If the US didn't get in WW1 and somehow the CP manage to win, would it be possible for America to tell thr UK to hand over Canada or even invade to settle the debt?
Question about UK losing WW1
- Thread starter RiseOfAmerica
- Start date
It's plausible they could, but I can't see what purpose doing so would serve.
There would be no need to. As of April 1917, when the US entered WW1, all loans were secured on British investments in America, so it would just bwe a matter of claiming the collateral - noi need to invade anywhere.
The only problem that could have arisen would have been if unsecured loans were granted, which the US would never have allowed while neutral.
Last edited:
I seriously doubt it.
By the time the US entered the war, the CP could not win. Their last great offensive, the Spring Offensive of 1918 (Kaiserschlacht [Kaiser's Battle], also known as the Ludendorff Offensive) was an attempt to defeat the entente before the US personnel and equipment arrived at the front. And the British and French (and associated allied troops) were able to hold the line. And then the allies were able to go on the offensive, such as with the Battle of Amiens, which was without a large American presence.
It is likely that without the US involved in the war (other than supplying Entente forces), the war as a whole would have ended in a stalemate. the CP would more than likely have been pushed back to the Hindenburg line, but it isn't likely that Britain/Empire and France could have broken through it, not without significantly more casualties, plus popular opinion could well have forced an Armistice.
Even if the CP manage to win, they've pretty much lost all of their colonies, and they aren't likely to be in the position to be demanding more. Thus, Britain still has access to the resources that it did OTL, and thus can payback the US loans as in OTL
By the time the US entered the war, the CP could not win. Their last great offensive, the Spring Offensive of 1918 (Kaiserschlacht [Kaiser's Battle], also known as the Ludendorff Offensive) was an attempt to defeat the entente before the US personnel and equipment arrived at the front. And the British and French (and associated allied troops) were able to hold the line. And then the allies were able to go on the offensive, such as with the Battle of Amiens, which was without a large American presence.
It is likely that without the US involved in the war (other than supplying Entente forces), the war as a whole would have ended in a stalemate. the CP would more than likely have been pushed back to the Hindenburg line, but it isn't likely that Britain/Empire and France could have broken through it, not without significantly more casualties, plus popular opinion could well have forced an Armistice.
Even if the CP manage to win, they've pretty much lost all of their colonies, and they aren't likely to be in the position to be demanding more. Thus, Britain still has access to the resources that it did OTL, and thus can payback the US loans as in OTL
A total "victory" by the CP with a POD in late 1917 or 1918 is probably impossible, but there are numerous small PODs which can turn the tide in favor of the CP; stuff like performing a little better in earlier battles, a more hostile to Entente US putting the screws on, no Romanian or Italian entry to the war, you get the idea. Combined with no US entry, that can easily get CP victory.
RamscoopRaider
Donor
No US entry and CP victory is practically guaranteed, by June of 1917 the allies would be out of collateral and the US would not grant unsecured loans
Without these loans they cannot import US raw materials and their war production drops by 25-33%, discounting any morale effects the Germans will have more men and they less, not counting the forces they have to use to replace the missing Americans holding the Front
The Spring Offensive is probably stopped, but it goes farther and the Germans end up with enough reserves to stop any counter offensive well short of the border
Without these loans they cannot import US raw materials and their war production drops by 25-33%, discounting any morale effects the Germans will have more men and they less, not counting the forces they have to use to replace the missing Americans holding the Front
The Spring Offensive is probably stopped, but it goes farther and the Germans end up with enough reserves to stop any counter offensive well short of the border
That's why I said if the US didn't get involved in the war, and just assuming the CP managed to win. I'm not talking about a total CP victory with Germans conquering the UK, but assuming they won the war on the european mainland. Still that way Britain wouldn't be receiving payments from Germany in this case so I'm not sure if they'd be able to pay back their debt to America, that's why I was wondering this.
If the US doesn't intervene, it's highly probable that America won't have given any unsecured loans to Britain (since Britain ran out of assets sometime in 1917). This basically means that all the US loans to GB were secured with British assets as collateral. If Britain can't pay back the loans, then America would seize those assets.
A German victory in the West is impossible after about mid-1917, the best they can hope for is a negotiated peace where they might keep Luxembourg but otherwise return to pre-war borders. They might score well in the East if Brest-Litovsk holds, but Germany is going to be a social nightmare for at least a year or two. The US will still profit immensely as the world rebuild but Germany may well have her cake and eat it too, especially once the Ukraine food production capacity resumes. Plus, without Byelorussia, the Baltic states, or the Ukraine, the USSR is going to experience either defeat at the hands of the Whites or be seriously stuck for food production and heavy industry (a third to half of each was in the Ukraine if memory serves).
Omg guys I wasn't asking how could Germany win WW1 and I wasn't asking if the CP could win, there's already a bunch of threads about that. I was just wondering if the US would annex Canada to settle the debt if the UK lost. 
In short, no.
Longer version: No. Canada was not Britain's to give away, given that it was a self governing Dominion.
Longer version: No. Canada was not Britain's to give away, given that it was a self governing Dominion.
Except that the US would no longer have been supplying Entente forces.
By 1917, Britain had run out of collateral to provide security for further loans - which she needed in order to purchase from the US. She could have gone on doing so only if she could obtain unsecured loans - something the US refused as long as it remained neutral.
There is also the question of what sanctions America might have been imposing in retaliation for British blacklists and other measured interfering with American trade - quite a serious possibility by the end of 1916.
Yes! Why do people always ignore this! By WWI, Canada, South Africa (I think), Australia and New Zealand were well on their way to becoming fully independent nations (Canada especially). By 1947 all of them were independent.
These aren't British territories anymore, they are British sister-states. They recognise they were colonised by Britain, they recognise that they owe their existence to the British, but they also recognise that they are no longer British peoples.
The US (esp under a President as racist as Wilson) had no interest in acquiring large nonwhite populations. Tiny acquisitions like the Danish West Indies were one thing, but large areas would be wanted only if their populations were white - and those wouldn't have been on offer.
Also, of course, they could only serve as collateral if the US had physical possession of them, so would have to be turned over immediately. A promissory note to do so would not suffice. I don't see that happening, given that it would amount to a public admission that the Allies were losing.
Also, of course, these loans were made by banks, not by the US government. I find it hard to picture a colony being ceded to a bank.
Last edited:
Grey Wolf
Donor
It would be an intriguing idea to write a dystopian timeline about
Best Regards
Grey Wolf
katchen
Banned
I remember reading in "An Ocean Apart" by Dimbleby & Reynolds about the Anglo-American Alliance, that a British informant was quoted as saying that if the Germans had not initiated unrestricted submarine warfare in early 1916, which provided the casus belli for the US to enter WWI on the Allied side, the British would have had to seek an armistice with the Central Powers by Autumn 1916. And the speculation I read in an article in I believe the Sydney Morning Herald when I was living in Australia was that if Germany had won WWI, the UK and France would have had to give Germany quite a few colonies, mostly in Africa but some in the Pacific.