Quote:
|
Originally Posted by perseus The tripartite act was signed in September 1940 although in principle it could have been earlier. I am assuming what Germany or the axis (since I am obviously considering the wider picture) 'did wrong' was from early on in the war. Britain had shipping lanes to the Far East, these would seem very venerable to a Japanese offensive in 1940. If Japan would have been careful to leave US possessions alone it would have been difficult for the US to come in on Britain's side. This would have left Malaya then Ceylon to be occupied in 1940 (no point in occupying anything other than defendable ports) then the whole Suez route comes under threat and the whole Middle East falls in 1941. |
I think the biggest problem with the Tripartite pact was that it never required a commitment from any of the parties unless one of them was attacked which means that because the Axis were always the aggressors there was no requirement from any of the others to assist.
It is this that makes the German declaration of war on the USA rather odd especially since:
(a) It was the only nation they did declare war on.
(b) They were not required to declare war or assist as Japan was the aggressor.
Quote:
|
I was assuming they were getting beaten up in Manchuria due to the lack of Armour and had aspirations for Asiatic Russia? The main problem would be transport so I suppose we are talking about technology transfer rather than tanks. The Tiger was probably far too late in the war and not much good anyway.
|
The Tiger was operation in mid to late 1942 I don't consider that too late I just don't think the Japanese had a use for it as they were not planning to fight the Russians. However as Doppleganger has pointed out the Mark IV may have been a better overall option as tank for Japan.