Make the answer the United States and include a thesis in the first paragraph for the rest of the paper to support.
Must use what Carl Von Clausewitz brings up as good strategy In his book ‘On War’. Also can use his points against Japan if Japan was doing poorly at identifying his points. Also can include points brought up by Alfred Thayer Mahan in ‘the influence of sea power upon history’ about how countries should prepare their navies fro way and how they should employ them. Can go back as far as the first sino Japanese war and any war with United states in it to make a point. Include some of the course themes in the essay: 1. THE INTERRELATIONSHIP OF POLICY,STRATEGY, AND OPERATIONS2. INTELLIGENCE, ASSESSMENT, AND PLANS 3. THE INSTRUMENTS OF WAR 4. THE DESIGN, EXECUTION, AND EFFECTS OF OPERATIONS 5. INTERACTION, REASSESSMENT, AND ADAPTATION 6. WAR TERMINATION
OUTLINE:
1. The United States and the various embargos levied on Japan and the effects it had on Japan and their ability to make war (Vinson Acts).
2. How the united states made the pacific fleet in vast numbers and upgraded the technology in use of aircraft carriers and prepared to go to war with japan through the 1940 conscriptions and the two ocean navy act,
3. how the united states war plan orange and other strategies were developed in the case japan were to ever attack.
Any other points to add about how the united states did better prewar planning and strategy development prior to WW2.
Here is a paragraph how I write, which is not that good but try and match the style:
Russia’s single biggest mistake in the prewar period was not correctly identifying the
nature of the war between them and the Empire of Japan. “The first, the supreme, the most far-
reaching act of judgment that the statesman and commander have to make is to establish… the
kind of war on which they are embarking; neither mistaking it for, nor trying to turn it into,
something that is alien to its nature” (Clausewitz, p. 145). Russia, in all its diplomacy with the
eastern Asian countries, made it very clear that they wanted a warm water port specifically in
Port Arthur and would act on this policy. Japan showed no effort in hiding that they were
interested in expanding into Manchuria and Korea and later that they wished to eliminate
Russian expansion in the region. Japan launched a campaign into eastern Asia that would show
just how strong and technologically advanced her armies had become after the Meiji reformation.
Later called the First Sino-Japanese war, Russian leaders and strategist would not involve
themselves in studying this war to gain a better assessment of the nature of the war, or how their
soon to be enemies would fight this war. Japan had very clear objectives for the war and
formulated its strategy to the gaining of those strategic objectives and implementing policies.
“Elements of this strategy included extensive prewar state building, diplomacy, finance,
industrialization, logistical preparations, intelligence gathering, and the buildup of both land and
naval forces,” (Paine, p. 23). The Russo-Japanese prewar buildup for Japan was the same as it
had been in the Sino-Japanese war, which would have given Russian forces the exact nature of
the war they would have been embarking on. Understanding just how much your adversary is
willing to use in the acquisition of the objectives would also give understanding to the nature of
the war. “The Russians did not appreciate the enormous difference in the value that they, versus
the Japanese, attached to control over Korea and Manchuria,” (Payne, p. 52). The Japanese were
willing to risk more of their total fighting forces for the same objective and understanding of this
by the Russians would have led to a more accurate nature of the war assessment. Showing just
how much Japan valued the object of eastern Asia, many attempts were made by Japan to sort
out the expansions without fighting. If Russian strategist invested in the value of the object, they
would have completed proper net assessment and be better suited for the coming war.