Possibility of US-Canadian War

This is a thoroughly uneducated question, so bear with me.

If US and Britain has fought on opposite sides during WW2 or any equivalent scenario, will Canada stick with British Empire or will it jump immediately to US camp ?
 
If things really looked like the US would be fighting Britain I've always though Canada would try to say neutral. Oh and I mean actual neutrality not US during WW1 and WW2 neutrality.
 
If US and Britain has fought on opposite sides during WW2 or any equivalent scenario, will Canada stick with British Empire or will it jump immediately to US camp ?
I'm only aware of plans made post-World War One, so most of this is based on 1920s-early 1930s information.
"Defense Scheme #1" was the Canadian plan, which called for simultaneous all-out assaults on several cities near the Canadian border (such as Seattle and Albany) at the opening of hostilities. Obviously this was not meant to be a glorious blaze of conquest, but rather to distract as many US forces as possible from invading Canada itself, thereby lessening the effectiveness of the US assault and buying time for assistance from the UK to arrive. When the Canadian forces encountered "significant resistance", the plan was then to swiftly retreat back to Canada, employing scorched earth tactics along the way.
Official British plans are more vague - specifically, they did not exist, as the British government disallowed planning exercises against the United States in order to discourage the Royal Navy from justifying a naval arms race against a nation they viewed as a natural ally. While it would be nice to think Britain would support her dominion(s) to the best of her ability, it was generally accepted that Canada would be effectively abandoned as the British knew the prospect of a large-scale invasion or even just blockading the United States was considered unrealistic at best. It would be a naval war, with the primary objectives of the Royal Navy being to harass American trade and raid the American coast while defending British trade, and above all else to defend the British Isles which were considered devastatingly vulnerable to blockade. By forcing a stalemate, a negotiated settlement would eventually be reached.

The American strategy, "War Plan Red", is as simple as it is ruthless. The primary objective would naturally be to prevent Britain from assisting Canada. Halifax, as a major city and Canada's largest port, would be the primary target, to be secured following a poison gas strike (!) on the city. Securing Quebec City, Montreal and Toronto would capture Canada's major population centers as well as the Great Lakes. This, along with the capture of Winnipeg, would effective cut the country in half and secure Canada's rail system. Vancouver and Victoria would be secured to deny Canada access to the Pacific and greatly hinder British forces in the Pacific from participating in the war directly.
Having secured and isolated Canada from the Empire, US strategy was to simply wait. The US Navy would secure the North American coast and wait for favorable opportunities to engage smaller British fleets. If successful, the advantage would be pressed and British shipping and colonies in the North Atlantic would be targeted. Notably, although the American plans were quite conservative and defense-oriented, British naval planners did not expect to be able to resist a major US Navy attempt to directly blockade the British Isles, which would obviously bring the war and the "stalemate" strategy considerably in the United States' favor.

At the war's conclusion, it was intended that captured British territory (specifically and primarily Canada, though any captured Caribbean/Central American territory would likely also come into play) be annexed: "The policy will be to prepare the provinces and territories of CRIMSON [Canada] and RED [The British Empire] to become states and territories of the BLUE union upon the declaration of peace."

In the event that Canada declared its neutrality in a United States - British Empire conflict, the plan advised that Canada's neutrality be accepted only on the condition that the US be allowed to effectively take over Canadian ports and strategic locations for the duration.

TL;DR version:

Assuming a one-on-one scenario, parts of Canada and probably quite a bit more are going to be joining the United States.
 

Saphroneth

Banned
Of course, for such a war to look actually anything like sane the world political system is going to look VERY different. I guess it's kind of like asking what would happen in the event of an Austria-Germany war in the 1910s.
 
This is a thoroughly uneducated question, so bear with me.

If US and Britain has fought on opposite sides during WW2 or any equivalent scenario, will Canada stick with British Empire or will it jump immediately to US camp ?

It depends on the time period and what the background is. By the 1930s, the U.S. was already Canada's largest trading partner. So economics are always going to be important.

However, until the 1960s, Canada was still culturally and politically very British. Diefenbaker was able to capitalise on St. Laurent's lack of support for the British during suez to help him win the election. There was also a strong 45% of the population that did not want the new maple leaf flag in 1965. That was otl.

In a situation where the Americans have been belligerent or fascist or communist or whatever, I can imagine the pro British sentiment will be higher. That being said, if Britain has fallen to fascism or communism and Canada has not, it could side with the Americans. It all depends on the context.
 
A lot of this depends on the nature of the war. If the US initiated it, it'd probably have been by attacking Canada so the Canucks would have had little choice
 
The US early in the twentieth century had plans drawn up regarding an invasion of New Zealand:

http://www.stuff.co.nz/auckland/local-news/north-shore-times/552755/US-invasion-plan-revealed

The reasoning was that there might be a US-Japanese war, which (due to the 1902 treaty) would drag in the UK and its Empire on the Japanese side. This would presumably apply to Canada as much as New Zealand, so that would function as your POD: somehow get Japan and the US to go to war pre-WWI, with an appropriately interventionist British Government.
 
Here's the divergence :

> Ottomans won Russo-Ottoman War in 1878, and then winning(somehow) the later Great War despite her German and Austrian allies on the account of being much stronger then OTL and no American participation. US and OE then develop a friendly, co-beneficial relations, oil and all.
> The ripple effect being the development of anti-colonial movements being more rapid in Asia and Africa. Ottomans supported Indonesian revolution in late 1920s, and eventually jumped to Indian side during their war of independence against Britain, which also drove American opinion against European colonialism. It raises the question on how Canada will be affected by this experience.
> As reaction to the decline of European empires and rising Islamic and Asian powers as well as radical socialist ideology ruling over Russia (not communism), there rose an intellectual current across Europe that gave birth to Pan-European Far Right movement which took over European countries one by one, banding them into Pan-European coalition. Not exactly fascism, but close enough. Some kind of Geert Wilders ideology on steroids. Their dream of vanquishing "mortal threats on European doorstep" and restore European dominance over the globe drove them into collision against Ottoman Empire and Russia and eventually sparked the second Great War.
 
Here's the divergence :

> Ottomans won Russo-Ottoman War in 1878, and then winning(somehow) the later Great War despite her German and Austrian allies on the account of being much stronger then OTL and no American participation. US and OE then develop a friendly, co-beneficial relations, oil and all.
> The ripple effect being the development of anti-colonial movements being more rapid in Asia and Africa. Ottomans supported Indonesian revolution in late 1920s, and eventually jumped to Indian side during their war of independence against Britain, which also drove American opinion against European colonialism. It raises the question on how Canada will be affected by this experience.
> As reaction to the decline of European empires and rising Islamic and Asian powers as well as radical socialist ideology ruling over Russia (not communism), there rose an intellectual current across Europe that gave birth to Pan-European Far Right movement which took over European countries one by one, banding them into Pan-European coalition. Not exactly fascism, but close enough. Some kind of Geert Wilders ideology on steroids. Their dream of vanquishing "mortal threats on European doorstep" and restore European dominance over the globe drove them into collision against Ottoman Empire and Russia and eventually sparked the second Great War.

The US didn't need oil until after WW2 in OTL in fact they were a major exporter so that would not forge close relations at all.
 
Here's the divergence :

> Ottomans won Russo-Ottoman War in 1878, and then winning(somehow) the later Great War despite her German and Austrian allies on the account of being much stronger then OTL and no American participation. US and OE then develop a friendly, co-beneficial relations, oil and all.

Ugh.

Look, the political and economic landscape of today is not the same as it was in the 1920s. The U.S. provided over three quarters of the WORLD'S oil supply.
 
You have got to be kidding. One of the targets of a Canadian invasion being Albany? Do you realize how far Albany is from the Canadian border.
I could possibly understand Buffalo but not Albany.
 
The US didn't need oil until after WW2 in OTL in fact they were a major exporter so that would not forge close relations at all.

I'm not saying US will depend itself on Ottoman oil. In fact, they'll might form a corner stone to this world's OPEC equivalent or something.

Also, lots of other reasons between two countries to be friends. It's OE that won 1878, so it retains Balkans. Also it will reoccupy Egypt as well. It's still a massive market not to miss. Obviously the same can be said for US from Ottoman perspective. Not to mention that this OE would have Suez Canal. Too many reason not to be enemies.

But that's besides the point. What I want to explore is the relations between US and Europe, especially Britain after a violent Indian revolution and how it will affect Canada that's standing in the middle.
 
I'm not saying US will depend itself on Ottoman oil. In fact, they'll might form a corner stone to this world's OPEC equivalent or something.

Also, lots of other reasons between two countries to be friends. It's OE that won 1878, so it retains Balkans. Also it will reoccupy Egypt as well. It's still a massive market not to miss. Obviously the same can be said for US from Ottoman perspective. Not to mention that this OE would have Suez Canal. Too many reason not to be enemies.

But that's besides the point. What I want to explore is the relations between US and Europe, especially Britain after a violent Indian revolution and how it will affect Canada that's standing in the middle.

Either way it would be in Canada's best interest to not antagonize America because they would be defeated.
 
They will meet certain defeat should they go war against the US.

The question being whether Canadian politics will make enough sense after Indian independence.
 
I have always fully supported the plan that the US declare war on Canada then surrender unconditionally. Let Ottawa deal with it. :p
 
I don't think so

Either way it would be in Canada's best interest to not antagonize America because they would be defeated.

If you Yanks ever want to try you will find out that holding Canada is a lot different that conquering it.

You think Vietnam was bad, Iraq?, just wait till you have IED's going off all over the US because you could not tell us apart from your own people. The majority of English Canada has no accent.

Come to think of it that could make a great ALT discussion.
 
If you Yanks ever want to try you will find out that holding Canada is a lot different that conquering it.

You think Vietnam was bad, Iraq?, just wait till you have IED's going off all over the US because you could not tell us apart from your own people. The majority of English Canada has no accent.

Come to think of it that could make a great ALT discussion.

It wouldnt happen in the modern day because there is no reason but if it happened in the past the US would not care and be as brutal as necessary to conquer it. Vietnam and Iraq are not good comparisons because the US could not invade the source of supplies in Vietnam or Iraq also the political climate of those times would not allow the US to actually stop either without repurcussions from other powers that could stop them or because they are supported by economic elements in allies. If the US would ever conquer Canada it qould most likely be during a war with the British which would mean it would be a territory lost during a war.
 
If things really looked like the US would be fighting Britain I've always though Canada would try to say neutral. Oh and I mean actual neutrality not US during WW1 and WW2 neutrality.

If its pre 1931 I don't think Canada would have a say in the matter. In 1914 Canada was in the war as soon as Britain was.
 
If its pre 1931 I don't think Canada would have a say in the matter. In 1914 Canada was in the war as soon as Britain was.

In theory. For practical purposes if the US and Britain go to war, especially if Britain is the aggressor, Canada could easily find that it suddenly has a very strong independent movement (or to put it in more honest terms, decide that backing Great Britain is a bad idea and they would much rather just sit the whole thing out.)
 
Top