firebird97113 жыл бұрын
LOL nice analogy
@f430ferrari52 жыл бұрын
But there wasn’t 10 briefcases full of chips in 1942. Come on. Stop with the lies. 😂🤣
@pwnrzero2 жыл бұрын
@@f430ferrari5 the briefcases were GM, Ford, and Detroit shipworks.
@f430ferrari52 жыл бұрын
@@pwnrzero those briefcases were empty and just started to get chips in there in 1942. That’s the whole point. Japan did have a chance in 1942. They blew it at Midway. The US had 8 cruisers and 15 destroyers. Not too many chips. Yes? Japan had 11 battleships, 22 cruisers, and 64 destroyers plus 9 carriers available and over 500 planes. They didn’t use their chips properly . Will you admit it? Highly doubtful.
@pwnrzero2 жыл бұрын
@@f430ferrari5 Didn't matter. Unless Japan conquered the continental US they were fucked. The US could draw upon the resources of a continent, arguably 2 if you included South America. Japan was just starting to expand into Southeast Asia. The US could simply bleed the Japanese dry like the Chinese did. The naval war more than anything else was a war of economic prowess. It takes industrial might to build ships, a trait which the Japanese empire clearly lacked.
@brendarua016 жыл бұрын
Wow! What an amazing way to make your point and drive it home! I can't imagine the time put in to research and then put this together. Thank you!
@trainknut6 жыл бұрын
US Army: "Build me more Shermans!" USAAF: MORE BOMBERS! USN: *_Fletcher, x175_*
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
O K
@stampede1224 жыл бұрын
The US Air Force didn’t exist in WW2, it was part of the Army until Sept. of ‘47
@booblizard1044 жыл бұрын
@@stampede122 that's why they put USAAF not USAF.
@alexwanatowicz99994 жыл бұрын
me in hearts of iron 4
@thurin844 жыл бұрын
american industry; 'YES! YES! YES! was it good for you?"
@leftfootfirstpolitics6 жыл бұрын
USA: Yo, Japan, how many ships did you commission today Japan: None USA: Oh. This week? Japan: None... USA: THIS MONTH??? Japan: I'll have u know I built a CVE and 7 subs last month USA: I did that in three days once lol have some more
@textmachine094 жыл бұрын
When the USA built more than 10 allied naval shipyard and was like: "UNIT READY, UNIT READY, UNIT READY, UNIT READY, UNIT READY, UNIT READY, UNIT READY."
@kingb44903 жыл бұрын
RA2 reference?
@johnquintmatt19863 жыл бұрын
Ah I remember Command and Conquer
@dereenaldoambun91582 жыл бұрын
Based USA go for the supplies and secure them first instead of raiding enemy command base in early game.
@hennessyblues4576 Жыл бұрын
You forgot "Building"
@richardtaylor1652 Жыл бұрын
Meanwhile the Japanese are hearing: "Unit lost." "Unit lost." "Unit lost." "Unit lost." "Unit lost." "Unit lost."
@OneofInfinity.5 жыл бұрын
I blame Match making, too many DD's again.
@kaseybrown76645 жыл бұрын
1941 -- "I fear we have awoken a sleeping giant." 1944 -- "WELL HOW BOUT THAT I WAS RIGHT!!"
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
so he wasnt so dumb it just took to long for motto to see it
@edfrawley43565 жыл бұрын
except Admiral Yamamoto was killed in April '43 when his flight was attacked by 16 P38's flying out of Guadalcanal. He was more right than he could have imagined.
@StryderK5 жыл бұрын
Ed Frawley mainly because he’s been to US and saw America’s might. Yamamoto was against Japan fighting a war against the US cause he know in a protracted war, the US industrial might will simply swamp Japan.
@benlex56725 жыл бұрын
@@StryderK He literally learned naval warfare in the US and was against war with the US by all means. The only person who had better foresight than he did was the emperor himself, who was against war by all means but could not stop a rogue army that took control of his government by assassinating cabinet members.
@StryderK5 жыл бұрын
IMJ Entertainment Studios P-38! The P-40 didn’t have the range to get to Yamamoto!
@TheIfifi6 жыл бұрын
Might walk from Berlin to Moscow. You wont swim from pearl harbour to tokyo... damn right. Also love that you admit. Due to the sheer numbers of ships there might be a "chance" of error. Confidence is sexy and you're rocking it.
@trevynlane80946 жыл бұрын
@Marty Man you are delusional.
@earthyring43936 жыл бұрын
@Marty Man World War 2 was a failed attempt by the Axis powers to create a New World Order. At the top? Germans Japanese and Italians. At the bottom? Everyone else. I don't think you actually know what went on in WWII, as there was one side doing most of the war crimes. If the winning sides wanted to exterminate the losing ones they would have, and the Russians seem to have been playing both sides and killing deserving and innocent in the same breath. If they wanted to exterminate the Japanese or Germans they would have. Believe me they would have. While I don't agree with the treatment of the first nations of North America, there isn't a country that hasn't been conquered or conquered others. Even First Nation tribes were warring states, I think there was just nothing that they could do to halt all the nations of the worlds immigrants looking for somewhere to live. Maybe you aren't smart enough to realize the U.S. was created by anyone who waned a piece of it and could find a boat over. Im almost positive the German Populus was the largest in the nation when WWII broke out, so why would Germans have a war on themselves? Oh yea, because all the Axis powers were slaughtering the entire world and that's about the gist of it. If you think the Japanese "Liberated" the Chinese then I guess your just stone cold retarded. WWII started when the Germans and Russians consumed Poland, The U.S. started actively in the war after an attack on a U.S. Naval Base by an axis Power. You probably aren't smart enough to know this, but a large portion of the U.S. populace was against joining another war across the seas. It's why they weren't actively engaged with the Axis powers already. Also The Vietnam war ended with a peace agreement and the removal of U.S. military forces. Vietnam was not taken while the U.S. was actively fighting, they signed peace and U.S. left. When it was just South V North Vietnam there was no chance they could hold. Nobody won or lost that, just a lot of young people died... and I guess the North won against the South.
@rembrandt972ify6 жыл бұрын
@Marty Man Wow, what's it like to be wrong about everything? No, don't tell me, your answer would just be wrong.
@nexus67556 жыл бұрын
Lol nah fam i played as USA in HOI4 and invaded Japan and did D-day in 1941.
@nexus67556 жыл бұрын
without Soviet help cause they were pussies and don`t wanna get into this brawl fight we took all of Normandy and i have just capitulated Japan and am nearing the Rhine.
@Shadowcam003 жыл бұрын
Oprah: *_"And if you look under your seats, you'll see the keys to a brand new Fletcher!"_*
@GreyWolfLeaderTW3 жыл бұрын
You get a Fletcher! And you get a Fletcher! Everyone gets a Fletcher!
@onyxdragon11795 жыл бұрын
US Government: "So, how many destroyers are you gonna commission?" US Navy Office: "Yes."
@Bobis325 жыл бұрын
the destroyers were built for the Atlantic fleet to protect the merchant marines feeding the UK
@onyxdragon11795 жыл бұрын
@@Bobis32 destroyers weren't built exclusively to serve as convoy escorts for the merchant fleet feeding the UK. It served as a scout and carrier fleet escort in the Pacific, and also serve as the first line of defense against IJN submarines who were as much a threat as the U-Boats in the Atlantic
@onyxdragon11795 жыл бұрын
@@Bobis32 in fact, I dare say the destroyers in the Pacific theatre saw more action than those on the Atlantic, specially once the enigma code was cracked and the German U-Boat's menace was lowered efficiently. In fact, it was a Pacific fleet destroyer, the Ward, which made the first strike against the axis powers by sinking a IJN sub
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
all of them
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
@@Bobis32 and our people at home
@woketree216 жыл бұрын
I was worried that American escort destroyer production was about to go off screen, crazy numbers
@MilitaryHistoryVisualized6 жыл бұрын
It did, I had to adopt the scale several times.
@ShladTheTonkLover6 жыл бұрын
Military History Visualized murica
@markusz44476 жыл бұрын
what exactly is the difference between a destroyer and an escort destroyer? is it just displacement basically?
@roger5555ful6 жыл бұрын
An escort destroyer is a cheaper destroyer good for chasing smaller shit like submarines,so the destroyers can focus on more important stuff like fighting battleships of to Samar
@klade50316 жыл бұрын
@@markusz4447 Fyi, despite the similar name, escort destroyers are a different type of ship than destroyer escorts. What the video is talking about is the 2nd one. As to your question, think of destroyer escorts as budget destroyers. They weren't meant for frontline combat against enemy vessels (had smaller caliber weapons and slow speed) but were equipped just enough to discourage attacks on convoys from raiders.
@9559ns6 жыл бұрын
The truth is kid, the game was rigged from the start.
@gordonlawrence47496 жыл бұрын
@@davidbros849 Nope Yamamoto said this is exactly what would happen as they could not ramp production in China fast enough.
@rgm96x496 жыл бұрын
God damn it Benny.
@Sungulltzu6 жыл бұрын
@Marty Man Can't tell if trolling or not
@icecold18056 жыл бұрын
@Marty Man Meh, let's not demonize (not excesively, to the very least) the US, nor even less glorify the axis. The war in the pacific is a war of no-heroes. Two empires battling to expand their spheres of influences in the pacific. Since the US had taken the Philiphines, it was clear their "manifest destiny" was gonna take them into the seas, and Japan knew it needed to find a moment of weakness in the US to strike them. In 1941 they thought they had it, the moment they had been waiting for. It was a gamble, yes, but there was little alternative: if this offensive didn't happen, then eventually the US would have taken the offensive, so better attack now, while they are weak, and hope for the best. Such hope quickly banished, as the sleeping giant awoke, and the roar of american industry grew in strenght.
@trevynlane80946 жыл бұрын
@@Sungulltzu he is definitely trolling. And lazy too, as that has been his reply to other comments, copy pasted word for word.
@blockmasterscott5 жыл бұрын
The feeling of euphoria and sheer relief had to have been beyond comprehension for the US Navy at the end of 1942 when all those ships started showing up. Especially for the Enterprise, no longer "Enterprise vs. Japan".
@potato888724 жыл бұрын
that carrier is something of a legend
@alexh39742 жыл бұрын
*Japan* America lacks resolve to fight. *USS Enterprise* Fine we will hold the entire line, come on and get some.
@dereenaldoambun91582 жыл бұрын
The chad Enterprise holding back the IJN VS The virgin Yamato got rekted by US Navy
@F14thunderhawk Жыл бұрын
@@dereenaldoambun9158 the Chad Enterprise vs the IJN andd holfing the line. vs the Yamato fleeing in terror of the Battleship named destroyer escort: the Samuel B Roberts.
@General_Dane2 ай бұрын
I don’t know if Saratoga was in for repairs during the latter part of 1942, but Saratoga, Enterprise and Ranger (who never was deployed in the pacific) was the only pre-war US Carriers to survive the entire war
6 жыл бұрын
And subtract the number of ships they respectively lost, the gap would only widen more.
@carter19406 жыл бұрын
Germany gets the mainstream blame for thinking unrealistically/megalomaniacal in regards to the Soviet Union, but the Japanese were even more ignorant on their perceived conquests.
@TheStephaneAdam6 жыл бұрын
Well, all Japan wanted was an end to the oil embargo. They thought a quick little war would bring the US at the negotiation table. Basically, they thought the USA was a nation of softies who couldn't possibly stand up to a nation of warriors such as imperial Japan. Turns out the "softies" make for pretty darn good fighters once they start lining up their logistics and making sure their own guys had the best equipment and training they could get.
@no1DdC6 жыл бұрын
@@TheStephaneAdam Interestingly enough, America wasn't obsessed with the "best equipment", but rather with cost-effective equipment that was fine for the job and could be produced rapidly and efficiently (although they were certainly leading in many areas). There's a reason why the expensive Thompson submachine gun was replaced by the much, much cheaper M3 Grease Gun, just to name one example. America did not only have industrial might, but also the ability to use it effectively, which is not something that can be said about every WW2 combatant. There was also nothing special about the training, except that, once more, it was done effectively. American pilots for example were rotated back home after certain periods of time so that they could train new recruits. Japan and Nazi Germany on the other hand burned their pilots, leaving them in front-line service until most of them were dead. This led to each generation of pilots being worse than the previous and as the war turned sour for the Axis Powers, shortened training programs to meet demand worsened the issue.
@TheStephaneAdam6 жыл бұрын
@@no1DdC Oh yeah absolutely! US equipment was effective, easy to use and reliable. People laugh at the Sherman for example, but it was actually great tank in practical use. Relatively easy to repair, not too prone to break downs and easy to jump out of when it caught fire. US tanker casualties were astoundingly low, a little over a thousand total for the whole war. Compare to the German Tiger. Great tank on paper, unreliable gaz-guzzling artillery magnet in reality.
@no1DdC6 жыл бұрын
@David Genestealowitz Definitely not. I could pick a fight with three sleeping price fighters, but after landing a few surprise blows, they'd beat me into a pulp. If Germany had held out longer against the US, they would have received a few nuclear bombs in return. That was the original plan, by the way, but since Germany was defeated before the bomb was ready, it was dropped on Japan instead. Nazi Germany's own nuclear program had absolutely no chance of succeeding, by the way. They were heading into the completely wrong direction and spent the required resources on far less useful wonder weapons. Not to mention, they didn't have a delivery system, a bomber capable of carrying a nuke and even with such a bomber, Allied air superiority would have made it impossible to use.
@icecold18056 жыл бұрын
On japan's defense, they didn't have a choice: they were in the way of US desire to expand his sphere of influence in the pacific, so a war was inevitable. They just tried to balance things out by attacking first when they thought it's opponent was at it's weakest.
@randomcoyote88075 жыл бұрын
IJN: "We rule the Pacific!" USN: *Turns on Firehose o' Destroyers*
@comradecommie71444 жыл бұрын
Britain: By the gods, America, how many ships are you going to make? America: wait was there supposed to be a limit
@ronanchristiana.belleza92704 жыл бұрын
Japanese Navy: Building more Ships? Wait that's illegal! American Navy: I'll Make it Legal Then
@looinrims4 жыл бұрын
“Enough to make you obsolete and not a world power”
@Warmaker014 жыл бұрын
The fun thing was the US & UK strictly honored the pre-WWII naval treaties while some like Japan cheated it. When Japan renounced the treaties, there were clauses for increases when such things happen. And when the treaties were done for good, the US basically took the gloves off in production. President Roosevelt ramped up military preparation, production before Pearl Harbor. One of the biggest things he did was ensure the USN got stronger. He was after all, a big fanboy of the Navy when he was younger. In the later WWI-era, he was also the Assistance Secretary of the Navy. Iowa-class Battleships, Cleveland-class Light Cruisers, Fletcher-class Destroyers, Essex-class Carriers. Those were all Pre-Pearl Harbor designs yet still new, and the US had started producing them even before the Japanese attack. The USN had no bigger champion in the US Gov't than President Roosevelt himself.
@Warhawk764 жыл бұрын
Britain: Hey America, how many ships are you going to build? America: ALL OF THEM!
@mode37633 жыл бұрын
America: Yes.
@MajesticOak3 жыл бұрын
The economic disparity wasn't even necessarily the biggest mistake: Japan assumed that it'll be fighting against a colonial power on its peripherals, and the implications was that like Imperial Russia in 1904, the US would not see a pacific war as a fight to the death and therefore would not utilize its full potential. Well, it turns out that Japan did misread US culture and mentality, and the Pacific theater did end up pretty much becoming a fight to the death. Also on a side note, the ships produced by Bethlehem Steel alone would have taken on the IJN at its height and have a fair chance of winning.
@Account.for.Comment3 жыл бұрын
The biggest mistake is that Japan believed they are destined to rule the world. They controlled Korea and Manchuria, believing that they can invaded and control China, then started to take over the European colonies over East Asia. They have technological edges and win at straight fight but had to deals with people who hated them everywhere and want to be free. The colonists found them to be more racist and horrible than the Eurpeans. The logistics stretch too thin, while their leaders believed that they are in Sunzi deathground and thus can fight harder then everybody else. They are indeed fight harder than everybody else, that it convinced the US to drop two nukes to compelled them to surrender. The war crimes that is commited convince them that they would suffer the same fate if they lost. Since its beginning to most of histories, Japan often never fight foreign states. The Mongol invasion and The Imjin wars is the only ones before the modern eras. After the Meiji Restoration, they have continuous successes, and that made them arrogance. While the US Navy is its most powerful enemy, they are already losing in China and barely hold on. Soviet also want to expand. Japanese leaders were ready to sent Japaneses to fight to the death, but their enemies are fighting for their homes. In the end of the days, Japanese soldiers prefered to be at their home and their enemies often do not have anywhere to go since Japan already invaded their neighbors.
@browncoat6973 жыл бұрын
That's an interesting idea: Japan thinks "well, a decisive and highly destructive attack on their outpost in the middle of the ocean shouldn't matter - that's the middle of nowhere, they won't throw away hundreds of thousands of lives and billions of dollars on defending a few islands in the middle of nowhere. They'll fight a bit to defend their honor and then sign a minor peace deal where we trade some territory we don't want for some territory they don't want." After all, the logic seems sound! Why _would_ you fight a massive, ocean spanning conflict all for the sake of a few thousand dead and a few modest islands? That would be Russian or British logic. Attacking a Russian colony in the Pacific would piss them off but they wouldn't fight to the death over it. Britain wouldn't literally nuke you for attacking some Polynesian colony, they've got a bunch of other shit to worry about. America? We're fucking psycho, dude. We blew up/are continuing to blow up a half dozen countries just because some Saudi dudes chilling in Afghanistan destroyed a couple buildings. You kill 3000 Americans in some colony somewhere and it's no different from if you had tried to annex fucking Massachusetts.
@MajesticOak3 жыл бұрын
@@browncoat697 although the USA's record in the decades up to that point did not suggest that it would have gone all in the way it did: -Spanish-American war: both sides were fighting on their peripherals, in which the US considered it a "splendid little war". (even more on point was that that war was also started by the sinking of American naval vessel) -Intervention in Mexico: the US sent troops yes, but it wasn't an all out effort. -WWI: the US wasn't able to fully rev up before the war was over, and so the full might of American singlemindedness wasn't displayed. -The Banana Wars: dude, no one cares. Thus from what Japan could see (even before being clouded by their own cultural blinders) that the US behaved similarly to the European colonial powers.
@brucetucker48472 жыл бұрын
@@browncoat697 It wasn't Hawaii that the war was fought over, it was the Pacific Fleet. The UK might not have cared much about Norfolk Island or Tahiti, but if the Japanese had sunk half the Royal Navy at anchor in Ceylon or Singapore the British would have reacted the same way the US did after Pearl Harbor. The reason the Pacific Fleet was in Pearl Harbor to begin with was, of course, China. China was much too important economically for any of the great powers to just sit back and watch another try to conquer the whole country. And mass atrocities like Nanjing weren't making Japan any more popular. Majestic Oak, the US didn't go all-out in those wars because they were not major threats. If the Japanese had looked a little further back to see how the Union states responded to Fort Sumter, they might have thought twice about attacking the "soft" US. What Sherman did to Georgia might have been a useful indicator of what LeMay was likely to do to Tokyo.
@user-pn3im5sm7k2 жыл бұрын
Biggest mistake Japan made was thinking Americans would not fight to death for global bankers. They were wrong.
5 жыл бұрын
I had an idea we made a few more ships but sweet Jesus this caught me completely off guard. This fight was over before the first shot was made.
@Pukemnukem4 жыл бұрын
The US Navy has to drastically shorten the time for basic training during WWII due to the shipyards drastically decreasing the time of new ship production. Boot camp literally became the bottleneck in the last months of the war.
@teebes20094 жыл бұрын
Actually I think it was due to the WAY the first shot was fired. On December 6th most Americans did not want a war. From what I've read, it seems like by December 8th men were lined up around the block to enlist.
@spikespa52084 жыл бұрын
@@teebes2009 For want of a competent decoder/typist in the Japanese embassy, they paid a dear price.
@tempestfury83244 жыл бұрын
No it wasn't! The raid on Pearl Harbor was a crippling blow! The fight had only begun! Our Army Air Force and Navy was not prepared to battle the Japanese in combat. The Japanese weren't training...they were doing...and we had to catch up fast! Our industrial output was on the rise because of our allies in Europe but it was full-blown after Dec. 7th. But some say the industrial might of the United States is the reason for victory. That dismisses the incredible training and tactics that these men had. Which has proven itself, time and again.
@jasoncross93544 жыл бұрын
@@tempestfury8324 pearl harbor wasn't good, but most ships could be raised from the shallow water and repaired. In the beginning of the war Japan had better positioning and more carriers.
@epeon75 жыл бұрын
The USN actually slowed down Escort carriers in 1944. Kaiser could have easily build another 100. Imagine, you have a fleet of 100 escort carriers. Each carrying, say, 24 airplanes. It would be overwhelming
10 ай бұрын
It was
@MultiCappie5 жыл бұрын
This has to be one of the best statistical representations I've ever seen. So important to capture the time dimension of the data.
@tankofnova90224 жыл бұрын
In this particular case... not really. U.S.A had more of everything at all times.
@mrplease666 жыл бұрын
I know people who have collected less data for a 5 year PhD than you did for a 13 minute youtube video. I salute you!
@ShinyaKogamiawesome6 жыл бұрын
764 destroyers were produced in the span of those 4 years, and yet not a single one was spared to escort the USS Indianapolis. God I love the US Navy
@theredhunter49976 жыл бұрын
Well I mean it was on a secret mission when it was sunk, and the more people that know the secret the more likely it gets out.
@ShinyaKogamiawesome6 жыл бұрын
@@theredhunter4997 I don't believe the return trip was secret as the Indianapolis was sailing to meet and perform gunnery practice with the USS Idaho, which was under heavy escort as it was a prewar battleship, but a lot of details on the sinking seem very contradictory so you may be right.
@DawnOfTheDead9916 жыл бұрын
@@theredhunter4997 The escort ships' crews would not have to be privy to her mission
@CorsetGrace6 жыл бұрын
Subs could only go about 6 knots underwater or 20 on the surface and the Indy could go 35 knots. Plus, how would a submarine, in those days without modern equipment, detect and fire a non-homing torpedo to hit an invisible target? Not sure you really understand naval warfare from the 1940's.
@williamkim59606 жыл бұрын
Most destroyers at the time were escorting troop ships to Okinawa or performing search and rescue for downed B-29 pilots. 764 may sound like a lot but when you consider the sheer amount of transports needed to ferry the men and material for Operation Downfall it's easy to see why there weren't enough destroyers to go around. Also the IJN was so thoroughly wrecked at this point it's not hard to see why an escort was considered unnecessary. The Indianapolis had made far longer journeys unescorted before
@Pigga-k8k4 жыл бұрын
when you have more escort carriers than enemy destroyers
@brucetucker48472 жыл бұрын
And more fleet carriers than enemy heavy cruisers.
@krapto34672 жыл бұрын
When you almost have more destroyers than the entire Japanese navy has ships.
@alitlweird5 жыл бұрын
Q: When did Japan lose WWII? A: Sunday, December 7th, 1941.
@matsv2015 жыл бұрын
We have awakon a sleeping dragon....
@matsv2015 жыл бұрын
@M'Load, 1Man Bukkake Baller. Cum hard or go home. well .. hmm i probobly remember wrong... giant?
@matsv2015 жыл бұрын
@M'Load, 1Man Bukkake Baller. Cum hard or go home. Well i was thinking.. because they fly and spit fire.. the have to be dragons.
@matsv2015 жыл бұрын
@M'Load, 1Man Bukkake Baller. Cum hard or go home. Well i go with that early mustang use the same engine as spitfire.. there for they are the same plane... Yea... that will do :D
@chrisvickers79284 жыл бұрын
@@matsv201 Yamamoto had served as military attache in the US before the war and had been given a tour of Detroit's automotive assembly plants. He knew the war was over before it started but gave it his best shot anyway.
@crookedshades81946 жыл бұрын
The Simpsons "Stop! He's already dead!" Meme comes to mind.
@girlgarde5 жыл бұрын
Then we'll make him even MORE dead!!
@HeIsAnAli5 жыл бұрын
> He's already dead! ... *_HE IS ALREADY DEAD._*
@lawrencelewis81055 жыл бұрын
@@girlgarde can't go wrong with that!
@aaroncabatingan52385 жыл бұрын
No better kill than overkill
@Cpt_Boony_Hat5 жыл бұрын
Yeah but he refuses to accept he’s dead is the problem
@hullbreach336 жыл бұрын
It's also quite difficult for a smaller force to defeat a larger force when the larger force has broken the cryptography of the smaller force.
@maximaldinotrap5 жыл бұрын
Yeah, the smaller force needs to demoralize the larger force and it isn't always easy.
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
we will not give up we will cook you like a pot of beans
@JoeDiGiovanniIV4 жыл бұрын
Looks like smaller force needs more brains then
@cannonfodder43766 жыл бұрын
There was never any sort of way Japan could have won, not with what they had as we can see. Outmatched in quality and quantity, it was only a matter of time until they were crushed.
@Snailman35166 жыл бұрын
Don't just think about the tonnage, think about the crews and the air pilots. The US was very protective and strategic with the use of their best pilots, often turning them into trainers for new recruits after they prove themselves in battle. The Japanese were more tactical and kept their aces in the sky. Unfortunately for them, the US had invested more in anti air and just the AA of the ships downed a lot of Japanese aces. This lead to an attrition in both the quality and quantity of Japanese pilots while the American pilots simply became more thoroughly expert at aerial combat.
@jeffbergstrom96586 жыл бұрын
When Japan started the war the quality of their ships and crews were every bit as good as the US, better in many cases. However, Japan did not innovate much and stuck with what they had while the US continually improved.
@lolroflroflcakes6 жыл бұрын
That quality didn't really do a whole lot for the Japanese seeing as they got stomped while the Americans were still trying to get their shit together with the whole carrier operations thing. Get unlucky and it doesn't matter how good you are, you're still quite dead.
@thomasscaife68676 жыл бұрын
daniel halachev At the beginning maybe, but their quality deteriorated as the war went on.
@Nonsense0106886 жыл бұрын
there would been, but it would require for the US to lose the will to win and the Axies was quite arrogant in terms of what they though democracies cable of. I mean if they could have destroyed the naval Oil reverse in pearl habour then they probably would have been 1 year without too much US intervention. Of course this doesn't solve the problem that in order to win they probably would need to take Australia and India and I can't see with them fighting in China having the ground troops for that.
@Jonconji4 жыл бұрын
When i was younger and i was like “there’s no way Germany would ever win a war on two front”... but then i forgot that American had two fronts practically across the globe lol
@bloodyplebs4 жыл бұрын
The us fought two seperate wars halfway across the world in the 2000s and the average American didn't feel a thing. Pls nerf us.
@azopeopaz30594 жыл бұрын
Not realy usa have mainly a pacific front german lost war was 95% not usa : 70% was from urss 5 % was from losser contry like france , pologne , greece that weak german by the batle or by the german occupation that take away troop from front 15% was uk and only 5% was usa that mainly do production support. And even in pacific it was not a 100% usa win : i would say 50% was usa 20% china 5% urss (by block japan divition in manchouria )5% was dutch and 18% was uk + comonwealt +2 other . Overall the allied victory was 50% urss 30% uk 10 usa and 10% other BUT the victory gain was 80% for usa and 20 for other so for weak war effort usa gain a lot the bigest prize was the geraman gold 90% of usa today gold is originated from german resserve (usa 3rd army take german gold in francfort) and german gold come mainly by take it from occupates contry. The bigest ironys for exemple is france financial help was mainly originated by the gold that usa take from germany and 70% of german gold come from france so basicaly they help france by use the money that was steal from france
@BenAnkenmann4 жыл бұрын
@@azopeopaz3059 Where are you getting all these numbers from? And the US definitely had two fronts. They were almost half the invading force in western Europe and the vast majority of the naval force in the pacific. There were certainly others helping, but you can't deny a 2 front US war.
@azopeopaz30594 жыл бұрын
@@BenAnkenmann @Ben Ankenmann usa fight against 10 maximun div in west front the rest surender the moment they meet because they prefered surender to usa the urss fight 200 german div : in d day 95% of german force was in east , the majority of german navy was destroyed way beford us comme in europe the the moment usa comme to war the german have already lose in all front, they just need to send some divition in europe and japan navy is behind uk navy that would take care of japan after win in eurpope so overall the american war effort is way less important that all other
@BenAnkenmann4 жыл бұрын
@@azopeopaz3059 You're mixing up your arguments. The argument was whether or not the US had a 2 front war. The answer is undeniably yes. In response to your other points: 1. I'd argue that making your enemy prefer to surrender than fight is the better strategy. 2. Japan's navy would have been incredibly difficult for the UK to take on. Especially if the US hadn't helped 3. The war would have definitely lasted longer and may not have ended with unconditional surrender of Germany and/or Japan without US help. Stating that the "American war effort is way less important than all other" is incorrect. The USSR and/or UK may have contributed more (I'm not actually sure, though they definitely sustained more direct attacks) but at worst America contributed 3rd most and had a huge impact in shortening the length of the war. To be complete honest, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make.
@HistoryGameV6 жыл бұрын
Waiting for the "But if they had sent the third wave at Pearl Harbor...!" faction...
@jackray13376 жыл бұрын
And hit the oil tanks? Because ...you know..."What about the oil?"
@danielmunoz22206 жыл бұрын
But if they had sent the third wave at Pearl Harbor they would have gotten a year instead six months. more than enough time for the decisive battle.
@buttbuttson7376 жыл бұрын
@@danielmunoz2220 It still amazes me how Japan figured that the war would be decided in one, decisive battle. It isn't like Japan had no knowledge of how naval warfare worked, but for some reason they still held onto a doctrine that had been obsolete since the invention of steam ships.
@klobiforpresident22546 жыл бұрын
@@buttbuttson737 Considering how the naval aspect of the war was handled when they faced the Russians this made sense. Then again, so did thinking the USSR would come crashing down after Barbarossa.
@thekittenofwar44216 жыл бұрын
@@danielmunoz2220 13:10, or why a decisive battle doesn't matter
@LewisRenovation6 жыл бұрын
That’s why I find WWI more interesting. Either side could have won up until the last 6 months. WWII seems to mostly decided before its 1/4 over.
@hazzmati6 жыл бұрын
It was limited but critical in that moment of '41 and '42 since the soviets were transporting their production facilities behind the urals. Allied material aid also meant less need for workers and more men available as soldiers
@arisukak6 жыл бұрын
WWI was the same way. Just compare the resources the allies had, versus the central powers. The central powers really lacked oil, rubber, horses and most importantly, food. Germany had the same problem in 1914 as they did in 1918. Any and every breakthrough could not be exploited as they could not advance fast enough.
@gordonlawrence47496 жыл бұрын
Actually Germany could have easily won WWII if they had not made so many screw-ups. The ME262 could have been flying at least 2 years earlier as could the FW190 but Hitler basically did not believe the BF109 was not enough and then tried to get the ME262 changed to a light bomber. The Germans were still fielding PanzerIII near the end of the war as they were spending stupid amounts on TigerII which could have been replaced with something crazy like 8 Panthers (OK the panther has issues but it's way better than a panzer III). Then there is the massive force of according to some 1000 Panthers which were near one of the invasion beaches (actually between two I believe) that Hitler had personal charge of. They did not take part and repel the invasion because Hitler was asleep and nobody dare wake him. I could go on but you get the idea. I have actually heard it said that the allies best general was Hitler.
@Schmidty16 жыл бұрын
@USERZ123 wrong soviets machine tools were 90% lend lease. They could not have developed a proper industry after it was on wheels without lend lease.
@alreadyblack33416 жыл бұрын
@@gordonlawrence4749 This only goes into the technological advances made in the war. Do you not understand that in order to field any of these war machines, it requires oil, metal and such. Resources that Germany's western and eastern armies were fighting over for the duration of the war? Resources were scarce, and Germany would not have been able to gain access to enough resources in time to halt the opening of more than one theater. The German military made mistakes in it's combined force and it's use, they failed to set up proper facilities for a defence capable of standing against the invasion fleets of the United States and Britain, failed to properly equip their troops on the eastern front, and wasted resources on countless side projects that had little overall effect. The ME262 is great and all, until you realize that they couldn't train pilots for it fast enough, and most were sitting in the hangers for the duration of their existence. Also, the United States would have developed the nuke first anyways, as the German's dropped their own nuclear weapons project after their source of deuterium, hard water from Norway, was destroyed by British special forces.
@Warmaker015 жыл бұрын
I know everybody gets wrapped up in Battleships, Carriers like Essex and Yorktown classes, and the sheer amount of Destroyers / Destroyer Escorts that were being produced, but attention needs to be paid to the 9 Light Carriers and *76* Escort Carriers and those Submarines. I know the US used a bunch of CVEs for convoy escorting and submarine hunting groups against U-Boats, but these were also being used to supplement the big Fleet Carriers in the pacific. If you look at orders of battle in the Pacific War you'll see these little, cheap CVEs being assigned to support amphibious operations and ground support. This frees up the Fleet Carriers to look out and specifically kill warships. They did this lots of times once we're in 1943 with Tarawa and subsequent operations. When Kurita's Center Force pushed into Samar against Taffy 3, the relentless attacks by the fleeing CVEs and the desperate DD / DDE attack runs to cover the retreat, Kurita thought he was dealing with the main US Fleet Carrier air attacks. The Japanese were losing ships to a bunch of CVEs and DDs / DDEs, and he gave the order to turn around and retreat. There were no aircraft from the American Fleet Carriers, nor Battleship, nor Cruisers to help Taffy 3 because Admiral Halsey was an idiot. It was only CVEs and Destroyers there. Also, the USN Submarines had spectacular success. The Japanese never could focus on the Allied Submarines like the Allies did against the German U-boats. They didn't have the resources. They couldn't even replace the Destroyers they were losing in the Solomon Islands and Guadalcanal Campaigns from 1942-1943. Those USN Submarines accomplished what the Kriegsmarine's U-Boats were trying to do. Shipping was literally strangled by US Submarines and they were spotting IJN movements, harassing them, and even claiming lots of warships. Matter of fact, things were going so good for the USN Submarines that they got directives to HUNT Destroyers, because the Americans knew that Japan couldn't replace them. "Late in the war the area north and east of Luzon was known to the Japanese as 'the Sea of the Devil'. In 1944 a common saying in Singapore was that 'one could walk from Singapore to Tokyo on American periscopes.'" maritime.org/doc/subsinpacific.htm
@brianlong23344 жыл бұрын
German U boats sunk 3,500 merchant ships or 21,000,000 tons and 175 war ships, 1,325 to 2,325 civilian ships out of a total of about 5,000 to 6,000 ships sunk, The Japanese lost 2,117 merchant ships or about 8,000,000 tons, 611 IJN or about 1,800,000 tons, 15,518 civilian ships.
@SuperCatacata4 жыл бұрын
@@brianlong2334 The big difference would be how a majority of German U-boats were destroyed by the Allies. At the end of the war, they were the ones being hunted. Also what was the total percentage of merchant shipping sunk? I'm assuming that there were more vessels making that trip to Europe to aid both GBR and the Soviet Union.
@brianlong23344 жыл бұрын
@@SuperCatacata Germany sunk about 21,000,000 tons of merchant goods. Just under 17,500,000 was delivered to Russia from the USA and 4,000,000 more from the British empire. UK received from America about 52,000,000 tons. So the total was about 91,000,000 tons so about or over 20% was stopped by Germany. Germany lost over 700 u-boats out of a total of 1,100+ So 21million for 1,100 vs 400 for 4million. USA had almost free range unmolested vs Germany had the bulk of the Royal navy and USA navy.
@SuperCatacata4 жыл бұрын
@@brianlong2334 Any of those stats for the Japanese shipping too? That's pretty impressive that they were able to sink 20% all things considered. Also, having 700 U-boats sunk out of 1100 really is a majority of them being destroyed.
@brianlong23344 жыл бұрын
@@SuperCatacata Only the 8,000,000 tons of Japanese suply sunk, but all most all of it's merchant ship's were sunk. At lest its pre war fleet, it did build some 500 more merchant ships that were still bringing in 8million tons of supplies in 1945. The USA also claims to have sunk 8million tons of oil alone so take it with a grain of salt.
@baconpwn2 жыл бұрын
"Shoukaku and Zuikaku are the perfect carrier. Vastly superior to anything you may have." - IJN "Allow me to introduce you to Essex. And her sister. And her sister. And her sister. And her sister. And her sister. And her sister. And her sister. And her sister. And her sister. And her sister. And she has another dozen or so coming. And if you manage to beat them, Midway Magic is coming." IJN has left the game
@Tachyon8364 жыл бұрын
The resources of an country spanning a 3rd of a continent vs a small island nation It was no contest. Japan really shouldn't have bombed Pearl Harbor
@blockmasterscott2 жыл бұрын
And in addition to attacking a country that spanned the third of a continent, they also did it in a way that filled the worlds greatest economic power with a cold fury that solidified its entire population to fight to the death. With Germany, it was just business. With Japan, it was public enemy number one.
@PeterNygard692 жыл бұрын
They didn’t have a choice
@Activated_Complex5 жыл бұрын
IJA: “We wanna keep ravaging China, so go get your fleet sunk as slowly as possible.” IJN: “.....”
@yeetboi1oof9765 жыл бұрын
About that...
@Veskhai5 жыл бұрын
"What fleet?"
@brianlong23344 жыл бұрын
IJN: "I can give you 4 maybe 5 years" IJA: "I told you war with the soviets would have bean better but no Navy gets all the resources still"
@livethefuture24924 жыл бұрын
@@brianlong2334 war with the soviets would have been suicide. and really war with the US was inevitable because japan needed the resources of southeast asia and would have invaded the region taking British, Dutch and American possessions resulting in a direct conflict with japan.
@brianlong23344 жыл бұрын
@@livethefuture2492 I would agree if they were fighting the Russian's alone but they wouldn't be. The Russian's were actually worried about the Japanese because they could supply and support its troops better then Russia could that far away from it's population, industry and government centres, who were a lot farther away then the Japanese. I don't see how the Soviet would have survived passed 43/44 had the Japanese invasion of Siberia not been cancelled on the 1st of August 1941, the same day and hours after the oil embargo the Japanese almost moved 400,000 men out of Manchuria over night to get ready for an invasion of the pacific. The Japanese invasion of the Dutch east Indies was due to the American oil embargo. The Japanese actually offered American all of it's gained land but Korea and Manchuria and non-aggression pact with at lest American, but also would hopefully include the UK and the Dutch and they wouldn't declare war on any nation in the south pacific. American refused all and demanded total loss of all territories out side there main island's and I believe the wording was something alone the lines of, the USA cannot guarantee that it would not be at war with the Japanese in the future and could not guarantee a non-aggression pact, the same day the Japanese navy left for pearl harbour. The Japanese had planed for an invasion of eastern Siberia and part's of central Siberia, why also taking about half of Mongolia this was to be no later then September 1941 however it was cancelled on the 1st of August 1941 as mentioned above. So if American didn't place the oil embargo on them, the Japanese wouldn't have invaded Dutch east Indies. The Japanese new they could only fight the Soviet or American not both that's why they went out of there way to get a none a aggression pack with the Soviets and succeeded, freeing up hundreds of thousands of men and thousands of tanks, planes, horses and artillery for the Soviet to be sent to fight Germany over then next few years. The Japanese wanted the Dutch east Indies because of the oil it produced, it was about 65million barrels a year, the Japanese estimated war with American and china they would need 35million barrels, however the Japanese never obtained more than 6million barrels a year after they took it. And they produced about 3million barrels them self, other resources were also the same at the end of the day they didn't get the resources anyway, they would have been better of attacking Russian and getting it that way. As an example the Island above Japan that's part of its island chain, that is part of Russian then and now, produced 8million barrels at the time, now you mite say it's not the 65million barrels they wanted but the oil deposits is estimated to have 2.3 to 7billion barrels still available under the ground it's also produced about 1billion barrels since the 1940s. It's about 1,500km from Tokyo or 300km from there main island's, the Dutch east Indies is about 4,500km from Tokyo. The Japanese navy estamated they needed 17million barrels a year to contend with the USA it never had more then 7million barrels and was basically out of oil after 1942.
@MpowerdAPE6 жыл бұрын
The more I read about the war in pacific... the more I wonder what the hell the Japanese were thinking.
@Morrigi1926 жыл бұрын
Compliance with American demands was an impossibility due to their political dysfunction, so they made a wild gamble and lost. Badly.
@Jupiter__001_6 жыл бұрын
They had an oil embargo by the USA, so they had to find some, and they went looking in South East Asia...
@anderskorsback41046 жыл бұрын
They were thinking that 1) They really need more oil to keep the warmachine rolling, after having been embargoed by the USA, so they need to conquer Southeast Asia 2) Doing so will inevitably make the USA join the war 3) If they manage to strike hard and fast against the USA, it will back down and let Japan continue its wars of conquest With hindsight, 2) and 3) were both catastrophic miscalculations.
@Jupiter__001_6 жыл бұрын
@Nobody Knows Indeed. I was just explaining their thought process.
@francesconicoletti25476 жыл бұрын
Arius Krieg why hindsight? Someone should have given the Japanese high command a US military history textbook. In the preceding hundred years the us had fought wars of extermination against its native population, won a civil war using much the same methods it used against its natives, expelled the remnants of the Spanish empire from the Americas, conquered the Phillipeans, got involved in WW1 , one of the reasons being sneak attacks on American Shipping, and interfered in the internal politics of central and South American nations. Does this sound like a country that’s going to back down to an act of aggression?
@zacharyzier3144 жыл бұрын
USN: How many ships can you build us? American Shipyards: Yes. USN: Awesome. American Shipyards: So when do want them? USN: Yes.
@raymondrenick48285 жыл бұрын
When the US goes more Dakka on the the Japanese Navy. As an American, I have to shake my head at what the Japanese were thinking a war with us was going to be like? The Russo-Japanese war?
@Scriptedviolince5 жыл бұрын
Yes actually. The entire idea was that the attack on pearl harbor would knock out the USN for 6 months in order to allow the IJN to finish up with rolling up the Philippines, Malaysia, and Indonesia, after which America would blithely and obligingly hurl the entirety of the USN across the Pacific Ocean at Tokyo to fight a decisive battle within range of japanese land based aircraft, unsupported and at the end of a ridiculous logistical train where the USN would lose, driving down support for the war, and allowing Tojo to negotiate peace terms from a position of strength. Yes. Really.
@deadbutmoving4 жыл бұрын
What Samuel Wang said is basically it. They figured if they had enough time to consolidate their strength in East Asia, they would be able to defeat the US navy in a decisive battle causing the American people to question if it was really worth spending so much time, money, and American lives fighting for Asians on the other side of the Planet. The American people would pressure the American government to negotiate a peace deal which would include Japan keeping all the territories she had taken in East Asia. That was the plan. Japan's top industrial and military leaders knew they could never defeat the Americans in a long drawn out war of attrition. Japan is a small country no bigger than California with much fewer people and much less resources than the US. Japan was never going to win in the long run and everyone knew it.
@Joesolo134 жыл бұрын
@@deadbutmoving I love how all the axis war plans were basically "We'll beat them so bad they all just start giving up!" Because if they were any more cautious they'd realize they were fucked in a real war.
@Whatatwist20094 жыл бұрын
As some already stated they did not think the US had the will for a long grind of a war. That they would run wild after pearl harbor and consolidate a nice area. The US would be unwilling to fight a long war and try a strike at a major area or Japan itself and they would engage in a deceive battle. Win it and the American public would want peace. Once they saw the US began its island hoping campaign to slowly build a supply chain to strike at Japan itself they likely knew the war would be lost. The IJN kept looking to get that knock large battle to break to spirit of the American public but they never got the chance. In fact the major battles fought were normally at when the IJN was at a disadvantage or not looking for a major fight.
@wtfbros51104 жыл бұрын
pretty much, they fell for the "decisive battle" meme
@admiralkirk61036 жыл бұрын
"had virtually no chance" Ah, see! All they had to do was X, Y, and Z then they could have easily won!
@ShladTheTonkLover6 жыл бұрын
ParselyBunny not as powerful as his chins
@MrRikersBeard6 жыл бұрын
All Japan had to do was scream, "I have the power of god and anime on my side!" and they would have one.
@HaloFTW556 жыл бұрын
Deploy mechas like Mobile Suits... Then again, the US will nick the design and make Gundams for themselves. Wait... I just spoiled the plot for the original Gundam.
@andrewp82845 жыл бұрын
Reading some of the comments, indeed. all Japan had to do was: X, Y, Z, Xa, Xb, Xc, Xd....Za, Zb, Zc...Zz...and they could've beaten the big bad US lol
@Martz6046 жыл бұрын
Can't tenno heika banzai your way out of this one.
@venn2001ad6 жыл бұрын
LOL! This really made me laugh. xD
@THESLlCK6 жыл бұрын
Martz O O F
@IrishCarney5 жыл бұрын
Cowardly traitor! All you have to do is tighten your hachimaki and chaaaaarge! Inevitable victory sure to follow. Don't trip on the huge numbers of corpses of our glorious comrades from the previous charges...
@fenderOCG2 жыл бұрын
Even more insane is that Japan couldn't even provide sufficient fuel, supplies and trained men for the limited ships they had. From the very beginning they had orders to conserve fuel and ammo which reduced training and even avoided shore bombardments.
@richardtaylor1652 Жыл бұрын
Meanwhile the US are busy working out the logistics of providing fresh ice cream for their troops and Marines.
@paulbricker90775 жыл бұрын
Japan: Yes! We’ve crippled their navy US: lol
@1pcfred5 жыл бұрын
Sinking the relics that were in Pearl Harbor probably saved American lives. Because if they were sunk further at sea more would have perished.
@keenanhaug88145 жыл бұрын
Lol
@coolday11114 жыл бұрын
Just build a new one
@narayasuiryoku13973 жыл бұрын
69 nice
@daneilfranklin6 жыл бұрын
Germany: *makes the bismark* UK: *sicks bismark with airpower.* Japan: Ouch... good thing we won't let that happen to the Yamamoto! US: [Laughs in dive bomber]
@tonyh.a54895 жыл бұрын
Yamato not Yamamoto
@maximaldinotrap5 жыл бұрын
Yeah, this was pretty much the war that said that Battleships were pretty much obselete or at least as flagships.
@許進曾4 жыл бұрын
@NotFBIAgent Well if the SB2C Hell diver wasn't enough we will add more TBF Avengers and Fighters with tini tim
@javiergilvidal15584 жыл бұрын
@@tonyh.a5489 ... and "Bismarck", not "Bismark"!
@iansneddon29564 жыл бұрын
@@tonyh.a5489 If the timing had been a little different they might have sunk Yamamoto too, rather than sending the plane he was on crashing into the jungle. But yeah.
@ethanmcfarland82405 жыл бұрын
*someone Tell America this isn’t a Race* Oh wait
@BlackBlood2974 жыл бұрын
UK Navy: "We're the largest & most power Navy on the face of this planet" US Navy: "Haha that's cute"
@thurin844 жыл бұрын
heres 50 used destroyers we lost track of......
@lawrencegabrieln.fabula23804 жыл бұрын
In numbers the RN was larger until about... late 42 early 43.
@EndOfSmallSanctuary974 жыл бұрын
The Royal Navy had a much larger area to disperse its ships to - English Channel, North Sea, Atlantic Ocean, Mediterranean Sea, Indian Ocean, and finally the Pacific Ocean.
@thurin844 жыл бұрын
@@EndOfSmallSanctuary97 the us navy also was in all those places.
@livethefuture24924 жыл бұрын
it was still the largest at the start of the war, and played a significant role in protecting allied shipment to the UK. they also played a major part in d-day.
@ScienceChap5 жыл бұрын
To quote Yamamoto in Tora! Tora! Tora!... "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
the one time he was right
@CM-ve1bz5 жыл бұрын
Science Chap He might have thought it but there's no record or individual to indicate he ever said it.
@stevekolarik28574 жыл бұрын
C M none, zero, zip, no.
@ScienceChap4 жыл бұрын
@@CM-ve1bz I know. Hence I quote the movie, not the man.
@appalachianwolf11876 жыл бұрын
Japan: Look at this cool ship I built! United States: Look at these 2 bombs we built!
@generalzod85894 жыл бұрын
Your joke. Is very dishonorable to my ANCESTORS! BANZAI!! 😋
@tyler895574 жыл бұрын
And the accompanying dozen ships.
@livethefuture24924 жыл бұрын
Japan: look i built the biggest battleship in history! United States: i built 8 carriers and over 1000 planes to accompany them!
@roger5555ful6 жыл бұрын
The Us was like: You came to the wrong ocean fool
@JGlennFL5 жыл бұрын
We built 50,000 tanks as well. There's a reason we were known as "the arsenal of democracy".
@thurin844 жыл бұрын
during peak production in 1944 a completed warplane rolled off an assembly line somewhere in america on average, EVERY 5 MINUTES!!!
@Ron52G4 жыл бұрын
The US built almost as many training aircraft during WW2 as the Germans built fighter planes.
@jonwoodhouse14443 жыл бұрын
Actually, the US Built 100,000 tanks. 50,000 was the number we had in the field.
@alexh39742 жыл бұрын
@@thurin84 a single factory got to stage of making a single heavy bomber rolling off every hour. that's 24 a day, 168 a week, or 672 a month if could be sustained.
@playboicartiismydad48426 жыл бұрын
The US industrial power was insane
@playboicartiismydad48426 жыл бұрын
@A I cant take someone seriously who uses the word "Islamocrats"
@eodyn75 жыл бұрын
@A amazing how incorrect you can be.
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
and still is
@thurin844 жыл бұрын
IS insane. we can turn that tap on again at any time.
@thurin844 жыл бұрын
@A nope. it was slick willy and the democrats. the republicans did whine about it a bit.
@okrajoe6 жыл бұрын
American shipbuilding industry be like - bro, we got this.
@esmondcrewe38584 жыл бұрын
okrajoe There is absolutely no doubt that America truly gets going when it decides to get going, to my knowledge no nation on earth can get into gear and get it done like America, p.s. I am an America loving Canadian.
@davidsabillon51826 жыл бұрын
The amount of time it took to put this together deserves praise. Thank you
@williamreymond26695 жыл бұрын
Every once in a while I come back and rewatch this video because it is so jaw dropping. The only categories of combatant ship production the Japanese were able to compete with the Americans *at all* was submarines and escort destroyers at about half. And as I've mentioned elsewhere, this production does not even count the American's huge production of auxiliaries, transports, and landing craft. What were the Japanese thinking??
@bcluett16975 жыл бұрын
Something along the lines of "Our emperor is God and God says we can beat them" Up until Midway the prospects seemed attainable. Yamamoto having studied abroad in the U.S. seemed to have an understanding though.
@williamreymond26695 жыл бұрын
@@bcluett1697 Yeah, Yamamoto famously reported home that there were more automobiles in the city of Washington DC, that in the whole of Japan. However, the Doolittle Raid of April '42 also ought to have significantly dinted the Japanese confidence. How did the Japanese keep a lid on it right up till August of '45? Reading James Bradley's 'Flyboys,' really turned me inside out on the whole topic. The Japanese *ate* their own dead soldiers, not just dead enemy soldiers and civilians. The Japanese - I should be more specific - the Japanese Emperor Hirohito and his high command, were prepared to allow *20 million* Japanese civilians perish in the final defense of Japan. To preserve Japan's honor. Then we decided to keep Hirohito on as Emperor when the Japanese themselves might just as well have allowed him to be hung by us like Tojo.
@lionhead1232 жыл бұрын
well they had 2 battleships with really big guns, and they actually believed they were unsinkable. Truth be told, a lot of bombs and torpedoes were needed to sink them(and i mean a lot), but yeah.
@the_undead2 жыл бұрын
@@lionhead123 I don't recall ever hearing the Japanese thinking they were unsinkable, but the estimate was that one Yamato class could take on two standards and comfortably win, so 2 yamato's takes out the entire Colorado class and one Tennessee class in the battle line. What they were not expecting was the Americans putting up practically the entire Pearl harbor strike force against a single battleship
@cck48632 жыл бұрын
Funny as it sound, the main reason US didn't build that many submarine was that they couldn't get crews for it. The working condition of sub was so bad that double the pay and dayoff did jackshit.
@GenghisVern6 жыл бұрын
Cool-- Dad's ship is listed, USS Loeser DE-680 destroyer escort!
@decrobyron6 жыл бұрын
Respect
@nathandamaren20936 жыл бұрын
Question. How old are you sir?
@GenghisVern6 жыл бұрын
@@nathandamaren2093 59. Dad served in the early 50s when Loeser was assigned to the Atlantic. LtJG
@nathandamaren20936 жыл бұрын
@@GenghisVern very interesting. Thanks for satisfying my curiosity sir.
@fatboyrowing6 жыл бұрын
Vern Etzel My father served on the USS Slater DE 766 in late 1945 and 1946. He is one of the last WW2 crew members alive (will be 92 this month). In his early to mid 80s, he was quite active in its restoration on the Hudson in Albany NY. It’s an amazing museum ship. The Twin 40s work like Swiss watches. It’s worth the trip to honor America’s greatest generation.
@stevecoscia6 жыл бұрын
Informative video - the numbers speak for themselves. I bet that the Japanese didn't grasp the USA's industrial and manufacturing powerhouse. Thanks for producing this - I'm glad to be a Patreon subscriber.
@Xaviar_St.Thomas6 жыл бұрын
Steve Coscia Yamamoto had America’s manufacturing base in mind before he formulated the Pearl Harbor Attack Strategy. What history books are you reading ??
@Shenaldrac6 жыл бұрын
I think they did. They just didn't think it would matter. Remember, they were planning on a very quick, decisive war- like Germany planned with Russia. Their hope was to inflict one or more serious, crushing victories over the US to convince them to come to the negotiating tables, since what they wanted were certain territories, iirc. Not total conquest. What they failed to grasp was A) how difficult it would be to achieve those decisive battles, and B) just how much their surprise attacks on December 7th would enrage and galvanize the American population against them. Given their recent easy conquest of a large, powerful (in their eyes) nation in the form of China, the idea of getting a few quick wins and a population that would capitulate easily makes some sense if you look at it from Imperial Japan's perspective. Again, much like how Germany figured Russia would be a pushover after they so recently lost to the Finns in the Winter War.
@bami26 жыл бұрын
Didn't Yamamoto claim that they would run wild for 6-12 months after pearl harbor, after that get absolutely rekt by the united states' industrial power?
@jeffbergstrom96586 жыл бұрын
Admiral Yamamoto, Japan's commander-in-chief and architect of the Pearl Harbor attack, spent time in the US as a naval attache in Washington DC and studied at Harvard University for a while. He was well aware of the US industrial might and opposed war against the US. He had hope Pearl Harbor would be sufficient to put the US on the backfoot and that by the time the US got back in Japan would have consolidated its hold on the South Pacific. That or the US would just not bother. After Pearl Harbor Yamamoto was quoted as saying, "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant and fill him with a terrible resolve."
@tomhutchins74956 жыл бұрын
I think that's true, and there's also a second dimension to it. Certainly there seems to have been a misconception among the Axis about how easily manufacturing lines could be diverted to different products, the ability of manufacturing engineers to develop world-leading designs that could be mass-produced, and a sense that war materiel and consumer goods are fundamentally different. See Goering's statement that the US could produce cars and refrigerators but not tanks or aeroplanes. The other side of this was a view from the Axis powers that the democracies were fundamentally weak and would not have the stomach for protracted war. This is a misreading of the economics of the time: Britain and France were bankrupted by WW1 and then hit by the Depression. They could not afford to sustain their empires and were looking inwards, hoping crises could be averted. Thus Japan believed the US would end its oil embargo and sign away its periphery interests in the Western Pacific if it were given a strong blow. Likewise Hitler believed that Britain would negotiate once the BEF was defeated, (and pretty much everyone thought the USSR would collapse). What they missed was the way in which the democracies tended to respond to major aggression: all-out war with the objective of regime change, and where the industrial and technological capacity was mated to a sense of righteousness. There's an interesting if distasteful point which emerges: having seen "them do it first", retaliatory actions were carried out on a scale that the originators could not have dreamed of. Consider that the firestorms which consumed Cologne, Dresden, Tokyo and others, not to mention the nuclear bombings, were seen as the enemy "reaping the whirlwind" which they sowed with Guernica, Nanking, Coventry, London and others. Misreading the industrial capacity of the US was certainly a factor, but without the will to fight which the Japanese created with the Pearl Harbour raid, it would have been an academic point.
@micfail23 жыл бұрын
The time lapse of ship numbers is awesome, I've never seen it displayed in such an easily digestible way before. Excellent video.
@MilitaryHistoryVisualized3 жыл бұрын
Glad you enjoyed it!
@the_undead2 жыл бұрын
Do keep in mind there is almost certainly errors somewhere in this video because as military history visualized said there's well over a thousand ships that are needed to be accounted for and that's just too much for one person
@thedungeondelver3 жыл бұрын
Japan: *VICTORY OR DEATH* US Industrial Might: *Your terms are acceptable.*
@SimonNZ69695 жыл бұрын
>When you can't be arsed creating a bunch of different units. So you just spamming that one type
@Yorkington3 жыл бұрын
God, the Fletcher-class were amazing for their purpose. 175! Amazing ships qualitatively and in quantity.
@Quadrolithium3 жыл бұрын
If the type is effective, why the fuck not?
@RangerJahu4 жыл бұрын
Older video, but I just want to give you some kudos for the phrase "You might walk from berlin to moscow, but you're not going to swim from pearl harbour to tokyo" it perfectly visualized the concept of the logistical constrains. well said.
@darrenvanderwilt12586 жыл бұрын
Wars are won through logistics. While the number of combat vessels is impressive, it was the high number of supply ships necessary to support combat operations in both theaters that had greater impact. Awesome video!
@1racemate5 жыл бұрын
we had it all
@seanmac17935 жыл бұрын
the shocking thing is the US was able to operate this on the go with basically no prepared bases except for the need for dockyards for major repairs
@nolanmosher87864 жыл бұрын
u are partially right, but even then 1 dock made 1 liberty ship in a day
@darrenvanderwilt12584 жыл бұрын
The US also had about 150 auxiliary repair docks. This prevented having to sail damaged ships back to the states for repairs.
@nolanmosher87864 жыл бұрын
@Samuel Brown we wouldn't if if Japanese won midway than it would be more painful for them bc we had nuclear power even if we didn't we had more tactics and firepower all they had was kamikaze and island defense