Was japan successful in their attack of SouthEast Asia?Why is it so?is it becaus

Question:

Was japan successful in their attack of SouthEast Asia?Why is it so?is it because of military, leadership etc.

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: Some of the reasons for Japans opening sucess in Asia, stems from the fact that no decleration of war was made on any of the powers attacked. Also due to the European conflict many of the forces from the area had been stripped to bolster the war there. Th bulk of Australian forces where in North Africa, The British/Indian forces where also removed in 1939 - 1940 and replaced with terratorial divisions, then conscripted forces once the 1940 defeats in france had taken place. The French had no forces left and allowed the Japenese to use Indo China as a staging post as they could not defend their area. The Dutch only had a few naval and garrison troops in the Java area. The Americans had some small forces dotted around the Phillapines and outposts trailing back to the Hawian chain for logistical support only.
The Japanese where given a golden opportunity to obtain the resources it required when the Soviets signed a non aggression treaty with them and removed the dangers from the Manchurian frontier area in 1941 and the Chinese goverment practically suspended hostilities to concentrate on the Communist internal threat.
The actual leadership of the armed forces where not much better than the Allied generals, the problem was the training and preperations. The Japanese forces had been fighting for almost 10 years and honed there forces to perfection, the new Zero fighters, medium range bombers where superior to any Allied aircraft in the arena. The Navy outweighed the strength of any Squadron it would meet once Pearl Harbour had happened. The tactics of the Land forces used the natural terrain a lot better than anyone else and they where not that bothered by the huge logistical support the Allies required.
Then there was the poor positions the Allied forces found themselves in. Thailand allied herself with the Japanese Empire once the Invasion of Malaya started, much like the Belgium and Dutch forces in 1940 giving the Empire troops the Headache to invade a Neutral Country or not to improve positions. So allowing the amphibious forces a free unopposed landing. Then what was thought to be unpeneterable jungle was bypassed by small forces which attacked the rear of prepared defences. The forward airfields where taken quickly without any demolition work allowing the Japanese to use airpower closer to targets. The civil population was unready for total war and caused problems in rear areas.
As the japanese commands said, the first year had great sucess for the forces, but then the American Industrial might started to kick in, troops where rushed from North Africa back to defened Australia and India and Naval forces where built up in Ceylon and Kenya from the British fleets after all German Capital Warships where destroyed and along with the rebuilt American force where able to stop and reverse the Japanese forces.
If the treatment of the captured Military and Civilian population had been forseen before the defeats of 1942, then I am sure the surrenders that happened at Bataan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Rangoon and the Dutch East Indies would have been different and the Japs would have had a much harder time.