WI - there was no targeting of merchant shipping by German U-boats in WW1?

[Raygun_McGuffin]

What if during the Great War, Germany never resorted to the attacking of merchant shipping? How would this change the war, and how would it change the strategies of warfare later on? Would this avoidance of attacks on civilian shipping by Germany in the Great War have any effect on later wars?

[Riain]

Do troopships count as merchant shipping, or armed ocean liners, or ships carrying shells across the Channel to France?

[Raygun_McGuffin]

Originally Posted by Riain

Do troopships count as merchant shipping

Troopships were usually obviously identified as not civilian.

Originally Posted by Riain

or armed ocean liners

If they're armed, then they're warships. if the armaments are hidden, that was considered to be in breach of rules of warfare.

Originally Posted by Riain

or ships carrying shells across the Channel to France?

The Germans originally treated merchant shipping as civilian, and so did other nations. To carry armaments or ammunition made the vessel a valid target, but a stop & search was the standard procedure to first identify this. Secretly smuggling armaments from a supposedly neutral nation to assist a nation at war was considered to be a hostile act, and very much against what was perceived as the right way to do things. The accusations of secretly smuggling military armaments on the Lusitania were strongly denied by the USA and UK for this very reason, because it was considered a very bad thing to do at the time.

As we now know, the ship really was secretly smuggling military supplies from the USA to the UK.

[Anaxagoras]

Originally Posted by Raygun_McGuffin

As we now know, the ship really was secretly smuggling military supplies from the USA to the UK.

Yes, and that was almost certainly what caused the second explosion.

No German U-boat attacks on merchant shipping means that the United States does not enter the war. Period. Unlike FDR and WWII, Wilson actually was trying to keep America out of the war, and without a casus bellum, there would be no American entry.

Indeed, until the U-boat attacks on civilian ships began, there was a good deal of sympathy for Germany in the United States, and the loudest outcries in the American papers were against Britain on account of the strict blockade against Germany. We would never see America join the Central Powers, of course, but with this POD (which isn't that far-fetched), we would certainly never see America in the ranks of the Allied powers.

Of course, this does not mean that the Allies wouldn't go on to win the war against Germany anyway, but it does mean that the victory would take place later and would cost much more in blood.

On the other hand, we might see a peace agreement from mutual exhaustion in late 1917, as Germany had won the war against Russia and the Allies didn't have the promise of American intervention to maintain their hopes of eventual victory.

[Raygun_McGuffin]

Originally Posted by Anaxagoras

Yes, and that was almost certainly what caused the second explosion.

No German U-boat attacks on merchant shipping means that the United States does not enter the war. Period. Unlike FDR and WWII, Wilson actually was trying to keep America out of the war, and without a casus bellum, there would be no American entry.

Indeed, until the U-boat attacks on civilian ships began, there was a good deal of sympathy for Germany in the United States, and the loudest outcries in the American papers were against Britain on account of the strict blockade against Germany. We would never see America join the Central Powers, of course, but with this POD (which isn't that far-fetched), we would certainly never see America in the ranks of the Allied powers.

Of course, this does not mean that the Allies wouldn't go on to win the war against Germany anyway, but it does mean that the victory would take place later and would cost much more in blood.

On the other hand, we might see a peace agreement from mutual exhaustion in late 1917, as Germany had won the war against Russia and the Allies didn't have the promise of American intervention to maintain their hopes of eventual victory.

Shouldn't be too hard to work out the likely result of the USA not entering the Great War. There's probably lots of threads already written on the subject.

Do you think there would be any change in attitudes to attacks on merchant shipping in later wars if the Germans hadn't resorted to it? Would it be acceptable policy for the USA to adopt in WW2 if the Germans hadn't already done so?

The Prize Rules of the London treaty may be of interest,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prize_rules