# US alternate history in Second World War **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 26, 2012, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323 "2012-06-26T04:17:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 5:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/21 "2012-06-27T05:12:53Z")
> [@quant18](#): > > The usual hand-wavey way around this is to imagine that Japan discovered the Daqing oilfield two decades early. There’s actually an alternate history comic book in Japan based on this counterfactual (覇者の戦塵). I guess this is a pretty popular theory in Anglophone alternate history circles too; if you Google “What if Japan discovered the Daqing oilfield” you get a bunch of threads of varying levels of plausibility on that theme as well, but I don’t know of any English novels about it. Thanks, I’ve never about any AH using that POD. I’ll look into that. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![cckerberos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@cckerberos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cckerberos)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/22 "2012-06-27T05:32:57Z")
> [@quant18](#): > > The usual hand-wavey way around this is to imagine that Japan discovered the Daqing oilfield two decades early. There’s actually an alternate history comic book in Japan based on this counterfactual (覇者の戦塵). I guess this is a pretty popular theory in Anglophone alternate history circles too; if you Google “What if Japan discovered the Daqing oilfield” you get a bunch of threads of varying levels of plausibility on that theme as well, but I don’t know of any English novels about it. I think 覇者の戦塵 is a series of novels. You might be thinking of Jipang? Re the OP: I think FDR would have gotten us into the war one way or another, even without Pearl Harbor. ---
**Author:** ![supery00n](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5f9b8f/32.png) [@supery00n](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/supery00n)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 7:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/23 "2012-06-27T07:07:49Z")
> [@Boyo\_Jim](#): > > Roosevelt was looking for a way to get into the war to support England before Pearl Harbor, and I’m reasonably confident that the U-boat war would have eventually escalated enough to provide a pretext. Once in an alliance with Great Britain, there is a very good chance that the US would have been drawn into a Pacific war by virtue of Japanese attacks on British Asian colonies. We can agree to disagree, but if you’re correct on this point, then I guess you have a low opinion of Roosevelt keeping his campaign promises… ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/24 "2012-06-27T07:08:54Z")
My speculation. Both Germany and Japan overestimated how much power Roosevelt had. They were dictatorships and they assumed the top guy could pretty much do what he wanted. So they discounted Congressional opposition to war. I think Japan could have bypassed the Philippines and other American possessions and just attacked the Dutch East Indies and Malaysia. These were where the oilfields they wanted were located. The Philippines were just important because they lay across the route between the oilfields and Japan. The United States didn’t declare war when France or the Netherlands were overrun nor when Japan occupied French Indochina. Nor did the United States declare war when Britain, China, or the Soviet Union were attacked. It seems likely to me that the only thing that would have caused Congress to declare war would have been an attack on an American possession. So let’s say Japan attacks southeast Asia but avoids any American possessions. And let’s say the United States protests greatly and imposes economic sanctions - but stops short of war. The British and Free Dutch wouldn’t have been able to defend their east Asian colonies and Japan would have secured the resources it needed to defy American economic sanctions. Hitler might have joined Japan in a war against the United States in 1941 but he wasn’t going to start one of his own. So Germany would have just continued its war against the British Commonwealth and Soviet Union. The United States would have continued its program of economic aid to these powers. And the United States would have continued its atomic bomb program (which pre-dated Pearl Harbor) and were based on fears of an equivalent German program. I think the Soviet Union would have beaten Germany eventually even if America stayed out of the war. Britain would have been on the winning side but it wouldn’t have been able to counter-balance the Soviets with the Americans. So continental Europe would have ended up under Soviet control just as Eastern Europe historically did. Japan would have eventually subdued China for the most part. The United States looking for allies to balance the Soviets would have had to accept a Japanese Empire as a fait accompli. The Americans would have an atomic bomb but it would remain a theoretical threat that had never been used in actual warfare. The British would have gradually lost their empire as they historically did. You might have seen proxy wars in Africa and southern Asia with Soviet-backed rebels fighting American-backed British regimes and American-backed rebels fighting Soviet-backed French and Dutch regimes. ---
**Author:** ![Boyo\_Jim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/87869e/32.png) [@Boyo\_Jim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Boyo_Jim)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 7:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/25 "2012-06-27T07:18:02Z")
> [@supery00n](#): > > We can agree to disagree, but if you’re correct on this point, then I guess you have a low opinion of Roosevelt keeping his campaign promises… Neither of us will ever know if I’m correct on this point. I suppose our disagreement will be eternal, and eternally meaningless. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![Randvek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/a6a055/32.png) [@Randvek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Randvek)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 7:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/26 "2012-06-27T07:23:18Z")
I can envision a world in which America never fought Japan, but I can’t envision one in which America never fought an aggressive Nazi Germany. Really, the only reason it took us so long to get involved is that we kind of liked the idea of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union beating the tar out of each other. What happens to the Cold War if we step in right away and don’t let Russian infrastructure go to hell in the German onslaught might be the better alternate history question… ---
**Author:** ![Bartman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/779978/32.png) [@Bartman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bartman)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/27 "2012-06-27T14:21:56Z")
> [@supery00n](#): > > If the USA had not gone to war when mainland Britain was under threat of invasion (Battle of Britain), and when mainland China was invaded, why would it have gone to war when a Dutch colony was invaded? I think there was a clear understanding in the US by '41, that this wasn’t a second great war. It wasn’t a bunch of Europeans having a squabble with no direct consequence for Americans. Polls were clearly moving in a pro-war direction and had been since the war had started. Americans were increasingly of the opinion that the wars were becoming an existential crisis, that the US was going to end up at war sooner or later, and most likely sooner. The US may have not declared war in December in response to a Japanese on the Dutch. But it was going to be yet another provocation, and the US was almost certainly going to eventually be at war with an expansionist Japan. It’s not that the Dutch East Indies were more important than China. It’s that the DEI, plus China, plus French Indochina, plus Thailand, plus Burma, etc. was more important than just China. Here is some poll data (all Gallup) 1938-Sep-23 - 73% favor keeping mandatory arms embargo 1939-Jun-29 - 51% favor keeping mandatory arms embargo 1939-Sep-22 - 62% favor repealing mandatory arms embargo …by 1941-Sep-4 - 62% approved limited naval warfare with Germany by 1941-Nov-19 - 72% considered “defeating the Axis” as “the biggest job facing the nation” At the same time the US was gearing up to war. The draft had been instituted the army had already gone from less than 200 thousand men to 1.6 million, and was still rapidly expanding. The navy had also grown but not as much. But the Navy generally had a long lead time. In '39 the US had 5 aircraft carriers and 1 under construction. By Pearl we had 8 and 11 under construction. I think the US was clearly gearing up both mentally and materially to fight (primarily the Germans). But if the Japanese hadn’t attacked the US. The US would have eventually attacked the Japanese. And with Wake, Guam, the Philippines, and a massive advantage in men and ships. It wouldn’t have been any better for them than the actual time line was. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [June 27, 2012, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/28 "2012-06-27T19:07:13Z")
> [@supery00n](#): > > All of your statements except the last sentence make perfect sense. Can you please explain how attacking the Dutch East Indies is a sufficient condition of attacking the US Navy? I’m not sure I get your confusion as you seem to have read all of my posts in this thread. The only thing I can think of is perhaps you are unaware that Borneo was part of the DEI. The US Navy was located in the Dutch East Indies, thus attacking the DEI meant attacking the US Navy. Tarakan and Balikpapan were both major ports for shipping oil from some of the largest sources of oil in the DEI and both were invaded by the Japanese. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/29 "2012-06-29T00:29:55Z")
> [@supery00n](#): > > If Japan hadn’t attacked Pearl Harbor or the Philippines, and had never throughout the course of its war in the Pacific and in China, attacked any U.S. ship, base, civilian or military property, and had not killed any U.S. soldiers or civilians, but did invade and conquer the Indonesian archipelago, New Guinea, Southeast Asia, and selectively “skipped over” the Philippines and Hawaii, and neither did any of the Axis powers do anything of the above that Japan did not do, could Roosevelt ever had successfully asked Congress for a declaration of war? I doubt it very seriously. There was too much isolationism in the United States. I cannot see the United States going to war to defend Indonesia, or even China without a Japanese strike against the United States. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/30 "2012-06-29T00:34:55Z")
> [@supery00n](#): > > If the U.S. had not entered the Second World War, and it had been fought to a victorious conclusion by the British Empire and the Soviet Union, although not necessarily an unconditional surrender, but a decisive military victory more conclusive than the victory won by the Triple Entente in the First World War but less so than unconditional surrender, would: > -America have developed an atom bomb, or have completed/started the Manhattan Project? > -Assuming the Soviet Union emerged the victor on the Eastern Front and on the Manchurian front, much as it did in actuality, but with significantly more casualties on the former and a greater length of the war by not more than a year, would the Soviet Union be the sole superpower in the world? If so, how much more powerful would the Soviet Union be than the British Empire and the United States? > -Comparing the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. directly in such a situation, could America, having stayed out of the war as I assumed it occurred, have become a superpower purely on its potential military strength as estimated by its economy, or would the gap between the U.S.S.R. and the USA, as a consequence of the latter’s non-participation, have become large enough militarily so that the U.S.A couldn’t be considered an equal in military sense? There are too many if’s here. I do not think the Soviet Union would have survived without American entry into the war. Hitler never wanted to fight Great Britain. If Germany had conquered the Soviet Union to the Ural Mountains I think is is likely that Winston Churchill would have been replaced by a British leader who would have signed a peace treaty with Hitler. Great Britain would have remained free. The British Empire would have remained intact. Germany would have ruled the continent of Europe. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/9d8465/32.png) [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Deal_Democrat)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/31 "2012-06-29T00:38:12Z")
> [@supery00n](#): > > Ignoring all of the alternate history above, with the only distinction being that the Manhattan project failed and the scientists in the project were stumped before the end of the war, before either the US or the USSR obtained nuclear weapons, was there a significant difference between the military strength in a purely conventional sense between the two nations? More to the point, would you be worried about _ **losing** _ a total conventional war against the Soviet Union in 1945 (assuming you’re American I guess), as Germany did against them, if neither of the two nations would throughout the course of the war obtain the atom bomb or H bomb, or would you feel assured of victory in the end, and only be aghast at the cost of lives necessary to achieve that end? If it came down to an unconditional surrender, would you feel confident that you, and not Stalin, would be the victor? According to the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey Japan would have surrendered without the use of the atomic bomb. During the Second World War the Soviet Union lost an estimated 27 million dead and one third of its industrial and farm plant, so it was in a poor position to threaten Western Europe, much less the Untied States. ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/32 "2012-06-29T02:49:33Z")
> [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > There are too many if’s here. I do not think the Soviet Union would have survived without American entry into the war. They survived Barbarossa on their own, after which Germany was on the losing end of a war of attrition. There is no reason to believe that Germany would have defeated the USSR had the US remained neutral. The German army and their allies had been so badly savaged by Barbarossa and the winter fighting that the 1942 summer offensive was only conducted on the southern third of the front. > [@](#): > > Hitler never wanted to fight Great Britain. Nonsense. He made it perfectly clear that he wanted to fight Great Britain by invading Poland on September 1, 1939 after the UK had guaranteed it’s independence. > [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > During the Second World War the Soviet Union lost an estimated 27 million dead and one third of its industrial and farm plant, so it was in a poor position to threaten Western Europe, much less the Untied States. They also ended the war with the largest army in history, with most of it in Central Europe. > [@New\_Deal\_Democrat](#): > > I doubt it very seriously. There was too much isolationism in the United States. I cannot see the United States going to war to defend Indonesia, or even China without a Japanese strike against the United States. See **Bartman’s** post concerning the actual degree of isolationist sentiment in the US. See my other posts and note that the US Navy was deployed to the Dutch East Indies, so a move against them would mean attacking the US. Perhaps you should stick to threads explaining why you think blacks are genetically inferior. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/33 "2012-06-29T03:09:59Z")
> [@Dissonance](#): > > I’m not sure I get your confusion as you seem to have read all of my posts in this thread. The only thing I can think of is perhaps you are unaware that Borneo was part of the DEI. The US Navy was located in the Dutch East Indies, thus attacking the DEI meant attacking the US Navy. Tarakan and Balikpapan were both major ports for shipping oil from some of the largest sources of oil in the DEI and both were invaded by the Japanese. There were American forces stationed in China when Japan attacked that country. American troops and ships even came under fire. But the United States didn’t regard that as a cause for war. Nor did the United States regard it as a cause for war when American ships were attacked by the Germans in the Atlantic. I’m going to stick with what I said earlier - Congress wasn’t going to declare war in 1941 for any reason less than an attack on American territory. And the reason I say this is because that’s what happened in history. ---
**Author:** ![supery00n](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5f9b8f/32.png) [@supery00n](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/supery00n)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/34 "2012-06-29T05:25:14Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > There were American forces stationed in China when Japan attacked that country. American troops and ships even came under fire. But the United States didn’t regard that as a cause for war. Nor did the United States regard it as a cause for war when American ships were attacked by the Germans in the Atlantic. > > I’m going to stick with what I said earlier - Congress wasn’t going to declare war in 1941 for any reason less than an attack on American territory. And the reason I say this is because that’s what happened in history. Debate won, if no response. That’s exactly what I think too. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![oreally](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ab992/32.png) [@oreally](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/oreally)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 6:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/35 "2012-06-29T06:14:50Z")
> [@Scumpup](#): > > WRT the US developing military might despite non-involvement in the war: take a look at real history. The stuff we had at the beginning of the war was not the same stuff we were using at the end. It was the war itself that drove us to develop and improve weapons. If we sat things out, being able to manufacture huge amounts of ca. 1940-ish tanks and planes and whatnot would have been of dubious value. War has been more responsible for technological advances than anything else in mankind’s history, and it’s not even close. Are we warped or what? PS there is absolutely no way UK and USSR defeat Germany without us. None. Hell even with us it was one helluva fight. ---
**Author:** ![oreally](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7ab992/32.png) [@oreally](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/oreally)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 6:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/36 "2012-06-29T06:19:15Z")
> [@Dissonance](#): > > Perhaps you should stick to threads explaining why you think blacks are genetically inferior. Sweet the race card. :thumbs up: Isn’t it great how many unrelated threads that is inserted into? The man oppressin! Reparations! You go girlfriend! All hail the almighty race card! Nothing can stand in its wake!! :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 6:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/37 "2012-06-29T06:43:55Z")
> [@oreally](#): > > Sweet the race card. :thumbs up: Isn’t it great how many unrelated threads that is inserted into? > > The man oppressin! Reparations! You go girlfriend! All hail the almighty race card! Nothing can stand in its wake!! > > :rolleyes: How was that playing the race card? He merely suggested NDD stick to racist rants about how blacks are inferior to whites. Considering the fact that around 90% of NDD’s posts are on this subject and that NDD regularly espouses views that would cause most people to label him a racist, what’s wrong with the comment? ---
**Author:** ![Dissonance](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@Dissonance](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dissonance)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 7:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/38 "2012-06-29T07:09:15Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > There were American forces stationed in China when Japan attacked that country. American troops and ships even came under fire. But the United States didn’t regard that as a cause for war. Nor did the United States regard it as a cause for war when American ships were attacked by the Germans in the Atlantic. We’ve been down this road before **Little Nemo**. [This](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=14538058&postcount=86) should be familiar, links to cites used are in the original post. > [@Me](#): > > Quote: > > > [@Little Nemo](#): > > > > Because Japan might sink some American naval ships? Japan (and Germany) had attacked other American naval ships and the United States hadn’t declared war. > > Let’s try this one last time. The river gunboat Panay was sunk with the loss of two lives. Japan said it was attacked in error, apologized profusely and paid reparation. There is a newspaper article here from The Straits Times, 27 December 1937, Page 11, AMERICA ACCEPTS JAPAN’S PANAY APOLOGY. There’s a lengthy article on the sinking of the Panay here. Let’s see how things went, shall we? > > > [@](#): > > > > Japan’s government acted quickly to forestall revenge,\*\* issuing a note of apology before the Panay survivors had even reached Shanghai.\*\* Such an action was viewed by Far Eastern analysts as an “unparalleled” gesture. In part the expression of profound regret noted that “…it has been established that the Japanese air force, acting on information that Chinese troops were fleeing from Nanking and were going up the river by steamer, took off in pursuit…(and) owing to poor visibility…the aircraft were unable to discern any mark showing any of them was an American ship or man-of-war.” > > … > > The Japanese responded by forcing Rear Admiral Teizo Mitsunami to take responsibility for the attack and resign. **A second apology** , from the Imperial Japanese Navy, was quickly forthcoming. The United Press wire service noted that the IJN intended that all sailors in its ranks should make an apology to their American counterparts > > … > > It was reported on the wire that “Emperor Hirohito has assumed personal charge of the investigation” and that “His Majesty…is determined to make full amends no matter how humiliating they may be to the armed forces.” > > … > > Admiral Mitsumasa Yonai, the Naval Minister, added his voice to the discussion on Christmas Eve, noting that “I do not know how to apologize for this attack” and suggesting that “imperfect communication and poor visibility” were responsible for the misunderstanding. On Christmas Day, \*\*a third formal apology \*\*was forthcoming in response to Hull’s earlier note that included mention of reparations, acknowledgement of the motorboat attack, and acquiescence to various demands. > > Even leaving aside the intervening four years, you do see that a deliberate, sustained attack on and sinking of some of a light cruiser and destroyers as part of an invasion of the very island they were sent to help defend might draw a slightly different reaction? Particularly since it wouldn’t be followed by three formal apologies from the Japanese government but rather with a Japanese declaration of war on the Dutch? You do see the difference between the two, right? > > The Reuben James, yet again. The US was already at war with Germany when it was sunk, albeit without a formal declaration of war. Let that sink in for a moment, I’ll repeat it: **the US was already at war with Germany**. It was acting as a belligerent vessel in the war. It was escorting the convoy of one belligerent (Britain) and had orders to attack the forces of the other belligerent (Germany) on sight. There is a lengthy US Naval Academy paper here (pdf file) entitled The U.S. Navy, the Neutrality Patrol, and Atlantic Fleet Escort Operations, 1939-1941. From the abstract: > > > [@](#): > > > > Although the United States was officially neutral until 7 December 1941, the U.S. Navy entered World War II on 5 September 1939 when the CNO, Admiral Harold R. Stark, initiated Neutrality Patrol operations in the Caribbean and in waters 200 miles off the coasts of North and South America. During 1940, the Navy conducted battleship sweeps deep into the Atlantic to deter Axis surface raiders and U-boats from entering the Neutrality Zone, and also moved toward a solid Anglo-American alliance, one vehicle being information exchanges between OpNav and the Admiralty. The negotiation of the ABC-1 Agreement in March 1941 increased Anglo-American collaboration. Atlantic Fleet patrols became more aggressive and the fleet doubled in size. By September, the Atlantic Fleet’s Support Force, in conjunction with the Royal Canadian Navy, was ready to commence escort-of-convoy operations, and that same month, Atlantic Fleet destroyers escorted their first convoy from Halifax to Iceland. > > There is a lengthy list here of “Belligerent Acts Prior to US Entry into WW2.” You might want to give it a read, some of the highlights regarding US/German relations: > > > [@](#): > > > > 1941 > > Mar 27. ABC Conference. Atlantic Fleet is to help the Royal Navy convoy ships across the Atlantic. The agreement inextricably links the U.S. Navy in the effort against Germany. > > Mar 30. U S seizes Axis ships in US ports. > > April 10. Niblack (DD-424) a new, Benson class destroyer on “Neutrality Patrol”, rescuing survivors, depth charged a contact off Iceland. > > May 24. USN PBYs from Newfoundland search for Bismarck in the western Atlantic. > > May 26. USN observers flying two separate RAF Catalinas sight Bismarck. British fleet units converge on the lone German capital ship. > > May 27. Roosevelt proclaims unlimited state of emergency, including delivery of supplies to Britain, because of Axis battleship incursion of western Atlantic. > > June 14. US freezes German and Italian assets. > > June 16. US closed German and Italian consulates. > > June 20. FDR addresses Congress concerning the German sinking of U.S. freighter Robin Moor. > > Aug 9 . Atlantic Charter, a strategy meeting in Newfoundland between President FDR and Prime Minister WSC. Agree, when the US enters the war, Germany first. US warships to escort British merchant ships between the United States and Iceland. > > Sept 4 . Recommissioned destroyer Greer (DD-145), tracked U-652 for several hours. Each attacked the other without injury. > > Sep 11. FDR broadcasts “shoot on sight” order. > > Oct 5 . Naval Conference between US and British commanders in Singapore. **[Hey look! Singapore!]** > > Oct 16-Nov 1. DDs escorting Atlantic convoy make depth charge attacks daily after six merchant ships sunk in five hours. > > Oct 28. Screening destroyer Anderson picked up a submarine contact and dropped depth charges noticing “considerable oil slick”. > > Nov 1-4. PBYs and PBMs provide air coverage for convoy ON 31. > > Nov 4 . Omaha (CL-4), Memphis (CL-13) and 3 DDs search for German surface raider. > > Nov 6 . Omaha (CL-4) and Somers (DD-381), en route to Recife, Brazil, returning from the 3,023-mile patrol, captures German blockade runner Odenwald, disguised as U.S. freighter Willmoto, in Atlantic equatorial waters > > Nov 10. First United States-escorted troop convoy, transporting more than 20,000 British troops, in six USN ships sailed from Halifax for the Far East. > > Nov 10-20. DDs attack numerous sound contacts. > > Nov 11. Navy ordered to attack any vessel threatening US shipping. > > Nov 13. Amend Neutrality Act: arm US ships, enter war zones. > > [Quote=Little Nemo] > > Because Japan and the United States had generally hostile relations? Japan and the United States had been having generally hostile relations for years and the United States hadn’t declared war. Umm, this generally hostile relationship had been escalating for years and was headed inexorably on a course to war. I suppose Germany and Poland weren’t going to go to war on 1 Sept 1939. They had generally hostile relations for years up 'til then and hadn’t gone to war. Thus Germany would not declare war on Poland. You do see the error in this logic, right? [Quote=Little Nemo] I realize that the United States took a number of defensive actions before Pearl Harbor. But they were based on the concern that Japan might declare war against the United States. They were not a prelude to an American declaration of war against Japan. [/quote] No, they were not based on the concern that Japan might declare war, they were based on the concern that Japan would initiate hostilities at any moment. Japan’s pattern of starting a war first and declaring war second was well known. The Russo-Japanese war of 1904-05 ringing any bells? [/quote] The sinking of the _Panay_ was in no way remotely comparable to what we are talking about in the DEI in 1941, and the US was already at war with Germany in the Atlantic. By the by, I should note the significance of the US destroyers at Balikpapan being on the way to join Force Z. Force Z was the two British capital ships in the Far East, the Prince of Wales and Repulse, which were sent into the South China Sea to intercept reported Japanese invasion convoys that had been spotted prior to the outbreak of hostilities. Had they been there they would have come under attack by the Japanese twin-engined bombers that sank Force Z. ---
**Author:** ![PrettyVacant](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/49beb7/32.png) [@PrettyVacant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PrettyVacant)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 7:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/39 "2012-06-29T07:45:12Z")
> [@oreally](#): > > PS there is absolutely no way UK and USSR defeat Germany without us. None. Hell even with us it was one helluva fight. That’s not very insightful. So many variables it’s impossible to gauge and taking any one, say the Ploiesti oil fields, out of the equation changes literally everything. As it was, something over 80% of German deaths and casualties occurred on the Eastern Front. Even now, the scale of events on the Eastern Front seems unimaginable. It’s also worth bearing in mind Germany was effectively surrounded by the Soviet Union and British Empire - it had to supply everything from within its boundaries, and the capture of every oil field, coal mine, steel mill, etc had an exponential effect because its production could not be replaced. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [June 29, 2012, 10:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323/40 "2012-06-29T10:26:01Z")
In short, the war lasts longer, Britain develops the nuke, parts of Germany become radioactive. Surrender rapidly follows. Faced with being nuked, Japan negotiates a surrender on advantageous terms. Churchill, who was re-elected due to the war not having been finished, launches a surprise nuclear attack against the Soviet Union, reducing Moscow to radioactive rubble, and the Soviet Union disintegrates into chaos, leading to a return of the Tsar. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-alternate-history-in-second-world-war/626323.md?page=3)