Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armed Forces of the World Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Battle of Hong Kong: Lost Opportunity?
Godofgamblers    9/15/2009 11:35:26 PM
From what i've read on the Battle of Hong Kong, most give the British little chance of winning because of the overwhelming odds against them and focus on the Battle of Singapore as the battle where the Japanese should have been stopped. Churchill himself saw reinforcing HK as throwing away troops, "good money after bad" because of the odds and the logistics. Britain could not supply HK or give any naval support; the Japanese quickly assumed full air superiority. Japanese troops outnumbered the British 3 to 1. However, looking at the battle lines in detail, the British had a considerable number of natural lines of defense at their disposal. A defensive line (the Gin Drinkers Line), Devil's Peak ( a commanding mountain position), the channel between Kowloon and HK island, and a natural gorge which separated north and south HK island and which as the only passage through from north to south. The British seemed to give up these natural redoubts virtually witout a fight. Given that they had years to prepare for the battle, a large populace to help with digging trenches, defensive positions, etc, could they not have fought the Japanese to a stalemate? Was the battle really a foregone conclusino or a massive blunder?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3
bigfella       9/22/2009 10:56:13 PM

Gentlemen, gentlemen, please enough acrimony. However, you have both identified the key issue: resupply. Since the Jpanese controlled the sea and land passages, resupply was next to impossible. Even if they were supplied by submarine, it would not be sufficient and then there was the civilian population to consider.

 

HK did not have the stores that Singapore did; despite this, Churchill  ordered HK to fight regardless of the suffering of the civilian population and of casualties. In my view, the Brits should have made the combat last a lot longer, inflict a lot more casualties on the Japs, but in the end, they would have to surrender.



No acrimony GoG, just frustration.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

albywan       9/22/2009 11:53:55 PM


No acrimony GoG, just frustration.
 
Agreed. much like those in command in HK, seeing the growing Japanese threat through the late 30's, knowing that Japan wanted a greater influence throughout Asia - yet not having the support from home to prepare for the battle that was to come.
By the way, the war in the pacific/asia did not start with the bombing of Pearl Harbour/the fall of Singapore or HK, it had already been underway for quite some time then - giving Britain plenty of notice that their outpost were under threat.
 
By the time the invasions came - it was too late.
 
Bigfella, I respect that you were trying to reign my arguements to focus on Hong Kong and only around the battle of Hong Kong, but please respect that there are alternate views to how it could have played out, with different decsions been made.
 
I wish you the best.
 
Quote    Reply

bigfella       9/23/2009 5:25:24 PM





No acrimony GoG, just frustration.

 


Agreed. much like those in command in HK, seeing the growing Japanese threat through the late 30's, knowing that Japan wanted a greater influence throughout Asia - yet not having the support from home to prepare for the battle that was to come.


By the way, the war in the pacific/asia did not start with the bombing of Pearl Harbour/the fall of Singapore or HK, it had already been underway for quite some time then - giving Britain plenty of notice that their outpost were under threat.

 

By the time the invasions came - it was too late.

 

Bigfella, I respect that you were trying to reign my arguements to focus on Hong Kong and only around the battle of Hong Kong, but please respect that there are alternate views to how it could have played out, with different decsions been made.

 

I wish you the best.





I will respect any view that actually displays an understanding of what was genuinely possible. If you want to change what happened in HK then you have to give actual, real world alternatives based in what was actually possible. Do that & I will cheerfully engage & show due respect.
 
So far I still don't have any idea what you were proposing or how it was to be achieved - what resources were to be used & how they were to be used to achieve what end. That is how you discuss alternate histories. Simply saying 'they should/could have done X' without an understanding of these limitations actually shows a lack of respect to others.
 
If you have something worthwhile to propose then go right ahead. 
 
Quote    Reply

albywan       9/23/2009 5:54:59 PM



I will respect any view that actually displays an understanding of what was genuinely possible. If you want to change what happened in HK then you have to give actual, real world alternatives based in what was actually possible. Do that & I will cheerfully engage & show due respect.

 

So far I still don't have any idea what you were proposing or how it was to be achieved - what resources were to be used & how they were to be used to achieve what end. That is how you discuss alternate histories. Simply saying 'they should/could have done X' without an understanding of these limitations actually shows a lack of respect to others
If you have something worthwhile to propose then go right ahead. 

 

I apologise to you and to any others who feel dispespected then.
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy