Earliest the US Navy could match the Royal Navy?

[Tallil2long]

So this could be the PoD then. Have the British screw up diplomatically like they did with the Germans by saying something along the lines of "Oh we don't really care. Our navy can easily shell their coasts if it has too" or something like that and you'd get the USN into the Naval Arms Race full bore.

Yup. All we need is British statesmen misreading American naval potential. If they were as diplomatically "inept" with the U.S. as they were with Germany, we could easily have our naval competition.

 

[Admiral Halsey]

Yup. All we need is British statesmen misreading American naval potential. If they were as diplomatically "inept" with the U.S. as they were with Germany, we could easily have our naval competition.

If anyone ever wants to write a TL about an "Anglo-American-German Naval Arms Race" i'll sub it.

 

[Tallil2long]

If anyone ever wants to write a TL about an "Anglo-American-German Naval Arms Race" i'll sub it.

I'm tempted. But if anyone else gets around to it sooner, be welcome.

It'll have interesting butterflies. Britain might not dare to enter WW1, I suspect. OTL, British statesmen concocted a plausible way to avoid going to war over Belgium; in TTL, they'll play that card. If Grey is actually honest and open with the French this time, they'll realize Britain won't join them. Might we see a merely Balkan war?

 

[Admiral Halsey]

I'm tempted. But if anyone else gets around to it sooner, be welcome.

It'll have interesting butterflies. Britain might not dare to enter WW1, I suspect. OTL, British statesmen concocted a plausible way to avoid going to war over Belgium; in TTL, they'll play that card. If Grey is actually honest and open with the French this time, they'll realize Britain won't join them. Might we see a merely Balkan war?

You know could this also move the US more into the German camp if Britain "screws the pooch" diplomatically?

 

[Tallil2long]

You know could this also move the US more into the German camp if Britain "screws the pooch" diplomatically?

There was quite a bit of sympathy for Germany in the U.S. up til 1916-17. Lots of German immigrants.
Let America develop an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" feeling, and maybe.

It'd probably never go so far as a formal alliance, but it wouldn't need to. Give Britain two likely, powerful opponents and she could only afford to go to war with either under the most pressing circumstances. I think she'd be very reluctant to enter WW1, for instance.

 

[Admiral Halsey]

There was quite a bit of sympathy for Germany in the U.S. up til 1916-17. Lots of German immigrants.
Let America develop an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" feeling, and maybe.

It'd probably never go so far as a formal alliance, but it wouldn't need to. Give Britain two likely, powerful opponents and she could only afford to go to war with either under the most pressing circumstances. I think she'd be very reluctant to enter WW1, for instance.

I doubt it'd go as far as a formal alliance either. Keeping America out of one during those early years of the 20th century was the best thing internationally we did IMO.

 

[Tallil2long]

I doubt it'd go as far as a formal alliance either. Keeping America out of one during those early years of the 20th century was the best thing internationally we did IMO.

Agreed. And Splendid Isolation would likely have served both Britain and Europe better.

 

[usertron2020]

Of course one issue is that I believe in 1890 or so the British came to the conclusion that the USA was growing too quickly in industry and population to successfully defend Canada from it.

After that point the British will always imo come to the conclusion that everything short of Canada is worth surrendering in order to keep it. Of course this was all secret (if it happened at all as I remember it from a documentary on war plan Red a while back where the British strategy was far less aggressive than the Canadian one (which launched an actual invasion of the USA!) [1] and made the assumption that victory was impossible in North America.


If it comes to it I think the British would make a deal with the Americans as OTL at the WNT.

1] Do you have details on this "Canadian Climb Mt. Niitaka"?

I can well imagine an ATL where in a world where the OTL Loyal Opposition members had maintained control over Lord North's "King's Friends" faction, thereby preventing the ARW. So why not a 2nd and 3rd generation "Lord Palmerston Faction" infecting the Foreign Office with rank nationalism (heavy enough OTL) and treating the outside world with extreme arrogance?

We have enough AH.com members who have an attitude of "we could have licked every man in the house" attitude regarding the British Empire versus the entire world in the late 19th to early 20th centuries. And this even without any Continental allies or any distractions for Britain's traditional enemies. As much of a diplomatic "Unspeakable Seamammal" as this might seem to us today, it certainly was the case that such people were running the show back in London in the American Revolutionary War. Who's to say it can't happen again with more forgetful memories 120-150 years later?

<snip>So, what might Britain wrangle about with the U.S.?

The Civil War. The Alaska Boundary Dispute. The Venezuela Crisis. Cuba (Britain originally favored the Spanish).

Let Britain be rather more high-handed in a couple of these, add in the U.S.'s resentment over historic British insults against American shipping, and a healthy dose of American newcomer-pride, and we might get enough to have the U.S. view Britain as a likely opponent.

It'd help if Britain blocked the U.S. from obtaining the Philippines (or made it relinquish them to another party), since that would not only cause additional resentment, but prevent America being distracted by the Far East.

Edit: in exchange for Britain acquiescing to our seizure of Cuba, the U.S. supported Britain in their Boer takeover. Derailing the first messes up the second, with resulting increase of tension.

Fortunate that the Germans were doing what they could to play this role. Remove them from the equation and things could go south for Anglo-American relations...

And when the British felt they had the upper hand, they could be extraordinarily arrogant, disregarding even the basic niceties of diplomacy in order to satisfy Imperial greed. This was Britain in 1900.

Between the two, yeah, we could've had an adversarial relationship.

I think though that fortunately a policy of UK vs. US would have been a serious bone of contention between the major parties of Britain, allowing the more likely to be anti-Imperialistic Liberals to play up the issue against the Tories at the ballot box. Something that the Tories OTL seem to have been well aware of.

Yup. All we need is British statesmen misreading American naval potential. If they were as diplomatically "inept" with the U.S. as they were with Germany, we could easily have our naval competition.

"Fir-built frigates"? Yeah, THAT I could see. But the Spanish-American War would have to be avoided, and the Anglo-Japanese Treaty strengthened.

There was quite a bit of sympathy for Germany in the U.S. up til 1916-17. Lots of German immigrants.
Let America develop an "enemy of my enemy is my friend" feeling, and maybe.

It'd probably never go so far as a formal alliance, but it wouldn't need to. Give Britain two likely, powerful opponents and she could only afford to go to war with either under the most pressing circumstances. I think she'd be very reluctant to enter WW1, for instance.

Meh. These factors were always more a matter of restricting Anglo-American bonds. OTL German diplomatic ineptitude did much to nullify this.

I doubt it'd go as far as a formal alliance either. Keeping America out of one during those early years of the 20th century was the best thing internationally we did IMO.

Agreed.

Agreed. And Splendid Isolation would likely have served both Britain and Europe better.

Until the shooting started.

One of the strongest forces backing American Isolationism was the European attitude (including Britain) was that the USA should STAY OUT of all European affairs, including the affairs of their imperial concerns (OK). As the Americans were too diplomatically and politically inexperienced to understand the complexities involved (uh, OK, I guess). And when every generation or so when the Europeans had turned everything to poo it was of course America's duty to come a-runnin' to the aid of one's own favored faction in the next war. After which America should like the little child it was go back to its room across the pond and let the adults pick up the pieces to make ready for a lasting peace/the next war.

 

[LordKalvert]

You know could this also move the US more into the German camp if Britain "screws the pooch" diplomatically?

Or the Franco-Russian camp. Russia was the traditional ally of America especially from the Civil War on to about the Boxer Rebellion. If America had realized that the Anglo-Japanese alliance was aimed as much against them as the Russians (at least by the Japanese), the British are done.

There's no alliance on Earth that could fight that combination (or would want to). I'm thinking Italy and Germany would be inclined to join in the attack on Britain. You could easily see a five on one end of the British Empire. There might be a big free for all over the spoils but the British would be gone

 

[deathscompanion1]

1] Do you have details on this "Canadian Climb Mt. Niitaka"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red

Scroll down and you find part of what I remember its Wiki and incomplete if the documentary was accurate but I don't have anything else to offer, apologise.

 

[Admiral Halsey]

Or the Franco-Russian camp. Russia was the traditional ally of America especially from the Civil War on to about the Boxer Rebellion. If America had realized that the Anglo-Japanese alliance was aimed as much against them as the Russians (at least by the Japanese), the British are done.

There's no alliance on Earth that could fight that combination (or would want to). I'm thinking Italy and Germany would be inclined to join in the attack on Britain. You could easily see a five on one end of the British Empire. There might be a big free for all over the spoils but the British would be gone

Now that'd be an interesting TL. The US realizing who the Anglo-Japanese alliance was really aimed at(At least from Japan's end) and the US siding with France and Russia.(Would we help them industrialize and reform their military and navy?)

 

[Admiral Halsey]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Plan_Red

Scroll down and you find part of what I remember its Wiki and incomplete if the documentary was accurate but I don't have anything else to offer, apologise.

Oh god not Defense Scheme No. 1. I forgot that even existed.

 

[Saphroneth]

And when every generation or so when the Europeans had turned everything to poo it was of course America's duty to come a-runnin' to the aid of one's own favored faction in the next war. After which America should like the little child it was go back to its room across the pond and let the adults pick up the pieces to make ready for a lasting peace/the next war.

Did this actually happen more than, er, once?

Because you're framing that like it was de rigeur several times over. But the only one which I can see which remotely fits that is... well, the first world war and aftermath.
The second world war, if you want to argue that stopping the Nazis was just another European war - well, fine. But I don't think anyone felt America should just go back across the pond after WW2.

 

[Tallil2long]

Did this actually happen more than, er, once?

Because you're framing that like it was de rigeur several times over. But the only one which I can see which remotely fits that is... well, the first world war and aftermath.
The second world war, if you want to argue that stopping the Nazis was just another European war - well, fine. But I don't think anyone felt America should just go back across the pond after WW2.

True. The Soviets were too strong after WW2. The French and British needed a strong backer. They weren't able to redraw so many lines on the map to their gain, as they did after WW1.