TL 191 WI: Great Britain stays out of the Great War

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Sandwich Islands not Hawaii. Next thing you will be doing is talking about tanks fighting battles.

Tanks? No-one uses that term!

The Question becomes will the Mormons rise up? Without a Second Front the US will be rather more obviously winning, Mormons rising if it looks like it could go either way is one thing, but if the US is definitely winning, they are likely to be crushed and not try it

They most likely won't. In 1881 they rose because the USA was getting stomped and in 1941 they rose because the USA was getting stomped. They know that the only way they will ever get independence is if they can fight for it, and they have no chance of that in a situation where the USA is more superior.

I think Reds Rising up is still likely, as I think it is more dependent on the CSA losing than the length of the war. The US did supply them, which it might not given more success, but if the CSA is being stomped into the dirt bad enough it looks like the Reds might have a chance, they are likely to give it a shot

Or... the CSA might realise it needs the black manpower faster, and moves to advance their rights quicker, so there is no rising.

- BNC

 

[RamscoopRaider]

Or... the CSA might realise it needs the black manpower faster, and moves to advance their rights quicker, so there is no rising.

- BNC

In the book the CSA only got desperate enough for that after the Reds decided to take their chances, if one goes faster it makes sense the other does to

 

[Tocomocho]

The way the war spread to North America in the books never made sense.

 

[m0585]

The way the war spread to North America in the books never made sense.

How so?

 

[Michael B]

The way the war spread to North America in the books never made sense.

South America, yes. North America, no. Think of it as a escalation of Britain's declaration of war. The wording though in The Great War:American Front is that the USA would declare war on any one declaring war on any member of the Alliance. That means that the moment Russia declared war on Austro-Hungary the US was in.

The CSA's declaration appears to have been voluntary in that no treaty clause is mentioned. However, the moment that they were in Roosevelt added their name to the list. The reason for the CSA's declaration was partly in support of their allies. I get the impression though that they were expecting a cheap easy victory against the damnyankees so saw no reason to not to get involved. A bit like Italy and WW2 on OTL.

 

[Richter von Manthofen]

What if the United Kingdom had not enter The Great War in 1914, but had stay neutral? (Germany does not enter Belgium, sort of thing.)

How will the Great War play out now? How would the war play out between the North and the South play out?

No war between North and South...

 

[Michael B]

No war between North and South...

As pointed out in an earlier post, the USA still declares war on France and Russia. The question is whether the CSA thinks that it should still join in although in the land war the USA has just one front. The British may or may not point out to it that if it declares war on the USA, no rescue will come from London.

In the circumstances then, the CSA will remain a neutral power. However, it is very likely that volunteers from the CSA will go to France via Spain. In addition, cross border raids by Indians could be stepped up. Obviously, the USA will still have to retain most of its army in case the perfidious Rebs and British try to stab it in the back. However, detachments could be sent to invade French North Africa.

 

[RamscoopRaider]

As pointed out in an earlier post, the USA still declares war on France and Russia. The question is whether the CSA thinks that it should still join in although in the land war the USA has just one front. The British may or may not point out to it that if it declares war on the USA, no rescue will come from London.

In the circumstances then, the CSA will remain a neutral power. However, it is very likely that volunteers from the CSA will go to France via Spain. In addition, cross border raids by Indians could be stepped up. Obviously, the USA will still have to retain most of its army in case the perfidious Rebs and British try to stab it in the back. However, detachments could be sent to invade French North Africa.

CSA remaining neutral depends on its plans and doctrine. It is going to have to mobilize, because if it lets the USA mobilize, and doesn't, then if the USA should strike first, its army would be really badly outnumbered for the first week. Mobilization is expensive, not as costly as a real war, but hell on the economy, so there is going to be a lot of temptation in the CSA to go to war, especially if their doctrine is for a preemptive strike, or if it does demobilize, temptation in the US to hit the CS first while they have something like a 5 to 1 edge for the first week

North Africa is a bit too far, too long and easy to reinforce for France however the Caribbean and South Pacific are another story, neither can France reinforce well, and the Caribbean is really close to the US

 

[Michael B]

CSA remaining neutral depends on its plans and doctrine. It is going to have to mobilize, because if it lets the USA mobilize, and doesn't, then if the USA should strike first, its army would be really badly outnumbered for the first week. Mobilization is expensive, not as costly as a real war, but hell on the economy, so there is going to be a lot of temptation in the CSA to go to war, especially if their doctrine is for a preemptive strike, or if it does demobilize, temptation in the US to hit the CS first while they have something like a 5 to 1 edge for the first week

Good point because the USA will have already declared that they are mobilising and with no Britain currently engaged could consider a first strike. That would of course bring Britain in. However, the USA could gamble on taking Richmond before there is sufficient build up Canada for the British to invade the USA.

North Africa is a bit too far, too long and easy to reinforce for France however the Caribbean and South Pacific are another story, neither can France reinforce well, and the Caribbean is really close to the US

Assuming that the CSA does not invade and without the British they are unlikely to, that leaves the USA little to do. On its own the High Seas Fleet can easily contain the French Fleet and knocking off a few islands and Guinea is not going to worry the French that much.

OK so North Africa may be risky, but what about West Africa? A German-US force operating out of the Kamerun could take Dakar, an important port in the French Empire. The USA may send troops to Germany, but that leaves idle hands in the US Navy to make mischief.

 

[RamscoopRaider]

Good point because the USA will have already declared that they are mobilising and with no Britain currently engaged could consider a first strike. That would of course bring Britain in. However, the USA could gamble on taking Richmond before there is sufficient build up Canada for the British to invade the USA.

Assuming that the CSA does not invade and without the British they are unlikely to, that leaves the USA little to do. On its own the High Seas Fleet can easily contain the French Fleet and knocking off a few islands and Guinea is not going to worry the French that much.

OK so North Africa may be risky, but what about West Africa? A German-US force operating out of the Kamerun could take Dakar, an important port in the French Empire. The USA may send troops to Germany, but that leaves idle hands in the US Navy to make mischief.

Don't even need to take Richmond, just grind up the standing CSA forces and reserves as they come up, even if Richmond is not taken their Army is long term wrecked, and the US would be able to divert more to Canada than otherwise

Forgot about West Africa, yeah that might be doable, but it would stretch the US, which historically was short of cruisers and likely still is in TL 191, and Germany is not that much better in that regard

 

[Michael B]

Don't even need to take Richmond, just grind up the standing CSA forces and reserves as they come up, even if Richmond is not taken their Army is long term wrecked, and the US would be able to divert more to Canada than otherwise

Sounds like the generals will have sold out their country. So a former artillery sergeant would have us believe.

If the CSA is chewed up faster than on the TL191 TL then the Reds are going to have less time and equipment before they up rise. I would still expect them to though. The damned good thrashing the CSA would be taking would be seen as opportunity enough.

Forgot about West Africa, yeah that might be doable, but it would stretch the US, which historically was short of cruisers and likely still is in TL 191, and Germany is not that much better in that regard

As Japan showed on OTL vis WW1 what you kill you get; they knocked off German holdings in the Far East and Pacific and got them after the war.

The Germans already have troops in West Africa. Whilst they may not be able to move very far per se with naval superiority they could be moved by merchant ship to key targets such as Dakar. If there are no US troops in Africa then the best that they can hope to get is a little bit of jungle. An opportunist like Teddy Roosevelt will realise that and so send troops to assist the Germans.

Would agree that fighting in Africa is not going to have much impact on winning it. However, who gets what spoils depends on what they do. The Austro-Hungarian Empire won't be in a position to get chunks of the French colonial empire, the US and maybe the Ottomans would be.

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

What use would the Ottomans have for chunks of West Africa? They were a shambles by 1914 and the last thing they need is far off Algeria threatening a fight in the form of rebellion.

- BNC

 

[Michael B]

What use would the Ottomans have for chunks of West Africa?

Nothing and no one has said that they would. If you read the section on the Ottomans I said Africa not West Africa. French Somiland is close to the Ottoman Empire so if the French colonial empire is being carved up they may ask for that. Tunisia and Algeria could go to the Italians, assuming that they joined in. And good luck to them if they received them

 

[BiteNibbleChomp]

Nothing and no one has said that they would. If you read the section on the Ottomans I said Africa not West Africa. French Somiland is close to the Ottoman Empire so if the French colonial empire is being carved up they may ask for that. Tunisia and Algeria could go to the Italians, assuming that they joined in. And good luck to them if they received them

I thought the British and Italians owned the area near Ethiopia, and France had basically the western third minus a few ports.

- BNC

 

[Michael B]

I thought the British and Italians owned the area near Ethiopia, and France had basically the western third minus a few ports.

- BNC

Modern day Djibouti