PC: United States on losing side in WWI
- Thread starter TimTurner
- Start date
RamscoopRaider
Donor
Not sure that would work. Absent loads of US supplies, that could not be found anywhere else in needed amounts, especially oil and zinc, the Entente are going to have a bad time and Russia pulls out months early. Not to mention the lack of Canadian troops and probable diversion of other British troops
If the US is actually tied into the alliance system things get even worse, as that implies the US is prepared for war and in it from the start
At best status quo ante for the Entente in the Americas, they just spent Summer 1914-Late 1918 fighting Germany and taking huge casualties. Now they have to liberate Canada and the Caribbean, across an entire Ocean, meaning the prospect of years more fighting. Not gonna fly, status quo ante there is much more likely
US might lose Guam and the Philippines to Japan, might lose some other minor islands, not Hawaii
I don't think so. They got an easy win in WWI by going after some inimportant islands and had to give up their claims to a port after the war due to the Chinese being rather angry about the idea. It would make Japan a target, as now all the countries with possessions in the area will have to believe that the Japanese will attack anyone, no matter whose side of a war they are on.
RamscoopRaider
Donor
I said might, not will. The US wasn't really defending those territories all that well, and with the RN has much bigger fish to fry. More importantly, unlike with the UK, the US would have no bargaining chips to force them one way or another
Japan was Entente, if the US is CP attacking them is bloody well what they should be doing. They wouldn't attacking neutrals or allies
Ahhh, alright. I misread a word or two in your post. Your scenario makes a good degree of sense. Or course the New Zealanders will also try snagging American Samoa and try to never let them go. And this would give Japan new economic opportunities in East Asia. If they can produce enough consumer goods to fill any gaps in the market left by the Americans being driven out and the British being busy.
Last edited:
Most posts here ignore the OP here & alter the alliance. It looks like the those who propose a different German strategy in 1918 are on the right track. Had the Germans understood the actual situation in the summer of 1917 they might have been able to break the French army and force the Entente to negotiation in the Autum of 1917. It may not have been a decisive victory, but it would have been enough of a victory to preserve the German empire and leave the French & Russian Empire in a inferior position for a decade or more.
I'm unsure if this would preserve the Austrian Empire for long. Don't know enough about their situation in 1917.
I did wonder what the possibilities would be with a CP Britain and an America that's going to war against the CP very enthusiastically. That would be a harder way to accomplish this though. Others have charted easier paths.
Deleted member 1487
Post war Austria-Hungary was done; the radical Magyars took over the Hungarian Parliament and were planning on forcing independence in the post-war Ausgleich renegotiation (delayed from the 1917 planned date due to war) no matter what and didn't care about the consequences that would have resulted from starting a civil war over it. The Czechs were done with the Habsburgs, Germans, and Magyars, so would start their own independence efforts the minute the Civil War began. The Southern Slavs too, same with the Romanians in Hungary. The war was keeping them together, but the situation was collapsing politically by 1917 to such as extent that even in total victory the post-war politics would have ripped the country apart. Even German intervention would only mean a controlled demolition.
RamscoopRaider
Donor
American Samoa I can see the ANZACs taking, keeping it in the peace treaty when the US Army is sitting on most of Canada less likely. Japan can tell the rest of the Entente to STFU about what they have taken, the ANZACs can't ignore the UK
Britain being CP allied means that unless the US is Entente from before the war, the CP are likely to win before the US can join. If the US is Entente allied pre war, that implies that they are feeling prepared for war and well if they are half as militarized as OTL Germany, the UK will be lucky to hold Nova Scotia, PEI and Newfoundland
ben0628
Banned
Are we sure that if France is defeated, this would automatically mean the US and British would just give up?
The US just got there, they are completely fresh, and are looking for a fight. A German peace might be to harsh for the British to accept.
If France is lost, I could see the US and Brits refuse to surrender and just keep fighting. It would just be the WW2 strategy all over again (technically if this happened, the WW2 strategy would be the WW1 strategy all over again
). Not only that, starving Germany by blockade is still and option for the Entente, especially in the Entente use scorched earth tactics while retreating through France.
The US just got there, they are completely fresh, and are looking for a fight. A German peace might be to harsh for the British to accept.
If France is lost, I could see the US and Brits refuse to surrender and just keep fighting. It would just be the WW2 strategy all over again (technically if this happened, the WW2 strategy would be the WW1 strategy all over again
). Not only that, starving Germany by blockade is still and option for the Entente, especially in the Entente use scorched earth tactics while retreating through France.Until spring 1918 the US forces in France were mostly either in training or service forces building and staffing the infrastructure for the US force. The plan was to have 2 million US troops in France for the spring 1919 offensive. If the French fold, the US & UK would be hard put to maintain any presence in France or Belgium. The biggest effect of the USA entering the war was to give the French especially hope that if they held out a bit longer all those American troops would turn the tide, which is more or less what happened as both sides were pretty exhausted and when a fresh force entered, that swung the balance.
BTW this talk of the USA or parts of the Empire jumping on each other to rearrange colonies is pretty bogus. If the Japanese tried to take the PI or Guam, they would find themselves at war with the USA. If you think the Japanese were not capable of winning against the USA in 1941, they were in even worse shape comparatively in 1918. At that point in time the Japanese government had not come down with terminal case of stupids they had in 1941.
BTW this talk of the USA or parts of the Empire jumping on each other to rearrange colonies is pretty bogus. If the Japanese tried to take the PI or Guam, they would find themselves at war with the USA. If you think the Japanese were not capable of winning against the USA in 1941, they were in even worse shape comparatively in 1918. At that point in time the Japanese government had not come down with terminal case of stupids they had in 1941.
Deleted member 1487
Are we sure that if France is defeated, this would automatically mean the US and British would just give up?
The US just got there, they are completely fresh, and are looking for a fight. A German peace might be to harsh for the British to accept.
If France is lost, I could see the US and Brits refuse to surrender and just keep fighting. It would just be the WW2 strategy all over again (technically if this happened, the WW2 strategy would be the WW1 strategy all over again
I mean where would they fight from? If the French are out the US has no significant source of heavy weapons, since they were sourcing mostly from the French, while the Brits would have to evacuate lest they face the entire German military on their own in Flanders. With France beaten and the food situation improving overall Germany can't really be starved out; IOTL it was due to the overall horrible situation during the war and then in the aftermath where the Allies were taking reparations, which included food, as part of the 1918 armistice (before Versailles even). The Brits were to tired to really keep going and the US isn't going to fight on with no hope of ultimate victory. I mean they could keep pressing on the Ottomans and in the Balkans and Italy, but that isn't going to get them through the Alps, into the heart of Austrian territory, or mean anything significant if the Ottomans surrender.
How would they manage to start a civil war?
what's to stop Karl doing what Franz Joseph did in 1906 - put a general in as Premier of Hungary and threaten the Magyar establishment with a greatly extended franchise if they didn't behave?
How would those "Magyar radicals" have any more chance of bringing down the Monarchy than the Provisional IRA had of bringing down the United Kingdom?
Deleted member 1487
A radicalized Magyar people. Their leadership wanted independence and given how crippled the Monarchy was during the latter stages of the war they really didn't have a chance to stop them, unlike in 1905 with Plan U, which was in peacetime and without a horribly bloody war that fell disproportionately hard on the German ethnic groups. Plus they know what the Southern Slavs and Czechs are thinking, so they know that they can get away with murder by starting an uprising in Hungary and seizing what they wanted because the Slavs in the Empire would too. The Germans are pretty heavily stretched out governing their empire, while the Austrians are going to be caught up trying to hold down the Czechs and German areas, which were starting to go 'Red' in 1918. I mean the son of a prominent Socialist even assassinated a major Habsburg official in Vienna, so things were getting tense as it was in 1916 and by 1918 the German people were finished with the Habsburgs. Even in victory there is going to be too much unrest to control the Empire, even with limited German help (all that can be offered given Germany's problems even in victory). Plus there are the Italians to worry about, along with whatever happens in the Balkans. The Poles would jump ship to be part of the Kingdom of Poland, which takes along Galicia.
Really the entire ramshackle thing would implode the second one ethnicity started trouble.
See above. The radicals ran parliament and had effectively taken control over the levers of power within Hungary. They had the power to call out the Honved and could organize a rebellion within normal channels of control of the state.
I mean even just look at the historical demolition of the A-H Empire in 1918, the whole thing imploded when people started rising up and declaring independence. By 1918 over 10k military deserters had formed bands of brigands and were even using artillery to clash with the Gendarme in A-H, while combat divisions had to be withdrawn from the front to try and confront them as they pillaged the countryside for food.
http://www.amazon.com/Hungary-Revol...2299011&sr=8-2&keywords=hungary+in+revolution
This is a great book on the political evolution of Hungary from 1914 until the the Hungarian revolution in 1918-20.
Edit:
looking that the relevant chapters the radical cohort of 1916 that eventually managed to push Tizsa out of power were the guys that started the Aster Revolution toward the end of the war and got Hungary its independence IOTL by starting the Hungary national movement. That would be a model for their early post-war actions at gaining independence here. Likely it would start by refusing to accept anything other than independence with a personal union with Austria via Kaiser Karl and when and if that would be refused, which is unclear given how weak Karl was as a personality and the general crisis that would already be happening over the Poland question, they would probably call out the Honved and declare independence if they didn't get what they wanted. The Combined Army would not be in a position to really intervene, especially if Magyar and other ethnic soldiers refused to participate in a crackdown, given their broken down state IOTL in 1918. Much would hinge on how the Allies handle France's defeat ITTL on the Italian Front. The Italians could still successfully attack and mangle the A-H army and probably with British and US support drive the Austrians back to the Alps. If that happens then the Habsburgs are a dead letter, as their last coherent and trusted armed force would be effectively shattered and with it state power ruined, even with German intervention and stabilization of some of the Habsburg divisions on the Alpine passes.
Likely there would be a negotiation at that point to end the war, but holding the Empire together post-war is going to be impossible once demobilization happens; no one respected the Monarchy or its institutions anymore and it was clear it could only exist with German help. Frankly by 1918 it would be for the best, as the Habsburgs were a mess anyway and needed to go. Having an Austro-Czech rump state, a Polish state including Galicia, and a Hungary with indeterminate borders (and probably a Southern Slav state just because of the lack of ability to stop one) would be for the best. Germany was already the master of Central Europe and A-H had proven itself incapable of adapting to the modern world and all the successor states would want to be allied to Germany, the Hungarian nationalists certainly did. The Austrians would need to be and might well be a de facto kingdom of the German empire over time. Poland too would be interested in being allied to Germany, just not dominated by it; for them a hostile Germany is a very bad option if they were to get independence, while a revanchist or Soviet Russia is not going to be kind to them either. The Germans offer a somewhat better future if they win the war, as they are the only game in town then, so best have a cordial relationship.
Last edited by a moderator:
RamscoopRaider
Donor
That was a response to the OP suggesting a CP UK (thus taking Japan with it) as a way to make the US on the losing side of WWI, ignoring of course that would mean no WWI as we know it
How can there be an Italian front once France has fallen?
That event releases far more German troops than those which won Caporetto the previous year - quite apart from the likely effect of the fall of France upon Italian morale. If France is knocked out then almost certainly so is Italy, probably within a matter of weeks.
Pardon my lack of period knowledge, but what would stop a victorious Germany from attempting to damage the American economy through blocking trade between America and the other European countries under Germany's rule ala Kaiserreich (which I know is not realistic)?
ben0628
Banned
So a German version of Napoleon's Continental System? Could work I guess, if Germany wins on the continent and Russia turned communist so there's no powerful nations to rebel against it.
I don't know if it'd be effective though. Scandinavia will ignore it since they rely on entente food imports and the British are America's main European trading partner so I don't really know if it'd hurt America.
Deleted member 1487
Italy hasn't fallen.
The issue is the Alps and the ability to supply forces forward. Germany would probably spend the rest of 1918 wrapping up and occupying/pillaging France, while dealing with the Brits and Americans before being able to move on Italy. In the meantime the Italians would probably go on the offensive as per OTL and drive out the Austrians and maintain an Alpine frontier.