Digital Survivors
 

What if Japan Invaded Mexico in June of 1942?

Scott Manning
September 30, 2006

Discussion of this article is welcome.

In the summer of 1942, US intelligence was reporting that Japan had a large invasion fleet in the Pacific. Due to the weakened security around Japan's communications, the Allied forces knew the target was Alaska. Even better, the Allies knew this was a diversionary tactic while the Japanese focused on their real target: Midway.

Not everyone in high command was convinced though. Some saw this as a feint and with good cause. The Japanese had used numerous feints before the bombing of Pearl Harbor. Targets such as Hawaii and San Francisco were discussed as possible destinations of a larger attack.

One such man who saw the whole thing as a deception was General Patton. In the summer of 1942, the US general was in charge of the I Armored Corps based out of the Southern Californian desert. He had around 20,000 troops practicing maneuvers throughout California, Arizona, and Nevada. This area of America best resembled the desert of North Africa where the Allies needed help fighting German Field Marshal Rommel.

Upon hearing the news that the Japanese had an invasion fleet somewhere in the Pacific, General Patton put his troops into high gear. He believed the most logical spot for the invasion fleet was Mexico. America's southern neighbor had just joined in the war against Japan in May. The general told his troops, "Mexico will not be able to stop any invasion. The beaches of this Lower California Bay are superior for landing a large invasion force. Several hundred thousand men could be landed on this beach! It will be easy to run through Mexico. Los Angeles is only a short distance from Mexico."

The goal of hitting Orange County and Los Angeles would be to take out the two largest producers of aircraft for America at the time. It was all too obvious for General Patton, "Any fool knows this would be the best objective for the Japs. If they knock out our aircraft production and get a force into Los Angeles, we are in for a long war. We will prepare to meet the bastards on the beaches of Mexico!"

The belief that the Japanese were heading for Alaska became stronger, but General Patton was not convinced. "Alaska is not the objective! This is to throw us off. They will never land in Alaska. No war has ever been fought so close to the Artic Circle! The devils will hit Mexico!"

The I Armored Corps learned everything they could about Mexico: railroads, beaches, soil conditions, and population of the towns. With less than 100 miles to travel to get to the northern tip of the California Bay, General Patton was prepared to have his 20,000 troops move in a minute's notice to confront the Japanese within three hours.

The following map is a visual of what such an invasion and response would have looked like.

Patton vs Japan

I Armored Corps was the first group that could have responded and because of General Patton, they were the most prepared. Porter B. Williamson, who served under the general at the time, described the situation among the troops, "We were on such a tight alert no man slept in a bedding roll. Every man slept in uniform. The helmet was the pillow. If we had received orders from Washington to move towards Mexico, every man and every vehicle would have been moving in less than sixty seconds."

This situation lasted for three days until Washington officially reported that the Japanese had indeed invaded Alaska's Kiska Island on June 6th.


Japanese Northern Area Force
border
In reality, the actual targets were some Alaskan islands (Attu and Kiska) to divert the allies attention while a much larger force hit Midway. The Japanese Northern Area Force included nearly 2,500 troops. This is the breakdown of the entire invasion fleet:

  • Northern Area Force Main Body was made up of one cruiser, two destroyers, two oilers, and three cargo ships.
  • Second Carrier Striking Force was made up of two light carriers, two cruisers, three destroyers, and one oiler.
  • The light carriers of the Second Carrier Striking Force were carrying 40 Zeroes, 21 torpedo bombers, and 21 dive bombers.
  • Kiska Invasion Force was made up of two light cruisers, one auxiliary cruiser, three destroyers, two transports, and three mine sweepers. The two transports were carrying 550 troops and 700 labor troops.
  • Attu Invasion Force was made up of one light cruiser, four destroyers, one mine layer, and one troop transport carrying 1,200 troops.
  • Submarine Detatchment made up of six submarines.

The invasion fleet was small, but that was due to the small target.


What if the Japanese invaded Mexico?
border
If General Patton was correct about the Japanese intentions, then 200,000 ground troops would have been needed to accomplish the objective. In which case, the I Armored Corps would have been merely a delay for the Japanese goal while the Allies got their act together to respond properly. The notion of the general's 20,000 unexperienced troops stopping such a force is wishful thinking.

One of General Patton's many shining moments was when he was able to respond quickly to the German attack during the Battle of the Bulge. The summer of 1942 forshadowed this visionary gift, but had the Japanese showed up with 200,000 troops, General Patton would have sadly been nothing more than a brave, dead general at the beginning of a very long war.


References
border
Source for numbers on the Japanese Northern Area Force: Fuchida, Mitsuo and Oqumiya, Masatake (1955). Midway: the battle that doomed Japan, the Japanese Navy's story. Annapolis, MD: United States Naval Institute Press. pp. 296-298.

Source for I Armored Corps' 20,000 troops: Nye, Roger H. (1993). The Patton mind: the professional development of an extraordinary leader. Garden City Park, NY: Avery Publishing Group. pp. 126.

Sources for the story of General Patton's reponse:
Williamson, Porter B. (1988). Gen. Patton's principles for life and leadership. Tuscon, AZ: Management and Systems Consultants. pp. 185-187.

Williamson, Porter B. (1979). General Patton's Principles for Life and Leadership. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. pp. 122-125.


Discuss this article in our forums
border
Agree with the approach of this article? Disapprove? Got something to say? Come talk to us about it.