US strategy in a Europe only WWII

[raharris1973]

What if Hitler orders an all-out submarine offensive versus the Atlantic, including the US and Canadian coasts, in March 1941, after the Lend-Lease Bill?

Assumption # 1 I would think that an escalation so close to home would lead to a US declaration of war- (Hitler in OTL assumed it would)

Hitler risks it because he'd like to crush Britain's capacity to interfere with his planned summer campaign in Russia, and the failure of the blitz has been apparent for a couple months. The way he sees it, given the small US army, with Lend-Lease the US is literally giving Britain all the help *it can* give, and with the re-election of Rosenfeld and his actions he figures its inevitable anyway so he ought to see if he can bring Britain to its knees. With France in his hands, US troops have no place to go anyway. Hey, and maybe Japan will come in on Germany's side.

Assumption # 2 I think this will hurt Britain, but won't cause her to quit the war.

Assumption # 3 The USSR is invaded in June. It's not like the US-UK can do anything between March and June that would frighten Hitler, and Lebensbraum is what he always wanted.

So, with a desperate battle of the Atlantic, the US and UK are likely to be more gingerly with Japan. Japan may stay out of the war.

So, with the US-UK-USSR only fighting the European Axis, how will US-UK strategic debates be affected.

The US may still come into the war with much more domestic criticism than in OTL. Will that reinforce US's OTL tendency to push for the earliest possible invasion of France, to win the war before the next Presidential election.

Or, will the British preference for peripheral attacks until later in the war be preferred, because even though the war may be lengthened, the western share of casualties will be reduced, and that's important in the ATL's domestic US politics?

So, what poison does FDR pick- a shorter, deadlier, riskier war or a longer, less costly, less risky war?

[Max Sinister]

As soon as Americans die, FDR will have a good argument for joining the war.

[CalBear]

Given Japan's supply position it seems quite unlikely that they could avoid war. However, let's accept that no war is possible to a certitude, freeing the U.S. from concern about the Pacific.

If Hitler sent U-Boats inside U.S. waters and attacked U.S. flagged vessels, he would play directly into FRD's hands. Burning oil tankers off the U.S. coast, visible to anyone living there, would be a sufficient cause for FDR to go to Congress and get a Declaration of War.

Once the war starts the U.S. strategy will be no different than in our TL. From Day One, it was the U.S. strategy to win in Europe & devote enough effort in the Pacific to slowly drive the Japanese back. I seem to recall statistics that show that 75% of the U.S. effort & output went to the European Theater. I don't see much more going to Europe, even with no way on the Pacific Horizon.

In practical terms you would likely see fewer capital ships built, as Europe would not be a Naval war. Carrier tactics will also be less advanced; this could have butterfly effects into the future regarding American control of the sea during the Cold War.

[Derek Jackson]

Would Roosevelt get a declaration of war? In OTL in the fall of 1941 there were some very serious incidents including at least 1 destroyer sunk by the Nazis and no declaration of war until Hitler did it on the US

[MerryPrankster]

Originally Posted by Derek Jackson

Would Roosevelt get a declaration of war? In OTL in the fall of 1941 there were some very serious incidents including at least 1 destroyer sunk by the Nazis and no declaration of war until Hitler did it on the US

The Reuben James incident. I believe the RJ was helping the Brits sub-hunt and a U-boat commander took issue with that.

Hitler was canny enough NOT to want a repeat of what brought the US into WWI.

[JimmyJimJam]

Am I recalling incorrectly that, before the US entered the war with Germany, Roosevelt had ordered the US navy and coast guard to "shoot on sight" u-boats?

[Derek Jackson]

Clearly the allies were the good guys and the Nazis the bad ones.

Equally clearly US had twisted neutrality out of all normal recognition.

I still point out that even when the Nazis sank US ships Roosevelt did not ask for a declaration of war on the Nazis and I am still not sure he would have got one without something very spectacular from them.

[CalBear]

Originally Posted by Derek Jackson

Clearly the allies were the good guys and the Nazis the bad ones.

Equally clearly US had twisted neutrality out of all normal recognition.

I still point out that even when the Nazis sank US ships Roosevelt did not ask for a declaration of war on the Nazis and I am still not sure he would have got one without something very spectacular from them.

I agree. I also believe the sight of burning U.S. flagged vessels of the East Coast (as occurred during the 1942 "Happy Time" in OTL), along with the resulting media attention would be quite spectacular enough.