Was watching this (very long) video on an alternative history scenario where the US joins Germany and the Central Powers in WWI instead of the UK and the Entente Powers. I was wondering what 'dopers think would have happened if this came to pass. Don’t tell me why the US wouldn’t have joined Germany and the Central Powers, as I know this is all highly unlikely…tell me what you think would have happened in the alternative universe where this actually occurred. You don’t need to watch the video in order to give your thoughts on this, in fact I don’t expect many to actually do that.
If you’ve read your Turtledove you know it leads to trench warfare across Virginia.
Outside of that, it would depend on when. If the US joined the war early - 1915 or so - it would lead to a definitive victory for the Central Powers. The UK and France also having to fight the US Navy or be blockaded? Not good for France and survival level for the UK.
It’s hard to imagine how the US gets ground troops in-theater quickly, though, without friendly French ports.
Also, how much would the Canadians get involved. Even with the mother country threatened would they wish to antagonize the colossus to their south? Or would the US decide it was time to finally annex those provinces we couldn’t take back in 1812?
But in Turtledove’s series on the Great War the South was an independent nation who had won (well, a stalemate) with the Union and was allies with the UK while the remnant Union was allied with the Germans. This would be a unified US just as it was in our timeline but instead of siding with the UK and Entente they side with Germany and the CP.
I don’t see the US getting any troops to Europe, so that would be out. Also, no way the US Navy could take on the Royal Navy at this time in history. It would, however, seriously stretch the Entente allies to the breaking point. The British would have to pen in the German Navy AND the US Navy, and the US could be a spoiler wrt sea commerce raiding. Plus, as you mentioned, there is Canada. I doubt the US could conquer Canada in this time frame (at least not until we had spun up our industry and drafted a bigger army) but it would have meant that all those Canadian troops set to Europe or in Europe might have needed to be recalled. Not sure about Australia though.
Ok, The American navy had less thna a dozen dreadnoughts, the British navy had almost three times that, so unless by some miracle we were able to join up with the Germans at exactlt the right time, I dont think the USA could have really challenged Royal navy. Even with the USNs’ 10 dreadnuaughts, and the High Seas Fleets 16, the RN had 28 ready (plus battlecruisers) .
However, the RN wouldnt have been able to leave their coast to attack us, either. Having a USA base, German raiders and U-boats would have had a field day, not to mention our cruisers. No food would have gotten to the British isles. They would have starved in a few years.
We could have invaded Canada, of course, and pretty much walked in.
So, it was a tight won thing anyway, and without the USA it would have been a stalemate. With the USA on the Central Powers side, they would have won. But it would have been nasty and long.
Don’t have to beat the Royal Navy. Just have to keep it busy long enough to give the German Navy some room to operate in.
Could the Australians be distracted? Possibly. But on the flip side, while it would be difficult for the US to bring land troops to Europe, it wouldn’t be hard to get the to Ireland. A division of marines roaming around the island would sure put a hurt on the UK. Ireland was already restless and US troops might actually flip the country.
In addition, I’m going to assume that UK and French colonies in the Caribbean would be up for grabs. The US could freely grab Bahamas, Barbados, Jamaica and so forth. Hell Bermuda alone would be an excellent forward base for protecting the American coast from harm.
Maybe even lure Mexico into the war - no Zimmerman telegram, after all - with the promise of Belize from the UK.
But Ireland’s the real prize. The US could never annex it. But creating a backed up Ally right on the British coast? Not a happy day for the crown.
French colonies are much more problematic, being further away on average - Africa and SE Asia. But should the US decide to enter the war I don’t think it’s unreasonable that - win or lose - the US would gain territory. Even a victorious UK would have trouble reclaiming their colonies.
WRT the dreadnoughts/battleships it took around 3 years at that time to produce a new one, and I doubt that this would have been substantially shortened even with a ramp up of war time production in the US, so no way to really shift the balance of power in any meaningful way wrt the RN. I think you are right about German bases in the US being key…US submarines at that time were pretty bad, but the Germans would have had a much easier time strangling UK trade if they had bases and support right here in the US. The US did have a lot of destroyers as well that could have been used for interdiction…the US just would have had to avoid any sort of head to head confrontation with the RN (not sure about UK raids on the US…the video talks about the RN shelling US coastal towns, but not sure how realistic that would be, at least anything more than a quick in and out raid).
The US had no real air force or even army at this time, though I think we started building up some things in 1916 wrt expansion. We obviously wouldn’t have gotten any tech transfers from France and the UK, but perhaps some from Germany? Armor would have definitely been out, but wonder what we could or would have done wrt air craft?
Yes, and we forget surface raiders were a big deal. Rather than the USA impounding several German raiders, we’d have given them a base, and sent our own cruisers out.
Moving food into England would have been tough. No way from Canada, the USN could have cut that off quickly.
Food & war materials coming from India, Africa and Australia would have had a tough time. Troopships would have been sunk.
If the American intervention has started after Canada sent most of their boys to the trenches, yes, we could have walked into Canada. Otherwise, a naval blockade would have been easy. No way the RN could afford half their Grand Fleet to come over and give the USN a drubbing.
Is the US all-in, à la after Pearl Harbor? That creates an interesting quandary on what to do about Canada. It wouldn’t be hard to invade but do we want to try and occupy all of Canada? Could Canada be threatened to stay out of the war? Would that make much of a difference on the continent?
If the US is in early, say 1915, how long before US manufacturing starts to take over the war? (A major factor in WW II was that the US out-produced everybody else combined during the conflict.) I can’t see the US landing troops in Europe (even Ireland) but they could exhaust the economies of France and UK. That might be enough to force an armistice, especially if the US would allow decent terms. Early US entry probably keeps Italy from joining the Entente.
Can Germany hold out that long, though? They might be content to sit behind the trenches until the US can ramp up but do the Russians/Soviets ever get back into the war? Austria-Hungary was already in serious decay and I don’t know if they can survive even if the Axis eventually win.
I think a big factor was that every country in Europe was on the ropes by 1917 after three years of fighting. It was just a question of which country would collapse first. American intervention on the side of the Entente was like a blood transfusion; it gave the Entente powers a quick boost. Germany, which didn’t get that boost, collapsed.
If the United States had entered the war on Germany’s side, I think the reverse would have happened. It would have been Britain and France that would have collapsed in the face of American intervention.
I’ve made this argument before and people have accused me of claiming that America “won” the war. That’s not what I’m saying. America’s contribution to WWI was actually relatively small. But it was decisive because the other powers where in such a close balance and already poised to fall. The relatively small push that came from America was enough to decide the outcome either way.
Yeah, I agree with your take on the US impact. No, the US didn’t ‘win’…but we were the fresh forces and resources that tipped the balance that the other powers were precariously standing on. It was a matter of who would have collapsed first, and if the US came into the Central Powers side I think it would be the Entente Powers that would have collapsed first.
We are talking 1917. Germany got a boost from Russia basically dropping out of the war. This allowed them to shift forces and go on the offensive. However, at this time the US also entered the war, with fresh troops and large amounts of supplies, putting more of a strain on Germany wrt their attempted blockade. Instead we’d be talking about helping Germany and hurting the UK/French.
As for AH…yeah, they were pretty close to collapse at this point. Not sure anything would have helped them, though it would be a moral boost to have the US join their side.
World War I was a very close affair. Closer, I’d argue, than the sequel.
It is absolutely impossible for the Entente to win the war if the United States is fighting against them. They bled themselves white winning WITH American help.
Absolutely, in fact, once Hitler commits to war vs Russia*, it is hard to imagine a reliable way for the Axis to win. Perhaps, maybe, if Hitler had treated the Ukrainians as liberated peoples and enlisted them- maybe the USSR would have fallen. Maybe. But them if Imperial Japan attacks the USA, the A-Bomb will come in, and then- Boom.
- there are some interesting Diplomatic possibilities earlier in the war.
In fact, I would go it one step further-without US help, the Entente wouldn’t win. It would be a horrible stalemate, likely finally in a brokered peace no one is happy with.
My WAG is that Germany would get to keep it’s Eastern gains, but give up anything in the West, plus it’s colonies. Everyone would go back to re-arming.
Germany screwed that one up big time. Russia asked for terms in 1917. Germany knew its last chance to win the war was to end the war in the East, shift troops to the West, and knock France and Britain out before American supplies and troops could arrive in substantial numbers. They had a window of opportunity and they needed to act fast.
And what did they do? Make exorbitant demands on Russia. So much so they shocked the Russian negotiators. Russia delayed for weeks before finally being forced to accept the German terms.
It was a double disaster for Germany. First, they delayed the movement of their troops to the west by dragging out the negotiations. Second, the terms they imposed on Russia horrified Britain and France. It hardened their resolve to keep fighting rather than accept a similar treaty from Germany.
It ended up blowing up in the Germany’s face. When the Germans would later complain that the terms of Versailles were too harsh, people would point out that the terms they offered at Brest-Litovsk had been far harsher. And Germany’s surrender in the west effectively negated the gains they had made at Brest-Litovsk. With Germany defeated, the Soviet Union renounced the treaty.
Some people have referred to the German government under the Kaiser as a kind of “nazi-lite”. Germany was already starting to push around its neighbors and a victory in WW1 would have left them a much bigger country with colonies from which to project their power. I see a Hitler - like dictator rising up with a mantra of the “master race” and wanting to 'finish the job" by starting a new war.
This is a chilling thought. What would have happened?
1 ) Russia, UK, and France would be German pawns.
2 ) No civil rights in the 1960’s, the USA becoming more imperialistic.
3 ) More Nazi extermination camps.
4 ) Hitler being who he might declare war with the USA at a later date, and with the USA developing nuclear weapons, first and Germany likely second, it’s a nuclear war, not a cold war.
5 ) The Space race is between the USA and Germany, Germany would have the edge early.
Just interested; how do you think US troops would have got to Europe? Troop ships?
I question how well the Royal Navy could have blockaded the American coast if they had lost Canada and would have to go all the way back home to refuel and resupply.
Why would it need to do that. It had already closed the channel and all points north of Scapa Flow, and the Mediterranean was sealed off. BOOM:
I don’t think a lot of American troops would have gone to Europe. Most of the American war effort to Europe would have been things like food, military supplies, and money (which is what historically was the majority of what America provided to Birtain and France). American troops would have been fighting in Canada and the Caribbean.
I’m guessing your question is directed at the British blockade. And, yes, that would have been a big problem for America and Germany. But not an insurmountable one. Britain did have a numerical advantage in naval strength but it wasn’t as dominant as some people think. They were able to keep the German navy in check by focusing all of their resources in the North Sea. With America in the war, the British fleet would have had to spread out all over the world. The blockade fleet would have had to be considerably reduced.
And British policy was that keeping its navy was its top priority - even higher than maintaining the blockade or advancing the war effort. So in the face of a significant risk, the British would have stepped away from a battle rather than take a chance of losing that battle.
That’s right. They always step away.