Why Japan had NO Chance in WW2

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 ธ.ค. 2018
  • Although, the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) started the war with a stronger force than the US Navy (USN) in the Pacific, it had virtually no Chance in winning the War in the long run. This becomes very apparent, if you watch the numbers evolving over the course of this video. I put together a chronologically ordered list of ships from the size of “destroyer escorts” upwards that were produced by the United States and the Japanese from December 1941 to September 1945, to give you an idea on how the situation progressed.
    Thank you to VonKickass for improvements on the Thumbnail Design!
    »» SUPPORT MHV ««
    » patreon - / mhv
    » paypal donation - www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
    » Book Wishlist www.amazon.de/gp/registry/wis...
    »» MERCHANDISE - SPOILS OF WAR ««
    » shop - www.redbubble.com/people/mhvi...
    »» SOCIAL MEDIA ««
    » twitter - / milhivisualized
    » facebook - / milhistoryvisualized
    » twitch - / militaryhistoryvisualized
    » minds.com - www.minds.com/militaryhistory...
    » SOURCES «
    H.P. Willmott, The Barrier and the Javelin: Japanese and Allied Pacific Strategies, February to June 1942. Naval Institute Press: Annapolis, 2008
    Evans, David C.; Peattie, Mark R.: Kaigun - Strategy, Tactics, and Technology in the IMPERIAL JAPANESE NAVY 1887-1941. US Naval Institute Press: United States, 2012.
    Parshall, Jonathan B.; Tully, Anthony P.: Shattered Sword. The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway. Potomac Books: United States, 2007.
    Chesneau, Roger; Gardiner; Robert: Conway’s All the World’s Fighting Ships 1922-1946. Naval Institute Press: Annapolis, 1980
    Stille, Mark: Imperial Japanese Navy Antisubmarine Escorts 1941-45. Osprey Publishing: 2017.
    Overy, Richard: Why the Allies Won. Pimlico: London, UK (2006).
    Spector, Ronald H.: Eagle against the Sun. The American War with Japan. Cassell & Co: Cornwall, UK, 2000.
    Symonds, Craig L.: World War II at Sea. A Global History. Oxford University Press: New York, 2018
    Important source, which I used to validate various numbers - note that I think there IJN submarine numbers early on are wrong: www.combinedfleet.com/economic...
    www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/U...
    www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USN/U...
    www.ww2pacific.com/japcv.html
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matsu-c...
    » DATA CHAIN «
    Made with Natural Earth. Free vector and raster map data @ naturalearthdata.com.
    » CREDITS & SPECIAL THX «
    Songs:
    Ethan Meixsell - Vindicated
    Ethan Meixsell - In the Shadows
    Letter Box - Hey Sailor
    Riot - North Sea
    #ww2 #visualization #industrialpower

ความคิดเห็น • 4.6K

  • @MilitaryHistoryVisualized
    @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  5 ปีที่แล้ว +337

    Why the Japanese attacked the United States: th-cam.com/video/zPn4mp6y-4w/w-d-xo.html
    Video on WW2 Ship Classes: th-cam.com/video/SgJKzrDJenw/w-d-xo.html
    If you like in-depth researched videos on Military History, consider supporting me on Patreon: patreon.com/mhv/

    • @copperhamster
      @copperhamster 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      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.

    • @matijarasovic4627
      @matijarasovic4627 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @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

    • @copperhamster
      @copperhamster 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @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!"

    • @matijarasovic4627
      @matijarasovic4627 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @marios gianopoulos well that sounds... dangerous

    • @Sshooter444
      @Sshooter444 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      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.

  • @ticotube2501
    @ticotube2501 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3628

    A destroyer a day keeps the enemy at bay?

    • @TeamRetroWorld
      @TeamRetroWorld 5 ปีที่แล้ว +94

      best comment i've found yet. +1

    • @rafalemiec8683
      @rafalemiec8683 5 ปีที่แล้ว +77

      "...keeps the enemy in bay" and then the ultimate naval pun is complete.

    • @aaroncabatingan5238
      @aaroncabatingan5238 5 ปีที่แล้ว +36

      @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.

    • @nancysexton4364
      @nancysexton4364 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @Call Me Ishmael God bless america

    • @andrewtaylor940
      @andrewtaylor940 4 ปีที่แล้ว +44

      I suspect the final invasion plan for Japan involved tying Destroyer and Destroyer escorts nose to tail and just walking across from Los Angeles

  • @alwayscurious3357
    @alwayscurious3357 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2476

    IJN: We got the Yamato!
    Kriegsmarine: We have the Bismarck!
    USN: We make warships like we make cars...

    • @alwayscurious3357
      @alwayscurious3357 5 ปีที่แล้ว +284

      @marios gianopoulos Iowa: *Lives on to the Cold War
      - Gets it's own Helicopter.
      -Precision Shells
      -Tomahawk Cruise Missiles
      "Cool"

    • @asherkosmos4312
      @asherkosmos4312 5 ปีที่แล้ว +165

      More like USN: We have Enterprise

    • @HaloFTW55
      @HaloFTW55 5 ปีที่แล้ว +143

      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.

    • @22steve5150
      @22steve5150 5 ปีที่แล้ว +92

      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.

    • @xb0xisbetter
      @xb0xisbetter 5 ปีที่แล้ว +21

      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.

  • @josephdestaubin7426
    @josephdestaubin7426 3 ปีที่แล้ว +406

    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
      @jamesgoldring1052 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      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

  • @radishinglad998
    @radishinglad998 2 ปีที่แล้ว +295

    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.

    • @Albukhshi
      @Albukhshi ปีที่แล้ว

      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
      @Blox117 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      why would they make ice cream when the ice cream could just be shipped pre made???

    • @collinwood6573
      @collinwood6573 ปีที่แล้ว +40

      @@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
      @Blox117 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@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
      @collinwood6573 ปีที่แล้ว +37

      @@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.

  • @Miketar2424
    @Miketar2424 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2583

    I liked the part when the United States commissioned a lot more ships than the Japanese Imperial Navy.

    • @mcglynn20
      @mcglynn20 5 ปีที่แล้ว +114

      Which part was that? I think I missed it.

    • @shojimoko
      @shojimoko 4 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      wut part lol haha

    • @jakebhenry2228
      @jakebhenry2228 4 ปีที่แล้ว +48

      Which part, all I see is the Japanese growin- OHH, US is blue, Japan red, come on japan

    • @margraveofgadsden8997
      @margraveofgadsden8997 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Okay, one of us most of completely misinterpreted what was going on here, because that’s not what I got from it all.

    • @MrShadowofthewind
      @MrShadowofthewind 4 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      @ZDProletariat Do you guys also close your eyes when you sleep ? 😲

  • @SonOfPatriots
    @SonOfPatriots 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2686

    That moment Japan realized this game of war was over when America figured out the glitch of infinite destroyers

    • @matsv201
      @matsv201 4 ปีที่แล้ว +126

      Luckily they didnt hit the 1024 hardcode cap

    • @shronkler1994
      @shronkler1994 4 ปีที่แล้ว +84

      japan just raged quit the game

    • @user-ro9zf9kz1h
      @user-ro9zf9kz1h 4 ปีที่แล้ว +30

      @@matsv201 I don't think so, consider the liberty fleet they have crank out from the dockyard.

    • @matsv201
      @matsv201 4 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      @@user-ro9zf9kz1h transpodg ship is a difrent entity

    • @user-ro9zf9kz1h
      @user-ro9zf9kz1h 3 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      @@matsv201 even transport ship will still need ship yard to construct.

  • @radishinglad998
    @radishinglad998 2 ปีที่แล้ว +212

    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
      @constantinethecataphract5949 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      You should have showed him this vid

    • @concept5631
      @concept5631 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      May he rest in peace.

    • @user-yj6ul9kz3p
      @user-yj6ul9kz3p 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The United States and the United Kingdom like to lie and exploit their workers during war

    • @KeterClass2155
      @KeterClass2155 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Your grandfather was every bit a hero as those in service.

  • @Tishirobearcat
    @Tishirobearcat 4 ปีที่แล้ว +304

    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.

    • @Bobis32
      @Bobis32 3 ปีที่แล้ว +65

      the record was 13 ships in a single day which is just ridiculous

    • @richardtaylor1652
      @richardtaylor1652 2 ปีที่แล้ว +48

      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.

    • @brianlong2334
      @brianlong2334 13 วันที่ผ่านมา

      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.

  • @historicalman1817
    @historicalman1817 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1123

    Japan: " Check out this Destroyer I made! "
    USA: *Proceeds to make 20 destroyers in response*

    • @RAKITHA9
      @RAKITHA9 5 ปีที่แล้ว +72

      Level 2 empire vs Level 5 empire

    • @paulbricker9077
      @paulbricker9077 5 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Hello I stole your food 50*

    • @inkedseahear
      @inkedseahear 5 ปีที่แล้ว +85

      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!

    • @CrazyNikel
      @CrazyNikel 5 ปีที่แล้ว +17

      @@inkedseahear That's not how this works kid.

    • @ThatRatBastard
      @ThatRatBastard 5 ปีที่แล้ว +54

      @@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.

  • @gordo2022
    @gordo2022 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1087

    Bruh he left his auto clicker on “build destroyer”

    • @justaglitch9387
      @justaglitch9387 3 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      Lol

    • @thomaskositzki9424
      @thomaskositzki9424 3 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Macros are cheating! XD

    • @oh_no7938
      @oh_no7938 3 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      us: MORE

    • @BeelzebubBeelzebub
      @BeelzebubBeelzebub 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      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.

    • @ivorbellringer2563
      @ivorbellringer2563 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Rafael Enriquez 9p

  • @hgbugalou
    @hgbugalou 4 ปีที่แล้ว +501

    Jesus, the US had to start naming ships after enlisted men at some point.

    • @HeIsAnAli
      @HeIsAnAli 4 ปีที่แล้ว +38

      DDs and DEs.

    • @egca2198
      @egca2198 4 ปีที่แล้ว +58

      yes the Destroyer The Sullimans was named after enlisted brothers.

    • @littlepeep7380
      @littlepeep7380 4 ปีที่แล้ว +66

      @@egca2198 That's "The Sullivans " not sulliman

    • @thurin84
      @thurin84 3 ปีที่แล้ว +29

      or people that looked at water once.

    • @TheAviationGuyID
      @TheAviationGuyID 3 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      I saw a ship named "Harder" and "hoe"

  • @comradecommie7144
    @comradecommie7144 3 ปีที่แล้ว +607

    Britain: By the gods, America, how many ships are you going to make?
    America: wait was there supposed to be a limit

    • @ronanchristiana.belleza9270
      @ronanchristiana.belleza9270 3 ปีที่แล้ว +65

      Japanese Navy: Building more Ships? Wait that's illegal!
      American Navy: I'll Make it Legal Then

    • @looinrims
      @looinrims 3 ปีที่แล้ว +30

      “Enough to make you obsolete and not a world power”

    • @Warmaker01
      @Warmaker01 3 ปีที่แล้ว +35

      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.

    • @Warhawk76
      @Warhawk76 3 ปีที่แล้ว +21

      Britain: Hey America, how many ships are you going to build?
      America: ALL OF THEM!

    • @mode3763
      @mode3763 3 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      America: Yes.

  • @milkboy2228
    @milkboy2228 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1231

    If you can't swim from Pearl Harbor to Tokyo - just build a bridge.
    With the 600 Destroyers you built.

    • @Graymenn
      @Graymenn 4 ปีที่แล้ว +38

      maybe 60km of destroyers... not quite there but still impressive

    • @liabilityvoid
      @liabilityvoid 3 ปีที่แล้ว +30

      @@Graymenn we may have gona just a little bit overboard on ships. Just a little.

    • @kingad8869
      @kingad8869 3 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      @@liabilityvoid At least we were at war, nowadays we do this for the lols.

    • @marinewillis1202
      @marinewillis1202 3 ปีที่แล้ว +39

      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

    • @DSiren
      @DSiren 3 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      you mean 2,710 liberty ships or 325km of liberty

  • @matijarasovic4627
    @matijarasovic4627 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1620

    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-Ramses
      @Jordan-Ramses 5 ปีที่แล้ว +31

      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.

    • @jonttul
      @jonttul 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@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
      @enigmagrieshaber5555 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@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

  • @pantherace1000
    @pantherace1000 4 ปีที่แล้ว +544

    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.

    • @stevekolarik2857
      @stevekolarik2857 3 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      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.

    • @robertgallagher7734
      @robertgallagher7734 3 ปีที่แล้ว +54

      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.

    • @stevekolarik2857
      @stevekolarik2857 3 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Robert Gallagher he never said it. No documentation or witnesses heard him said it. He never had a diary. Nothing!

    • @robertgallagher7734
      @robertgallagher7734 3 ปีที่แล้ว +45

      @@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?

    • @MasterofBlitz
      @MasterofBlitz 3 ปีที่แล้ว +51

      @@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."

  • @jameshar9592
    @jameshar9592 4 ปีที่แล้ว +320

    Admiral Yamamoto studied in the US and warned the emperor that our concept of mass production could overwhelm japan...he was right!!

    • @asga2600
      @asga2600 4 ปีที่แล้ว +57

      Well he's the only Japanese who has brain in that time... But he was overwhelmed by idiots

    • @jesusramirezromo2037
      @jesusramirezromo2037 3 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      Its a shame Hirohito had no power at the time

    • @insanejoe9042
      @insanejoe9042 3 ปีที่แล้ว +24

      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.

    • @ItsSerialBoX
      @ItsSerialBoX 3 ปีที่แล้ว +27

      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.

    • @johnfoster8643
      @johnfoster8643 2 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      @@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.

  • @andromedaputraharyanto5420
    @andromedaputraharyanto5420 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2553

    "I swear admiral,we've sunk that ship twelve times alteady"
    -Some IJN Crew

    • @thelegacyshow4248
      @thelegacyshow4248 4 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      Shit

    • @thelegacyshow4248
      @thelegacyshow4248 4 ปีที่แล้ว +204

      "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant, and fill him with a terrible resolve"

    • @VersusARCH
      @VersusARCH 4 ปีที่แล้ว +33

      "Soryu, admiral!"

    • @user-ro9zf9kz1h
      @user-ro9zf9kz1h 4 ปีที่แล้ว +53

      @Totally not the flash :3 IJN carrier group: I fear no man. But that thing (grey ghost steaming over the horizon). It scare me.

    • @HeIsAnAli
      @HeIsAnAli 4 ปีที่แล้ว +18

      @Totally not the flash :3 _OWARI DA!_

  • @brachio1000
    @brachio1000 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1437

    Before Pearl Harbor, it took an American shipyard three years to build a destroyer. Six months after the attack, it took one year from the laying down to commissioning. That's the U.S. when it's running on all eight.

    • @andrewp8284
      @andrewp8284 5 ปีที่แล้ว +316

      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.

    • @manabouttongue
      @manabouttongue 4 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      You mean 16!

    • @ronansmith9148
      @ronansmith9148 4 ปีที่แล้ว +100

      One liberty ship every 3 hours. Cargo spam.

    • @justinsutton5005
      @justinsutton5005 4 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      @@andrewp8284 we were also just warming up

    • @alexh3974
      @alexh3974 4 ปีที่แล้ว +57

      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.

  • @NguyenMinh-vs1vm
    @NguyenMinh-vs1vm 3 ปีที่แล้ว +695

    Drinking game: take a shot for every destroyer commissioned

    • @MilitaryHistoryVisualized
      @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  3 ปีที่แล้ว +414

      More like a suicide pact.

    • @protoculturejunkie
      @protoculturejunkie 3 ปีที่แล้ว +60

      Are you trying to kill someone? 😛

    • @ninjadejedi
      @ninjadejedi 3 ปีที่แล้ว +43

      It is not a drinking game, it's just drinking.

    • @michaelnewton1332
      @michaelnewton1332 3 ปีที่แล้ว +52

      I am currently at the hospital getting my stomach pumped. Hope you're happy, asshole!!!

    • @kennymendoza1581
      @kennymendoza1581 2 ปีที่แล้ว +15

      Try drinking a glass of water every time a destroyer is produced, you will OD on water.

  • @g0ast
    @g0ast 3 ปีที่แล้ว +182

    "What should we name these destroyers, Keith?"
    "I don't know Scott, just pick something."
    "I got you, fam."
    3:18

    • @moistronaut4755
      @moistronaut4755 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Lmao😂

    • @GhostTrueCapitalist
      @GhostTrueCapitalist 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      This one got me good

    • @martinXY
      @martinXY 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      My favourite name is Ray.

    • @VirgoShelter
      @VirgoShelter 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Destoryer were named after deceased American admiral and such

  • @Scientist118
    @Scientist118 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1714

    That moment you realize you forgot to stop building destroyers.

    • @tremedar
      @tremedar 5 ปีที่แล้ว +203

      I have no gold for research...the hell is going on??
      >check city maintenance....ok
      >check trade agreements....ok
      >check unit maintenance.....WTF?!

    • @CT--gs1wj
      @CT--gs1wj 5 ปีที่แล้ว +227

      When you commit 15 naval dockyards in producing Destroyers in HOI4

    • @robertjarman3703
      @robertjarman3703 5 ปีที่แล้ว +153

      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.

    • @onetwothreefour3957
      @onetwothreefour3957 5 ปีที่แล้ว +45

      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.

    • @marxel4444
      @marxel4444 5 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      @@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

  • @xchazz86
    @xchazz86 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1197

    Japan: "How many ships are you going to make?"
    US: "Yes."

    • @sumponeighknotyew9757
      @sumponeighknotyew9757 4 ปีที่แล้ว +71

      Japan:"what's you favorite flavor?"
      US:"LARGE"

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      alot

    • @f430ferrari5
      @f430ferrari5 4 ปีที่แล้ว +37

      Toyo Masauce
      Japan - but how many are you going to bring to the Pacific
      US - Everyone
      Japan - what do you mean everyone?
      US - EVERYONE!!!

    • @gregoryhickok6300
      @gregoryhickok6300 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@1racemate in the Army we called it factor P. P=plenty

    • @BELCAN57
      @BELCAN57 4 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      Japan "How many? "
      USA "ALL OF THEM"

  • @Shadowcam00
    @Shadowcam00 3 ปีที่แล้ว +177

    Oprah: *_"And if you look under your seats, you'll see the keys to a brand new Fletcher!"_*

    • @GreyWolfLeaderTW
      @GreyWolfLeaderTW 2 ปีที่แล้ว +34

      You get a Fletcher! And you get a Fletcher! Everyone gets a Fletcher!

  • @keithw4920
    @keithw4920 3 ปีที่แล้ว +411

    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.

    • @firebird9711
      @firebird9711 3 ปีที่แล้ว +22

      LOL nice analogy

    • @f430ferrari5
      @f430ferrari5 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      But there wasn’t 10 briefcases full of chips in 1942. Come on. Stop with the lies. 😂🤣

    • @pwnrzero
      @pwnrzero 2 ปีที่แล้ว +37

      @@f430ferrari5 the briefcases were GM, Ford, and Detroit shipworks.

    • @f430ferrari5
      @f430ferrari5 2 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@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.

    • @pwnrzero
      @pwnrzero 2 ปีที่แล้ว +45

      @@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.

  • @budmeister
    @budmeister 5 ปีที่แล้ว +973

    Fletcher class destroyers are the Zerglings of WW2.

    • @Ralph-yn3gr
      @Ralph-yn3gr 5 ปีที่แล้ว +201

      No one ever expects the 11 shipyard 175 destroyer rush.

    • @Lehr-km5be
      @Lehr-km5be 5 ปีที่แล้ว +57

      Tbh T-34s or russian infantry seem like a better personification of Zerglings to me

    • @thomas.02
      @thomas.02 5 ปีที่แล้ว +128

      "we have more destroyers than you have bombs and torpedoes"

    • @Lehr-km5be
      @Lehr-km5be 5 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@thomas.02 Hah thats a good one :)

    • @oceanhome2023
      @oceanhome2023 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Lehr9807
      And to the Germans too !

  • @willyreeves319
    @willyreeves319 5 ปีที่แล้ว +887

    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 ...

    • @thurin84
      @thurin84 3 ปีที่แล้ว +171

      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"

    • @willyreeves319
      @willyreeves319 3 ปีที่แล้ว +124

      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.

    • @andrewptob
      @andrewptob 3 ปีที่แล้ว +48

      Yes, U.S. sent a ton of military aid to the Russians to help them against the German invasion

    • @marinewillis1202
      @marinewillis1202 3 ปีที่แล้ว +52

      throw in there the amount of food we were producing and shipping out also. We basically fed all of the Allies also.

    • @DSiren
      @DSiren 3 ปีที่แล้ว +20

      @@willyreeves319 .45ACP was the ammo used by the Thompson and the M3 "Grease Gun"

  • @textmachine09
    @textmachine09 3 ปีที่แล้ว +233

    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."

    • @kingb4490
      @kingb4490 2 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      RA2 reference?

    • @johnquintmatt1986
      @johnquintmatt1986 2 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      Ah I remember Command and Conquer

    • @dereenaldoambun9158
      @dereenaldoambun9158 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Based USA go for the supplies and secure them first instead of raiding enemy command base in early game.

    • @hennessyblues4576
      @hennessyblues4576 ปีที่แล้ว

      You forgot "Building"

    • @richardtaylor1652
      @richardtaylor1652 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Meanwhile the Japanese are hearing: "Unit lost." "Unit lost." "Unit lost." "Unit lost." "Unit lost." "Unit lost."

  • @blockmasterscott
    @blockmasterscott 4 ปีที่แล้ว +168

    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".

    • @potato88872
      @potato88872 3 ปีที่แล้ว +36

      that carrier is something of a legend

    • @alexh3974
      @alexh3974 2 ปีที่แล้ว +48

      *Japan*
      America lacks resolve to fight.
      *USS Enterprise*
      Fine we will hold the entire line, come on and get some.

    • @dereenaldoambun9158
      @dereenaldoambun9158 2 ปีที่แล้ว +22

      The chad Enterprise holding back the IJN
      VS
      The virgin Yamato got rekted by US Navy

    • @F14thunderhawk
      @F14thunderhawk ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@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.

  • @TheNightWatcher1385
    @TheNightWatcher1385 4 ปีที่แล้ว +86

    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.

    • @FriedrichBarb
      @FriedrichBarb 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      I noticed the Battleships but not the rest. Thats interesting lol

    • @alexh3974
      @alexh3974 2 ปีที่แล้ว +20

      they had to start inventing Fish for the submarine fleet, for ones that sounded suitable to avoid US Gold fish etc.

    • @JamesWillmus
      @JamesWillmus ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@alexh3974 the USN Asian Carp

    • @thelettery6
      @thelettery6 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      I just figured out what kitty hawk was named after the location of the first flight of the Wright Brothers

  • @donaldreynolds6857
    @donaldreynolds6857 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1060

    The two scariest weapons America had. The American shipyard and the American factory,

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      no people who love to work

    • @VioletMilks
      @VioletMilks 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      john barrett stonks

    • @JGlennFL
      @JGlennFL 4 ปีที่แล้ว +95

      And our two best allies; Atlantic and Pacific.

    • @joker_season
      @joker_season 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      It will be oil, and food

    • @anathapindikahalim
      @anathapindikahalim 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      There was three you forgot The American's booming Economy

  • @user-ym2bb1jl2w
    @user-ym2bb1jl2w 4 ปีที่แล้ว +103

    when you have more escort carriers than enemy destroyers

    • @brucetucker4847
      @brucetucker4847 2 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      And more fleet carriers than enemy heavy cruisers.

    • @krapto3467
      @krapto3467 2 ปีที่แล้ว +16

      When you almost have more destroyers than the entire Japanese navy has ships.

  • @jotabe1984
    @jotabe1984 4 ปีที่แล้ว +296

    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

    • @grantaldrichaguilar5645
      @grantaldrichaguilar5645 3 ปีที่แล้ว +52

      USN also had better intelligence unit that paved way in winning the war.

    • @WuzzyYT
      @WuzzyYT 3 ปีที่แล้ว +21

      After midway the Japanese navy was destined to fail

    • @ulfenburg7539
      @ulfenburg7539 3 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      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

    • @pahtar7189
      @pahtar7189 3 ปีที่แล้ว +39

      The USN also had much better damage control, meaning their ships were much more likely to survive an attack than their IJN counterparts.

    • @ulfenburg7539
      @ulfenburg7539 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@pahtar7189 That is not the only factor for survivability

  • @misterjag
    @misterjag 4 ปีที่แล้ว +989

    "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

    • @tompayne8863
      @tompayne8863 4 ปีที่แล้ว +204

      @@1racemate He was smart. He knew!

    • @StryderK
      @StryderK 4 ปีที่แล้ว +196

      Tom Payne cause he’s been to America and knew what would happen if American industrial might is unleashed.

    • @teebes2009
      @teebes2009 4 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      I am not sure they quite made it to 6 months.

    • @JoeSpringer97
      @JoeSpringer97 4 ปีที่แล้ว +79

      @@teebes2009 If they came up short on 6 months, it was by a few days. Midway was in June of 1942.

    • @teebes2009
      @teebes2009 4 ปีที่แล้ว +48

      @@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.

  • @enfield_the_enigmatic2989
    @enfield_the_enigmatic2989 5 ปีที่แล้ว +492

    This obviously took a lot of effort, I applaud your dedication to the topic!

  • @MultiCappie
    @MultiCappie 4 ปีที่แล้ว +103

    This has to be one of the best statistical representations I've ever seen. So important to capture the time dimension of the data.

    • @tankofnova9022
      @tankofnova9022 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      In this particular case... not really. U.S.A had more of everything at all times.

  • @baconpwn
    @baconpwn ปีที่แล้ว +15

    "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

  • @williamreymond2669
    @williamreymond2669 5 ปีที่แล้ว +589

    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.

    • @johnlach3700
      @johnlach3700 4 ปีที่แล้ว +82

      or planes for the carriers

    • @CM-ve1bz
      @CM-ve1bz 4 ปีที่แล้ว +142

      William Reymond
      By 1945 70% of all ships on the water around the world were American made.

    • @asga2600
      @asga2600 4 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      Its just took damn manyyyyy.......tooo list...

    • @ez_company9325
      @ez_company9325 4 ปีที่แล้ว +29

      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

    • @nolanmosher8786
      @nolanmosher8786 4 ปีที่แล้ว +36

      dont forget lliberty ships 1 ship a day from all 9 shipyards

  • @Eatmydbzballs
    @Eatmydbzballs 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1413

    America commissioned a ship every-single-day almost

    • @budmeister
      @budmeister 5 ปีที่แล้ว +178

      @marios gianopoulos So many Fletchers...

    • @TheRockstarFreak9
      @TheRockstarFreak9 5 ปีที่แล้ว +160

      Many days they commissioned 2 or more so they would on average commission more than one ship every day
      Edit: I was wrong. They commissioned a little under one ship a day. Still very impressive.

    • @klobiforpresident2254
      @klobiforpresident2254 5 ปีที่แล้ว +93

      Do you even Fletcher rush?

    • @andresmartinezramos7513
      @andresmartinezramos7513 5 ปีที่แล้ว +89

      The war lasted 1366 days for the United States, from 7/12/1941 to 2/9/1945.
      1124 ships were commissioned during the conflict.
      This results in only 242 days without their own ship.

    • @KarlfMjolnir
      @KarlfMjolnir 5 ปีที่แล้ว +18

      @@andresmartinezramos7513 does that include auxiliaries and things like torpedo boats and sub chasers?

  • @alitlweird
    @alitlweird 4 ปีที่แล้ว +583

    Q: When did Japan lose WWII?
    A: Sunday, December 7th, 1941.

    • @matsv201
      @matsv201 4 ปีที่แล้ว +26

      We have awakon a sleeping dragon....

    • @matsv201
      @matsv201 4 ปีที่แล้ว +25

      @M'Load, 1Man Bukkake Baller. Cum hard or go home. well .. hmm i probobly remember wrong... giant?

    • @matsv201
      @matsv201 4 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      @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.

    • @matsv201
      @matsv201 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @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

    • @chrisvickers7928
      @chrisvickers7928 4 ปีที่แล้ว +26

      @@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.

  • @epeon7
    @epeon7 4 ปีที่แล้ว +68

    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

    •  5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It was

  • @pac1fic055
    @pac1fic055 5 ปีที่แล้ว +513

    After lining up all American ships built during WW2 you could walk from Pearl Harbor to Tokyo.

    • @incendiarybullet3516
      @incendiarybullet3516 5 ปีที่แล้ว +72

      Pac1fic0 -
      Just the Destroyers is enough.

    • @Thai8521
      @Thai8521 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      @@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_Fleckeri
      @Chironex_Fleckeri 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Is this true? Warships only?

    • @anoon-
      @anoon- 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Chironex_Fleckeri not side by side but I would believe this if they were connected nose to rear

  • @nerowulfee9210
    @nerowulfee9210 5 ปีที่แล้ว +194

    - 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.

    • @MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized
      @MilitaryHistoryNotVisualized 5 ปีที่แล้ว +52

      No, give em two.

    • @seanmac1793
      @seanmac1793 4 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      You know that actually happened

    • @TheOtakuPrince
      @TheOtakuPrince 4 ปีที่แล้ว +34

      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.

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      I love it just go kick there ass

    • @kyokyodisaster4842
      @kyokyodisaster4842 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      @@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.

  • @MajesticOak
    @MajesticOak 3 ปีที่แล้ว +133

    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.Comment
      @Account.for.Comment 2 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      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.

    • @browncoat697
      @browncoat697 2 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      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.

    • @MajesticOak
      @MajesticOak 2 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      @@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.

    • @brucetucker4847
      @brucetucker4847 2 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      @@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-pn3im5sm7k
      @user-pn3im5sm7k 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      Biggest mistake Japan made was thinking Americans would not fight to death for global bankers. They were wrong.

  • @Jonconji
    @Jonconji 4 ปีที่แล้ว +305

    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

    • @bloodyplebs
      @bloodyplebs 3 ปีที่แล้ว +64

      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.

    • @azopeopaz3059
      @azopeopaz3059 3 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      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

    • @BenAnkenmann
      @BenAnkenmann 3 ปีที่แล้ว +88

      @@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.

    • @azopeopaz3059
      @azopeopaz3059 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@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

    • @BenAnkenmann
      @BenAnkenmann 3 ปีที่แล้ว +53

      @@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.

  • @9559ns
    @9559ns 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1589

    The truth is kid, the game was rigged from the start.

    • @gordonlawrence4749
      @gordonlawrence4749 5 ปีที่แล้ว +152

      @@davidbros849 Nope Yamamoto said this is exactly what would happen as they could not ramp production in China fast enough.

    • @rgm96x49
      @rgm96x49 5 ปีที่แล้ว +56

      God damn it Benny.

    • @Sungulltzu
      @Sungulltzu 5 ปีที่แล้ว +89

      @Marty Man Can't tell if trolling or not

    • @icecold1805
      @icecold1805 5 ปีที่แล้ว +33

      @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.

    • @trevynlane8094
      @trevynlane8094 5 ปีที่แล้ว +60

      @@Sungulltzu he is definitely trolling. And lazy too, as that has been his reply to other comments, copy pasted word for word.

  • @onyxdragon1179
    @onyxdragon1179 4 ปีที่แล้ว +396

    US Government: "So, how many destroyers are you gonna commission?"
    US Navy Office: "Yes."

    • @Bobis32
      @Bobis32 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      the destroyers were built for the Atlantic fleet to protect the merchant marines feeding the UK

    • @onyxdragon1179
      @onyxdragon1179 4 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      @@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

    • @onyxdragon1179
      @onyxdragon1179 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      @@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

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      all of them

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Bobis32 and our people at home

  • @BlackBlood297
    @BlackBlood297 4 ปีที่แล้ว +168

    UK Navy: "We're the largest & most power Navy on the face of this planet"
    US Navy: "Haha that's cute"

    • @thurin84
      @thurin84 3 ปีที่แล้ว +32

      heres 50 used destroyers we lost track of......

    • @lawrencegabrieln.fabula2380
      @lawrencegabrieln.fabula2380 3 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      In numbers the RN was larger until about... late 42 early 43.

    • @EndOfSmallSanctuary97
      @EndOfSmallSanctuary97 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      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.

    • @thurin84
      @thurin84 3 ปีที่แล้ว +32

      @@EndOfSmallSanctuary97 the us navy also was in all those places.

    • @livethefuture2492
      @livethefuture2492 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      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.

  • @zacharyzier314
    @zacharyzier314 4 ปีที่แล้ว +66

    USN: How many ships can you build us?
    American Shipyards: Yes.
    USN: Awesome.
    American Shipyards: So when do want them?
    USN: Yes.

  • @glitch164
    @glitch164 5 ปีที่แล้ว +338

    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!

    • @theboom1694
      @theboom1694 4 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      Around 1:26 there was a ship commissioned called “Hoe” and one a little while earlier called “harder” who thought those where good names

    • @windwalker5765
      @windwalker5765 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      She's in WoWs, too, and I have one! I'll sink a couple Axis boats for your grandpa...

    • @jamescodyjones
      @jamescodyjones 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Grateful for your grandfather's service.

    • @Troopertroll
      @Troopertroll 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      3:41 for mine, and she's still afloat as a museum ship c:

    • @glitch164
      @glitch164 3 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      ​@@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.

  • @_datapoint
    @_datapoint 5 ปีที่แล้ว +271

    Dayum. No wonder the US tested a nuke on its own ships. I’m sure there were plenty after the war.

    • @caif4
      @caif4 5 ปีที่แล้ว +105

      Also tested it on captured ships. Poor Nagato.
      F

    • @Spaceman404.
      @Spaceman404. 5 ปีที่แล้ว +60

      @@caif4 and Prinz Eugen

    • @HaloFTW55
      @HaloFTW55 5 ปีที่แล้ว +56

      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.

    • @Autechltd
      @Autechltd 5 ปีที่แล้ว +17

      @@HaloFTW55 Its like that episode of Oprah where she gave away cars. SHIPS FOR EVERYBODY!!

    • @ericjamieson
      @ericjamieson 5 ปีที่แล้ว +25

      @@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.

  • @TurbhoeHDRemix
    @TurbhoeHDRemix 3 ปีที่แล้ว +45

    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

    • @blockmasterscott
      @blockmasterscott 2 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      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.

    • @PeterNygard69
      @PeterNygard69 ปีที่แล้ว

      They didn’t have a choice

  • @fenderOCG
    @fenderOCG 2 ปีที่แล้ว +40

    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
      @richardtaylor1652 10 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Meanwhile the US are busy working out the logistics of providing fresh ice cream for their troops and Marines.

  • @leftfootfirstpolitics
    @leftfootfirstpolitics 5 ปีที่แล้ว +106

    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

  • @trainknut
    @trainknut 5 ปีที่แล้ว +211

    US Army: "Build me more Shermans!"
    USAAF: MORE BOMBERS!
    USN: *_Fletcher, x175_*

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      O K

    • @stampede122
      @stampede122 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      The US Air Force didn’t exist in WW2, it was part of the Army until Sept. of ‘47

    • @booblizard104
      @booblizard104 4 ปีที่แล้ว +47

      @@stampede122 that's why they put USAAF not USAF.

    • @alexwanatowicz9999
      @alexwanatowicz9999 4 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      me in hearts of iron 4

    • @thurin84
      @thurin84 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      american industry; 'YES! YES! YES! was it good for you?"

  • @thedungeondelver
    @thedungeondelver 2 ปีที่แล้ว +17

    Japan: *VICTORY OR DEATH*
    US Industrial Might: *Your terms are acceptable.*

  • @George-fo6tm
    @George-fo6tm 4 ปีที่แล้ว +40

    Japan: slow and steady wins the war
    America: shits out 500 destroyers

  • @username65585
    @username65585 5 ปีที่แล้ว +312

    There is a dude who is swimming across the pacific right now.

    • @MilitaryHistoryVisualized
      @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  5 ปีที่แล้ว +78

      I prove you wrong mhv... Gets eaten by a shark.

    • @MostlyPennyCat
      @MostlyPennyCat 5 ปีที่แล้ว +17

      @@MilitaryHistoryVisualized
      Do doooo - do doo - da do.

    • @Custerd1
      @Custerd1 5 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      Hulk swim! Hulk no scared!

    • @CT--gs1wj
      @CT--gs1wj 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Chuck norris

    • @alwayscurious3357
      @alwayscurious3357 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @@CT--gs1wj Chuck Norris doesn't have to swim. He just have to jump to the other side of the Pacific

  • @emeryalmasy7727
    @emeryalmasy7727 5 ปีที่แล้ว +151

    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!"

    • @hobmoor2042
      @hobmoor2042 5 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      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).

    • @mjbull5156
      @mjbull5156 5 ปีที่แล้ว +24

      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.

    • @IrishCarney
      @IrishCarney 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@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.

    • @J7Handle
      @J7Handle 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      The strategy works in a purely defensive war. At least if you are as crazy as the Viet Cong.

    • @eodyn7
      @eodyn7 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@IrishCarney You definitely couldn't say that about the Americans.

  • @theholyinquisition389
    @theholyinquisition389 2 ปีที่แล้ว +16

    And those are only the combat vessels, this doesn't even take merchant shipping into consideration.

    • @seanmac1793
      @seanmac1793 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      another thing I will point out is that US isn't producing a bunch of garbage. every ship the US pumped out was just as good if not better than its Japanese counterpart

    • @theholyinquisition389
      @theholyinquisition389 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@seanmac1793 The warships largely yes. Liberty ships not so much. But in general the quality of US equipment was very good during the war.

    • @seanmac1793
      @seanmac1793 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@theholyinquisition389 i mean the liberty ships for what they are a very very good design

    • @theholyinquisition389
      @theholyinquisition389 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@seanmac1793 They were quick to build and cheap, which was what was needed at the time. They were also not built to very high quality Standards. There are multiple accounts of Liberty ships simply breaking apart due to shoddy welds and similar problems.

  • @SpaceMonkeyBoi
    @SpaceMonkeyBoi 2 ปีที่แล้ว +18

    America: **builds massive navy**
    Britain: "they grow up so fast... 🥺"

  • @kaseybrown7664
    @kaseybrown7664 4 ปีที่แล้ว +473

    1941 -- "I fear we have awoken a sleeping giant."
    1944 -- "WELL HOW BOUT THAT I WAS RIGHT!!"

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      so he wasnt so dumb it just took to long for motto to see it

    • @edfrawley4356
      @edfrawley4356 4 ปีที่แล้ว +60

      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.

    • @StryderK
      @StryderK 4 ปีที่แล้ว +25

      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.

    • @benlex5672
      @benlex5672 4 ปีที่แล้ว +37

      @@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.

    • @justsomeguy6240
      @justsomeguy6240 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      Probably said that as a P-40 shot his transport plane down.

  • @paulbricker9077
    @paulbricker9077 5 ปีที่แล้ว +141

    Japan: Yes! We’ve crippled their navy
    US: lol

    • @1pcfred
      @1pcfred 4 ปีที่แล้ว +16

      Sinking the relics that were in Pearl Harbor probably saved American lives. Because if they were sunk further at sea more would have perished.

    • @keenanhaug8814
      @keenanhaug8814 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      Lol

    • @coolday1111
      @coolday1111 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Just build a new one

    • @narayasuiryoku1397
      @narayasuiryoku1397 3 ปีที่แล้ว

      69 nice

  • @JGlennFL
    @JGlennFL 4 ปีที่แล้ว +67

    We built 50,000 tanks as well. There's a reason we were known as "the arsenal of democracy".

    • @thurin84
      @thurin84 3 ปีที่แล้ว +22

      during peak production in 1944 a completed warplane rolled off an assembly line somewhere in america on average, EVERY 5 MINUTES!!!

    • @Ron52G
      @Ron52G 3 ปีที่แล้ว +20

      The US built almost as many training aircraft during WW2 as the Germans built fighter planes.

    • @jonwoodhouse1444
      @jonwoodhouse1444 2 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      Actually, the US Built 100,000 tanks. 50,000 was the number we had in the field.

    • @alexh3974
      @alexh3974 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      @@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.

  • @micfail2
    @micfail2 2 ปีที่แล้ว +33

    The time lapse of ship numbers is awesome, I've never seen it displayed in such an easily digestible way before. Excellent video.

    • @MilitaryHistoryVisualized
      @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  2 ปีที่แล้ว +10

      Glad you enjoyed it!

    • @the_undead
      @the_undead ปีที่แล้ว +1

      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

  • @RichardAndewSwayne
    @RichardAndewSwayne 5 ปีที่แล้ว +103

    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

    • @Zarastro54
      @Zarastro54 5 ปีที่แล้ว +21

      It's a shame most of those auto factories are now defunct and the population largely in abject poverty.

    • @windwalker5765
      @windwalker5765 4 ปีที่แล้ว +8

      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.

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Zarastro54 just wait

    • @stevenwolfe7101
      @stevenwolfe7101 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      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.

  • @barleysixseventwo6665
    @barleysixseventwo6665 5 ปีที่แล้ว +390

    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.

    • @ineednochannelyoutube5384
      @ineednochannelyoutube5384 5 ปีที่แล้ว +26

      A fletcher is approx 130m long, the pacific is approx 12000km across. Its 7.5 fletchers in a km. thats some 90 000 Fletchers.

    • @aethertech
      @aethertech 4 ปีที่แล้ว +44

      @@ineednochannelyoutube5384 time to start building them inland, railroad them to the sea if we must!

    • @8vantor8
      @8vantor8 4 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      we where going to make it 5 thick so they could not stop it

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      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

    • @JediKnight19852002
      @JediKnight19852002 4 ปีที่แล้ว +15

      @@ineednochannelyoutube5384 US Production to Roosevelt: The Navy and Marines are moving too quickly for Operation Fletcher Parallel to be achieved.

  • @williamreymond2669
    @williamreymond2669 4 ปีที่แล้ว +76

    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??

    • @bcluett1697
      @bcluett1697 4 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      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.

    • @williamreymond2669
      @williamreymond2669 4 ปีที่แล้ว +14

      @@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.

    • @lionhead123
      @lionhead123 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      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_undead
      @the_undead ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@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

    • @cck4863
      @cck4863 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      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.

  • @blockmasterscott
    @blockmasterscott 3 ปีที่แล้ว +35

    Man, Pearl Harbor was like punching the neighborhood fat rich kid in the mouth and knocking him down, and he goes on a hard core salad diet and trains like a mad man in martial arts while weightlifting everyday, while arranging for his banker to disrupt your finances.

    • @Account.for.Comment
      @Account.for.Comment 2 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      "The greatest service Mahan did for the US Navy is by allowing his books to be translated to Japanese". The guy who do the punching also happened to be crazy, punching everyone else at the same time and could not bother to knock the rich kid again.

    • @blockmasterscott
      @blockmasterscott 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Account.for.Comment I read that book, and it's actually pretty good. I don't understand the quote though, did the Japanese derive the wrong message from it? How did it getting translated to Japanese help us?

    • @Account.for.Comment
      @Account.for.Comment 2 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@blockmasterscottMahan advocate for massive decisive sea battles like Trafalgar. Using Mahan books, the Japanese built the best fleet. There is another naval theorist who said "control of the sea " is impossible. Even if you can destroy the enemy navy, if you don' t defeat them on land, you can' t win. The fleet were destroyed in Pearl Harbor, the US built more while the Japanese continued losing their wars on the Asian continent. The Japanese were looking to find decisive sea battles, but the US were focus on destroying the Japanese production facilities on the islands. Basically, the battles and ships are almost useless, if the Japanese can' t blockade the coasts or attack the mainland. They do not have the capacity to do it, especially since the Pacific War is only a second priority to their already_losing Sino-Japanese war. All the destructions of the US ships managed to do, is destroying their own ships in the process.

    • @blockmasterscott
      @blockmasterscott 2 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@Account.for.Comment ok, that makes sense. Thanks for explaining!

    • @johnbiddle1829
      @johnbiddle1829 2 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Plus the rich kid comes from a very numerous, tough and protective family.

  • @ShaDOWDoG667
    @ShaDOWDoG667 5 ปีที่แล้ว +148

    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-98
      @Starwarsgeek-98 5 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      Thats including auxilary and merchant ships I believe
      Everything from cargo ships to minelayers

    • @CorsetGrace
      @CorsetGrace 5 ปีที่แล้ว +15

      And only 6 USN capital ships, fleet carriers and battleships, were sunk.

    • @Starwarsgeek-98
      @Starwarsgeek-98 5 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      @@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

    • @ShaDOWDoG667
      @ShaDOWDoG667 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@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

    • @aaroncabatingan5238
      @aaroncabatingan5238 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      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

  • @randomcoyote8807
    @randomcoyote8807 4 ปีที่แล้ว +141

    IJN: "We rule the Pacific!"
    USN: *Turns on Firehose o' Destroyers*

  • @RangerJahu
    @RangerJahu 3 ปีที่แล้ว +28

    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.

  • @andrewwade5752
    @andrewwade5752 3 ปีที่แล้ว +48

    This "No chance" could be expanded significantly when considering advantages with radar, anti aircraft and doctrine. Still a great visualisation of the most important factor. Great work!

    • @kaletovhangar
      @kaletovhangar ปีที่แล้ว

      And aircraft, ground vehicles,small arms,their quality,other much needed equipment etc.

    • @lionhead123
      @lionhead123 ปีที่แล้ว

      and a really big bomb or 2

    • @justinhighum2892
      @justinhighum2892 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      Japan had a handful of advantages: a well trained and effective starting carrier task force, better torpedos, and shorter supply lines. Everything else was in the US' favor.
      Radar in particular was huge, and often underrated!

    • @andrewwade5752
      @andrewwade5752 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@justinhighum2892 Yep, US torpedos in '42 were not only awful... but it took them far too long to realise how awful they were!

    • @justinhighum2892
      @justinhighum2892 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@andrewwade5752 they didn't even detonate lol

  • @brendarua01
    @brendarua01 5 ปีที่แล้ว +179

    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!

  • @jaccovermeulen2762
    @jaccovermeulen2762 5 ปีที่แล้ว +265

    I expected the difference to be big but not THIS huge.

    • @JoshuaKevinPerry
      @JoshuaKevinPerry 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      4 days ago? Oh do Patreons get a secret link?

    • @gordonlawrence4749
      @gordonlawrence4749 5 ปีที่แล้ว +3

      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.

    • @vincentletzner8638
      @vincentletzner8638 5 ปีที่แล้ว +19

      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.

    • @pola5392
      @pola5392 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      The American numbers are from both the theatres, slash it in 2 and you get a more accurate picture

    • @gordonlawrence4749
      @gordonlawrence4749 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @Call Me Ishmael however they did have control of large areas of China at the beginning of the war which did have oil etc.

  • @livingadreamlife1428
    @livingadreamlife1428 2 ปีที่แล้ว +17

    “Oopsie, guess we picked the wrong country to attack.” - Emporer Hirohito.

  • @JohnSmith-il7jn
    @JohnSmith-il7jn 2 ปีที่แล้ว +25

    There were those in the Japanese military and Japanese government who were very much aware of these harsh realities prior to the Pearl Harbor attack, having studied at American universities during the 1920s-1930's. Remember the military brass always gets it's way, even when disaster looms beyond the horizon.

  • @carter1940
    @carter1940 5 ปีที่แล้ว +343

    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.

    • @TheStephaneAdam
      @TheStephaneAdam 5 ปีที่แล้ว +116

      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.

    • @no1DdC
      @no1DdC 5 ปีที่แล้ว +109

      @@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.

    • @TheStephaneAdam
      @TheStephaneAdam 5 ปีที่แล้ว +61

      @@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.

    • @no1DdC
      @no1DdC 5 ปีที่แล้ว +64

      @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.

    • @icecold1805
      @icecold1805 5 ปีที่แล้ว +11

      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.

  • @TheIfifi
    @TheIfifi 5 ปีที่แล้ว +330

    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.

    • @trevynlane8094
      @trevynlane8094 5 ปีที่แล้ว +20

      @Marty Man you are delusional.

    • @earthyring4393
      @earthyring4393 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @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.

    • @rembrandt972ify
      @rembrandt972ify 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      @Marty Man Wow, what's it like to be wrong about everything? No, don't tell me, your answer would just be wrong.

    • @nexus6755
      @nexus6755 5 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Lol nah fam i played as USA in HOI4 and invaded Japan and did D-day in 1941.

    • @nexus6755
      @nexus6755 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      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.

  • @wisenber
    @wisenber 2 ปีที่แล้ว +39

    Apparently, Japan's strategy was to patiently wait for the US to build so many ships that they became hopelessly tangled in a naval traffic jam while at sea an no place to dock.
    Towards the end of the war, highly trained American accountants noticed that the strange overage in "destroyer escorts" could be traced back to destroyer sailors repeated requesting female companionship. Shortly thereafter, new orders for "escort carriers" were cancelled for similar reasons.
    The obsessive compulsive ship building employee Hank "the Rivet" McKay was finally convinced to stop building Fletcher Class destroyers around 09:15 August 17, 1953. He was later transferred to work on Eisenhower's Interstate highway project and tragically drowned when he continued building Interstate 40 well into the San Diego harbor.

  • @crfblur
    @crfblur 3 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    Japan: We’ve built 200 destroyers
    American: I use auto clicker

  • @woketree21
    @woketree21 5 ปีที่แล้ว +208

    I was worried that American escort destroyer production was about to go off screen, crazy numbers

    • @MilitaryHistoryVisualized
      @MilitaryHistoryVisualized  5 ปีที่แล้ว +95

      It did, I had to adopt the scale several times.

    • @ShladTheTonkLover
      @ShladTheTonkLover 5 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      Military History Visualized murica

    • @markusz4447
      @markusz4447 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      what exactly is the difference between a destroyer and an escort destroyer? is it just displacement basically?

    • @roger5555ful
      @roger5555ful 5 ปีที่แล้ว +15

      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

    • @klade5031
      @klade5031 5 ปีที่แล้ว +9

      @@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.

  •  5 ปีที่แล้ว +275

    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.

    • @Pukemnukem
      @Pukemnukem 4 ปีที่แล้ว +47

      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.

    • @teebes2009
      @teebes2009 4 ปีที่แล้ว +36

      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.

    • @spikespa5208
      @spikespa5208 4 ปีที่แล้ว +7

      @@teebes2009 For want of a competent decoder/typist in the Japanese embassy, they paid a dear price.

    • @tempestfury8324
      @tempestfury8324 3 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      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.

    • @jasoncross9354
      @jasoncross9354 3 ปีที่แล้ว +12

      @@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.

  • @carlopulanco183
    @carlopulanco183 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

    If you think about it; the 2 major allied countries and 2 major axis countries followed the same doctrine:
    Nazi Germany: Build much more heavy duty and powerful tanks and take out as many allied tanks before you get destroyed
    Imperial Japan: Build large heavy duty Battleships and take out as many allied ships before you go down
    USSR: Build as many tanks as possible in a short amount of time until you overwhelm the enemy
    US: Build as many ships as you can until you overwhelm the enemy navy

  • @andymendez7710
    @andymendez7710 2 ปีที่แล้ว +31

    Really unbelievable, I've been on one of those destroyers that were being made like cookies (USS Kidd in Baton Rouge) and it is hard to imagine how much work it takes to build one of them let alone hundreds. Equally amazing that crews could be trained fast enough to man that many ships.

  • @crookedshades8194
    @crookedshades8194 5 ปีที่แล้ว +206

    The Simpsons "Stop! He's already dead!" Meme comes to mind.

    • @girlgarde
      @girlgarde 5 ปีที่แล้ว +16

      Then we'll make him even MORE dead!!

    • @HeIsAnAli
      @HeIsAnAli 5 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      > He's already dead!
      ...
      *_HE IS ALREADY DEAD._*

    • @lawrencelewis8105
      @lawrencelewis8105 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      @@girlgarde can't go wrong with that!

    • @aaroncabatingan5238
      @aaroncabatingan5238 5 ปีที่แล้ว +6

      No better kill than overkill

    • @Cpt_Boony_Hat
      @Cpt_Boony_Hat 4 ปีที่แล้ว +4

      Yeah but he refuses to accept he’s dead is the problem

  • @appalachianwolf1187
    @appalachianwolf1187 5 ปีที่แล้ว +133

    Japan: Look at this cool ship I built!
    United States: Look at these 2 bombs we built!

    • @generalzod8589
      @generalzod8589 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Your joke. Is very dishonorable to my ANCESTORS! BANZAI!! 😋

    • @tyler89557
      @tyler89557 3 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      And the accompanying dozen ships.

    • @livethefuture2492
      @livethefuture2492 3 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      Japan: look i built the biggest battleship in history!
      United States: i built 8 carriers and over 1000 planes to accompany them!

  • @9sore
    @9sore 3 ปีที่แล้ว +19

    alternative title: Survival gamemode VS Creative gamemode

  • @hwasiaqhan8923
    @hwasiaqhan8923 3 ปีที่แล้ว +39

    Japan had a tiny industrial capability and manpower compared to the US, it also severely lacked important resources such as Iron and Oil.

    • @brucenorman8904
      @brucenorman8904 4 หลายเดือนก่อน

      The US committed about 15% of its economy to the war with Japan and that was still about 50%more than Japan's economy.

  •  5 ปีที่แล้ว +65

    And subtract the number of ships they respectively lost, the gap would only widen more.

  • @hullbreach33
    @hullbreach33 5 ปีที่แล้ว +55

    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.

    • @maximaldinotrap
      @maximaldinotrap 5 ปีที่แล้ว

      Yeah, the smaller force needs to demoralize the larger force and it isn't always easy.

    • @1racemate
      @1racemate 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      we will not give up we will cook you like a pot of beans

    • @JoeDiGiovanniIV
      @JoeDiGiovanniIV 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      Looks like smaller force needs more brains then

  • @albay543
    @albay543 2 ปีที่แล้ว +7

    Japan: I think thats enough destroyers
    America: I'LL TELL YOU WHEN IVE HAD ENOUGH

  • @terryhale9006
    @terryhale9006 4 ปีที่แล้ว +9

    What a huge effort to put that together! Thanks to all involved.

  • @daneilfranklin
    @daneilfranklin 5 ปีที่แล้ว +172

    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.a5489
      @tonyh.a5489 5 ปีที่แล้ว +32

      Yamato not Yamamoto

    • @maximaldinotrap
      @maximaldinotrap 5 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      Yeah, this was pretty much the war that said that Battleships were pretty much obselete or at least as flagships.

    • @user-ro9zf9kz1h
      @user-ro9zf9kz1h 4 ปีที่แล้ว

      @NotFBIAgent Well if the SB2C Hell diver wasn't enough we will add more TBF Avengers and Fighters with tini tim

    • @javiergilvidal1558
      @javiergilvidal1558 4 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @@tonyh.a5489 ... and "Bismarck", not "Bismark"!

    • @iansneddon2956
      @iansneddon2956 4 ปีที่แล้ว +1

      @@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.

  • @OneofInfinity.
    @OneofInfinity. 5 ปีที่แล้ว +130

    I blame Match making, too many DD's again.

  • @pheresy1367
    @pheresy1367 2 ปีที่แล้ว +14

    When I was a kid in the '60s living in Long Island, oftentimes we traveled to upstate NY, and stopped off at the campus of West Point. There was a perfect view the "Mothball Fleet" of destroyers from WW2 that were moored in endless rows along the sides of the Hudson River. It was surreal to see them all there. Strangely awesomely terrifying.
    They have since scrapped them all.

    • @Thor_Odinson
      @Thor_Odinson 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Similar story from SF Bay Area except it was a bunch of Liberty ships that slowly disappeared over the years

  • @OneGuyIKnow
    @OneGuyIKnow 2 ปีที่แล้ว +6

    Japan: PLEASE JUST PRODUCE SHIPS AT A NORMAL RATE!!
    USA: *Post pearl harbor autistic screeching*

  • @mrplease66
    @mrplease66 5 ปีที่แล้ว +82

    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!

  • @MpowerdAPE
    @MpowerdAPE 5 ปีที่แล้ว +100

    The more I read about the war in pacific... the more I wonder what the hell the Japanese were thinking.

    • @Morrigi192
      @Morrigi192 5 ปีที่แล้ว +13

      Compliance with American demands was an impossibility due to their political dysfunction, so they made a wild gamble and lost. Badly.

    • @Jupiter__001_
      @Jupiter__001_ 5 ปีที่แล้ว +5

      They had an oil embargo by the USA, so they had to find some, and they went looking in South East Asia...

    • @anderskorsback4104
      @anderskorsback4104 5 ปีที่แล้ว +23

      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_
      @Jupiter__001_ 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      @Nobody Knows Indeed. I was just explaining their thought process.

    • @francesconicoletti2547
      @francesconicoletti2547 5 ปีที่แล้ว +2

      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?

  • @robertgoss4842
    @robertgoss4842 4 ปีที่แล้ว +17

    Terrific job of amassing, correlating and editing on this video! Thank you x 10K for your hard work!