View Poll Results: Can Singapore possible to withstand Imperial Japanese army invasion ?

Voters
35. You may not vote on this poll
  • No, the situation is hopless

    16 45.71%
  • Yes, Singapore can hold up the invasion

    17 48.57%
  • Not Sure

    2 5.71%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 56 of 56

Thread: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

  1. #41
    Moderator Francis247's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Hougang, Punggol
    Posts
    6,627

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Quote Originally Posted by King Tiger View Post
    Well said, Francis247.

    OT abit. Recently, I bought a DVD about the Qin Army during the Warring States.
    There is talks on 围 魏 救 赵 too.
    Thanks KT. The Ancient China strategies are very interesting.

    Ok, back to the topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by King Tiger View Post
    Should General Percival decide not to give up on 15 Feb 1942, issuing a full-counter attack at all front.

    Follow up by a daring punch thru along the west to retake Jurong Line and the north to retake Woodland perimeter.

    The British might in turn contain the Japanese forces, and in the position to outflank them from their rear at Kranji/Choa Chu Kang.

    The Japanese might not have enough time to withdrawn all their troops back to Johore.

    What do you guys think ? Any possibilities and capacity of the British forces to achieve this ?
    In this situation, if communication line is still up, General Percival could have launch a full-counter attack and push the Jap back but there are still 3 issues at hand.

    1. Morale. After the Japs enter Singapore, morale of the Brit should be really low. Will the soldiers still raise arms to fight?
    2. Pushing back Jap to Malaya could only means that the Jap got more chances to regroup and prepare for another round of assault.
    3. Even if the Japs are successful push back, Singapore will be under siege in some sense. How can we outlast our enemy.

    Guess that pretty much make people give up that fighting will and spirit.
    莫问前程有愧,只求今生无悔. Time pasts, Places changed, Beauty faded, what is left are Photos of Memories…

  2. #42
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,021

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Quote Originally Posted by Yatlapball View Post
    Not really actually. The japanese zero fighters are superior in almost every way compared to the hurricane.

    I doubted the presence of the indomitable would have made much of a difference.
    The Indomitable could have provided fighter cover for Force Z. The Bettys that attacked the two capital ships were unescorted as it was outside the combat radius of the Zero fighter. The presence of CAP, even if they shot down few of the attackers, was that fewer bombs and torpedos could be carefully aimed with the luxury of time.

    The follow-on effect would be one where these two capital ships would still be afloat and able to bombard the Japanese transports as they were landing troops on the East Coast of Malaysia.

    However, the Japanese Navy in that area wasn't overshadowed by the British, they had two battlecruisers, three or four heavy cruisers, as well as a corresponding number of light cruisers and destroyers. They would have given Force Z a hard time, with or without Japanese air support.

    For the Japanese to come into the Peninsula they would have had to come down the hard way through southern Thailand, where you can see that it is a bottleneck. Their landings on the coast were successful, so they managed to spread the British lines out and thin.

    It pays to remember that the Singapore defence strategy depended on the US Pacific Fleet responding and coming to Singapore's aid should this region be attacked. But as the first landings were made in Malaya, the bulk of the Pacific Fleet lay on the bottom of Pearl Harbour. It was a fantastic move on the part of the strategic planners.

    I feel that Singapore could have held out, suffering and all. Why? There were other lonely outposts that put up a decent fight, like Greece, Malta, Corrigedor. Singapore gave up without a much of a fight.

    If Singapore held out, each month it holds out would be a thorn in the Japanese's plans of expansion. They would have had to devote forces to guard against raids and counterattacks coming out of Singapore if they continued on their plans to grab Indonesia.

  3. #43
    Senior Member josho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jln Teck Whye
    Posts
    2,110

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Japanese had their Zero fighter and they are willing to die for their imperial and crash themselves to the important area. And also, the British soldiers (Local) were not experience enough at that point of time plus no armour as support, not to forget that the Division Commander Major-General Merton Beckwith-Smith was also lack of both experience and training. Japanese almost surrender at that point of time during the Battle of Bukit Timah (I think) as that's the worst war area apart from Battle of Pasir Panjang and Battle of Choa Chu Kang. I bet this is due to Jap high morale to win over Brit despite of the army strength.

    Not to forget that the Brit had the gun place at the other side not knowing Jap come down from Johor.

    As for the British traitor, the person is a Captain named Patrick Stanleyu Vaughan Heenan.

  4. #44
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    sing
    Posts
    3,353

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    What battle?
    Since when the British were prepared to fight to the death to defend coloured people who were their colonial subjects.

    There was no intention nor will to fight.

    Even the UK war HQ was not prepared to commit large resources to fight a war so far away defending a small island, when England itself was under attack by Hitler's Nazi war machine.

  5. #45

    Cool Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    I remember my history teacher taught me before that in history, there is no "WHAT IF".
    It has ALREADY HAPPENED. That's why it is called history.

    I think what is more important is to know the reasons why Singapore fell to Japan, and to learn from it, so that history doesn't repeat itself.

    No offence to the TS. i think he's a very well-read man.


  6. #46
    Senior Member zac08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    East
    Posts
    11,755

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Quote Originally Posted by pro_FHM View Post
    I remember my history teacher taught me before that in history, there is no "WHAT IF".
    It has ALREADY HAPPENED. That's why it is called history.

    I think what is more important is to know the reasons why Singapore fell to Japan, and to learn from it, so that history doesn't repeat itself.

    No offence to the TS. i think he's a very well-read man.

    More of a discussion. I mean, if you can have the chance to travel thru time, would you try to change history? Here's a discussion on other possible senarios.

  7. #47

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Nikon & Canon

  8. #48

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    I think someone mentioned an important point... that this is not their fight in malaya for the brits, kiwis and etc. and it is an important lesson that we must learn today..... no one will fight the battle for you if you do not help yourself. However, we should be grateful that they have stayed and sacrifice their lives.

    back to the question.
    Once the line has reached straits of johor, the fate for singapore is doomed in 1942. Hence, if the allies were able to hold the japs in malaya, further up north --away from the arti fire, Yamashita will not be credited for clearing the malaya in record time. But the allied air cover and naval for the region is definitely lacking and was of no matched to the axis.

    Based on air, land and sea.... it is a matter of time only ( how long ) Singapore will fall.

  9. #49
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    near the Equator
    Posts
    1,255

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Let's look at this in a more radical light.

    What if there was a coup launched against Percival by a high-level Australian Imperial Forces commander (remember they did not look kindly on the High Command's messy retreat plan) and they seized control of the materiel?

    Consequently, reinforcements could have been made to the main roads leading to the CBD.

    Would the Battle of Singapore have been as bloody as the Battle of Fallujah? At that stage, the SSVF, local pro-communist fighters and Dalforce could have been given free rein in their attacks, something like the Fedayeen's role in the Iraq War.

    Possible? Let's hear some views.
    Last edited by LazerLordz; 17th June 2007 at 12:07 PM.
    We live in an age when unnecessary things are our only necessities. - Oscar Wilde

  10. #50

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    B4 the reinforcement has arrived, the battle would be long gone anyway. Same take... longer time but same effect. I think you're refering to the Aussie Maj Gen, what if they initiate a coup.... to initiate a coup or mutiny is very hard >>> if you're right, you will be heroes and wrong, traitors. Remember the allied is a coalition forces of many nationals....

  11. #51

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    The Brits failed to learn the lessons from the Germans' Ardennes offensive during the opening phases of invasion of France in summer of 1940 - undersetimating the abilities of tanks to travel on rough & "impassable" terrain.

    Also, Percival was lacking in both resolve & tactical ingenuity...
    hasta la justicia siempre

  12. #52
    Senior Member zac08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    East
    Posts
    11,755

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Quote Originally Posted by LazerLordz View Post
    Let's look at this in a more radical light.

    What if there was a coup launched against Percival by a high-level Australian Imperial Forces commander (remember they did not look kindly on the High Command's messy retreat plan) and they seized control of the materiel?

    Consequently, reinforcements could have been made to the main roads leading to the CBD.

    Would the Battle of Singapore have been as bloody as the Battle of Fallujah? At that stage, the SSVF, local pro-communist fighters and Dalforce could have been given free rein in their attacks, something like the Fedayeen's role in the Iraq War.

    Possible? Let's hear some views.
    Now let's talk about a protracted guerilla warfare. That may work in malaya where there is plenty of land and hiding zones. But in SG, we're limited by space and also given away by plenty of spies, thus the likelihood was low of any chance of winning. Plus, lack of weapons and training was also a negative point.

    In Iraq, the allies has another problem, publicity. They had to be the good guys and weren't allowed to be too cruel. Do you think that would have bothered the Japanese?
    Michael Lim
    My Flickr Site

  13. #53
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    187

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Mind you, we are talking of tactics and strategies that are of the olden era. As the saying goes, " the best defence is offence". I strongly hold on to this, and as such, would judge that the "Impregnable Fortress" was a title made to fail in the first place.

    No one should dig in and wait without knowing what to do, but one should have an offensive counter to any potential enemy that may come at anytime. I think the British forces would have won if they were to carry out an offensive strategy, however, by assuming a defender role and wait out the bombardment from the Japs, they are indeed wasting away resources and spirit of the soldiers, a sure-die situation.

    The correct thing I would suggest for them, was to attack northwards, bringing the enemy front line up towards at least the position of Kuala Lumpur, consolidate their position and resupply( and most definitely through revolutionary Anti-Jap guerilla fighters). That way, the battle is quickly brought up outside of our homeland. In the meantime, Singapore being a centre of communication , have the infra structure to coordinate for reinforcements. The reinforcements should infiltrate from the north, somewhere between Thailand and Malaysia, sandwiching the Jap troops now being pushed up north by the Singapore British troops, then WHAM!!!! The Japs are not stupid, knowing this, they wouldn't even dare counter attack at their state of orbat, we would have seen a Jap retreat and subsequent surrender in our history book today. And also we wouldn't think that the British troops are here just to enjoy the land and have a holiday too, but we do think so today

    However, to give due credits where its due, the British soldiers fought heroically in India against the Japs, bringing them down to their knees, to that I give a wooyay!! This goes to show that the British had the might, but was greatly hampled by bad leadership and strategies.
    Last edited by nikontiger; 17th June 2007 at 03:39 PM.

  14. #54

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    It is impossible to defend Singapore in 1942, what’s making it defendable in 2007?

    When it is so difficult to defend the city, why not open the gate and let the enemy come in and occupy it. Then close the gate and lay siege to the city? Now you are the attacker and your enemy is the defender.

    Do not blame the uselessness of the Britons for our downfall.
    We chose to belief in white supremacy (until today) and passed them the responsibility to defend us.

    History tells us that all the bloodiest battles (along Muar River and in Bukit Timah Hill) that had inflicted heavy casualty on our enemy were fought by the locals and indigenous people, who were badly out numbered and ill equipped with inferior weapons.

  15. #55
    Deregistered
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    East Coast
    Posts
    187

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Quote Originally Posted by Silence Sky View Post
    It is impossible to defend Singapore in 1942, what’s making it defendable in 2007?

    When it is so difficult to defend the city, why not open the gate and let the enemy come in and occupy it. Then close the gate and lay siege to the city? Now you are the attacker and your enemy is the defender.

    Do not blame the uselessness of the Britons for our downfall.
    We chose to belief in white supremacy (until today) and passed them the responsibility to defend us.

    History tells us that all the bloodiest battles (along Muar River and in Bukit Timah Hill) that had inflicted heavy casualty on our enemy were fought by the locals and indigenous people, who were badly out numbered and ill equipped with inferior weapons.
    That's a totally weird way of carrying out warfare in your understanding , I hope you're not a Singaporean who still have to defend S'pore... Nevertheless, I won't go any further than that. But one statement which I truly agree with you, is this " We chose to belief in white supremacy (until today) and passed them the responsibility to defend us."

    In context, we have to understand also how the British got here in the first place, we can't isolate the WW2 era, without going back to the European Colonisation period, as well as Chinese history, Arab history etc...... its all connected. But nothing will ever beat defending our own country ourselves, provided we could.
    Last edited by nikontiger; 17th June 2007 at 04:29 PM.

  16. #56

    Default Re: Military Discussion : Battle of Singapore (Feb 1942)

    Singapore may last a little longer if they (Brits) tried, but the end result will still be defeat, with more bloodshed. They simply got no reinforcements to start with, and the Japs had both the experience and the drive, whereas the Brits were left to their own.

    Even if Yamashita conceded that it was a bluff, due to forces spread thin and running out of ammo and logistics, he had RADM (then) Kondo's fleet to provide support and suppression against the British forces.

    The situation was a goner, given the level of preparedness the Brits had then.

    My dua-puluh sen.
    from guitars, cars to dslr...

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •