1941 - Britain and Japan vs USA - How long until the USA wins?

Presume the world went as normal, except Britain and Japan kept their alliance from WW1.

Just before ww2 begins expansionist glory hunters get into power in Britain who only care about their own nation

Nazi Germany fights France and the USSR (with US but not British support) on the continent. Japan isn't officially allied with the Nazis so there are two separate wars. Axis, Cominterm, Allies (USA +France), and team island.

Britain and Japan secretly arrange a plan to carve up Asia (Japan gets sino Asia, so China, Korea, North Vietnam, plus the event of a war with USSR the Pacific Coast), Britain gets Dutch east indies, Siam and Tibet. They split the Philippines?

They arrange to keep this secret from the USA so they give no aid to Japan until the date of pearl harbour.

Assuming this, would the empire conduct its own surprise offensive? Where would it do this?

What would the USA reaction be? Would the USSR fall because its cut off from USA (if island nation are neutral in USSR/Nazi conflict)?

How long would it take for the USA to build up to defeat the islands? Would they lose motivation?

How about Canada and the Caribbean?
 
Evan a fascist Britain would not attack the USA. Japan thought the American will would crumble, the British have no such cultural blind spot. Britain has known that fighting the USA is a losing proposition for many years. (How many? Good question I suggest 1900 but any way by 1940 it was laughably obvious.)
Britain would throw the Japanese under the bus without hesitation to avoid a war with America.
The only exception I can imagine is a Britain "allied" with Germany following a loss of nerve in 1939 or 1940. In which case the empire would be de facto independent, the white colonies actually independent and Britain would concentrate only on defending the Western approaches and entrance to the Med.
 
American industrial heartland is within range of RAF heavies from British holding in N America. The Royal Navy can hit American shipping and bases from Newfoundland etc, and the Americans have no equivalent capability.

The focus of American operations would be to try and evict the British from N America....the Phillipines, Gaum and even possibly Hawaii are write offs.

1000 bomber raids againt the North Eastern population centers? Instead of Hamburg, Colonge, Essen and Dresdan, we get Detroit, New York, Chicago and Philadelphia?


You know, betting againt the Royal Navy is usually a very bad idea.
 
Even a fascist Britain does not need more territory. It might like more trade but then war with the US is generally contra-indicated. A glory hunter or whatever Britain is unlikely to pursue a war outside the Empire when it could instead pursue a bloody crackdown on the independence movement in India.

This would not be a Britain that any thinking person would want to be a part of but is still far and away more likely than a Britain that goes to war with America.

Then further a Japan allied with Britain especially a peacetime Britain is unlikely to need to go to war with the US. The British Empire can supply oil and rubber and scrap metal and more besides. In fact the Glory Hunter regime in this scenario would probably come to some kind of arrangement to sell to the Nazis though I am not sure they could afford to pay much up front so a lot depends on their credit rating with the British.

This is not pleasant world with oppression in India and invasion and atrocity in China and the USSR.

However a war with America in 1941 is only likely to end one way and while it would certainly cost America more than OTL World War 2 the cost for Britain would be immense.
 
American industrial heartland is within range of RAF heavies from British holding in N America. The Royal Navy can hit American shipping and bases from Newfoundland etc, and the Americans have no equivalent capability.

The focus of American operations would be to try and evict the British from N America....the Phillipines, Gaum and even possibly Hawaii are write offs.

1000 bomber raids againt the North Eastern population centers? Instead of Hamburg, Colonge, Essen and Dresdan, we get Detroit, New York, Chicago and Philadelphia?

You know, betting againt the Royal Navy is usually a very bad idea.
Which is why it fared so well in the Pacific? The British don't have a lot there, and while I will agree that British forces in Canada can strike along the eastern seaboard and the Great Lakes region rather easily, they lack the ships to strike at the West Coast and the US Pacific territories. The Philippines is indeed a write-off due to its proximity to Japan (as it was OTL), but the Japanese lacked the capability to take Hawaii, and I doubt the British Pacific Fleet would change that significantly.

And you're acting like the USN is a joke. It wasn't. It really wasn't. The first strike at Pearl was an ambush done with an unexpected form of attack, and after that they leveled with then overcame the Japanese. A first strike through Canada into the East Coast would be devastating, but it galvanize the Americans into fighting back.

The big issue with this whole scenario is this; "what does Japan offer Britain that the US doesn't, and the US offers everything better". The biggest issue between Tokyo and London was the Far East possessions, which Britain felt unable to protect adequately after WW1 effectively wrecked its economy and military. Britain considered a deal with Japan, but Australia and New Zealand felt threatened by Japan's increasingly aggressive, expansionist attitude and preferred the white-Anglo America as a trade/alliance partner, so Britain let its alliance with Japan lapse and signed up with the Americans. Also, for Britain to ignore Europe being overrun by the Nazis runs counter to centuries of Imperial politics, where no single power was to dominate Western Europe, barely a stone's throw away from Britain itself. Plus, one of Japan's expansion targets was India, under the British Raj (though that may have come after they got closer to the Nazis).
 
Even a fascist Britain does not need more territory. It might like more trade but then war with the US is generally contra-indicated. A glory hunter or whatever Britain is unlikely to pursue a war outside the Empire when it could instead pursue a bloody crackdown on the independence movement in India.

This would not be a Britain that any thinking person would want to be a part of but is still far and away more likely than a Britain that goes to war with America.

Then further a Japan allied with Britain especially a peacetime Britain is unlikely to need to go to war with the US. The British Empire can supply oil and rubber and scrap metal and more besides. In fact the Glory Hunter regime in this scenario would probably come to some kind of arrangement to sell to the Nazis though I am not sure they could afford to pay much up front so a lot depends on their credit rating with the British.

This is not pleasant world with oppression in India and invasion and atrocity in China and the USSR.

However a war with America in 1941 is only likely to end one way and while it would certainly cost America more than OTL World War 2 the cost for Britain would be immense.
the only way the UK could win this is wait until Tube Alloys is successful with just Commonwealth assistance, so no war until about 1947-9. otherwise the best result is gain the PHilipines/Hawaii lose most of the West indies and Canada. To win a conventional war would require an integrated federal empire drawing on the full resources of India, but if the UK has that why fight?
 
Ok so I think you are going to have try to hard to get Britain to choose a war with the states and it's going to need a few tough pre-conditions. Britain has some motivation to try and squish upstart powers and maintain a balance of power in Europe and across the world so that Britain can always influence the results of conflicts in her favour. So the conditions for Britain's war with the US are basically a: stable peace in Europe(very tough), b: Japan contained/dependent on imports(medium), and c: a belief that they can win the war(insane difficulty). But I suppose you wait a few years and give a wacky enough regime in Britain a (secret?)Nuclear monopoly and I think all the conditions could be met. But in that case I think it's also possible that Britain and Japan could win the war.
 
the only way the UK could win this is wait until Tube Alloys is successful with just Commonwealth assistance, so no war until about 1947-9. otherwise the best result is gain the PHilipines/Hawaii lose most of the West indies and Canada. To win a conventional war would require an integrated federal empire drawing on the full resources of India, but if the UK has that why fight?
Ah beat me to it.
 
Which is why it fared so well in the Pacific? The British don't have a lot there, and while I will agree that British forces in Canada can strike along the eastern seaboard and the Great Lakes region rather easily, they lack the ships to strike at the West Coast and the US Pacific territories. The Philippines is indeed a write-off due to its proximity to Japan (as it was OTL), but the Japanese lacked the capability to take Hawaii, and I doubt the British Pacific Fleet would change that significantly.

And you're acting like the USN is a joke. It wasn't. It really wasn't. The first strike at Pearl was an ambush done with an unexpected form of attack, and after that they leveled with then overcame the Japanese. A first strike through Canada into the East Coast would be devastating, but it galvanize the Americans into fighting back.
Geography is remorseless. The Americans in 1939 have no realistic way of striking at the UK homeland. The British absolutely can and will do so for the US. The question is not that the USN is a “joke”, it’s not, it’s just that in any war, it’s going to be fighting to keep the RN away from the US Coast, while it’s bases in the North East, as well as the shipyards are going to be major targets for RAF. Rather than having a secure base to rearm, rebuild and refit, as it did in the OTL Pacific War, it will have to expend tremendous resources in Homeland Defence.
Galvanised or not. The massive shipyards and aircraft factories were untouched in OTL. They won’t be in such a war.
Which is why OTL 30’s plans for use in a war against the British empire, US strategy was mostly land based. Force the British **out** of N America.
The big issue with this whole scenario is this; "what does Japan offer Britain that the US doesn't, and the US offers everything better". The biggest issue between Tokyo and London was the Far East possessions, which Britain felt unable to protect adequately after WW1 effectively wrecked its economy and military. Britain considered a deal with Japan, but Australia and New Zealand felt threatened by Japan's increasingly aggressive, expansionist attitude and preferred the white-Anglo America as a trade/alliance partner, so Britain let its alliance with Japan lapse and signed up with the Americans. Also, for Britain to ignore Europe being overrun by the Nazis runs counter to centuries of Imperial politics, where no single power was to dominate Western Europe, barely a stone's throw away from Britain itself. Plus, one of Japan's expansion targets was India, under the British Raj (though that may have come after they got closer to the Nazis).

Let’s not dispute the senario.
 
Interesting question. Could be many butterflies. In the long run though, I think GB is even more screwed.
Are they still fighting Germany? Who is going to help them with ASW against Uboats? No B24 to close air gap in Atlantic. No destroyer trade. No Lend Lease. No US ASW HK groups. No US AirPower fighting against Germany. No Sherman’s or Lees to the desert for Monty. Think he had 600 Sherman’s at 2nd Alamein and a crap ton of US artillery. Once US gets going then GB will be dealing with unrestricted submarine war from US and Germany. Probably not good for an island nation. According to wiki Lancaster’s are first used in 1942. Plenty of time for US to explain to Canada that they have a nice country and it would be a real shame for anything to happen to it.

On the flip side no cavity magnetron from GB for US. No jet engine knowledge from GB either. Does GB sign peace deal with Germany to fight US?

IMHO it would be messy but it would be hard to beat around 300,000 airplanes, over 2,000 Liberty ships, 24 Essex class, 60,000 Sherman’s, etc.
 
Let’s not dispute the senario.
Okay then, we'll stick to the scenario.

Allies: US, USSR, France
Axis: Germany, Italy
Imperials: UK, Japan

(Nationalist) China might work with either Axis or Allies, depending on whether the US or Germany courts it successfully.
Geography is remorseless. The Americans in 1939 have no realistic way of striking at the UK homeland. The British absolutely can and will do so for the US. The question is not that the USN is a “joke”, it’s not, it’s just that in any war, it’s going to be fighting to keep the RN away from the US Coast, while it’s bases in the North East, as well as the shipyards are going to be major targets for RAF. Rather than having a secure base to rearm, rebuild and refit, as it did in the OTL Pacific War, it will have to expend tremendous resources in Homeland Defence.
Galvanised or not. The massive shipyards and aircraft factories were untouched in OTL. They won’t be in such a war.
Which is why OTL 30’s plans for use in a war against the British empire, US strategy was mostly land based. Force the British **out** of N America.
That's certainly true. But there's one other way they can destroy the British; sink their commerce. Britain was entirely dependent on its shipping. Once the USN manages to retake the initiative, the British are going to lose a lot of ships. Any shipping is going to go through the Atlantic Ocean.

The other side of the equation, though, depends on how well, the US-Soviet alliance holds up. But first, let's go through how this was will progress, and let's start from, say, 1938.

1938:
By Munich, it's become increasingly clear the British are becoming less and less interested in keeping balance in Europe, despite desperate French entreaties. As much as they plead with their former Entente Cordial friends, London does not budge. "The Sudentenland," says the British PM, "is a German matter, and Germany has every right to reclaim it." Paris is in an uproar, furious at the callous disregard for the weakening peace in Europe. Unbeknownst to most of Europe, the British and the Germans have signed a non-aggression pact; Britain is to turn a blind eye to German actions, while the British Empire is to be free of German attempts to invade or influence it. Both sides have their eyes on bigger fish; the USA and USSR. Nazi hate for Socialism is no secret, but it's become clear in the past decade that British contempt for the 'colonials' has gone on the rise. The USA has been excessively demanding repayments on its WW1 loans during the depression, while denouncing British acts in its colonies. France has staved off American demands by vague promises to improve things and try to speed up decolonization, and fostered a closer Washington-Paris relationship. As a result, Britain is convinced that the USA is its new existential foe. Many pro-US politicians, such as Winston Churchill, son of an American woman, fall out of favor of 10 Downing Street and effectively "sent to Coventry".

The USSR tries to offer the French a secret deal to take down Germany before it takes the Sudetenland, offering to help Poland bolster Czechoslovakia and prevent the German invasion, but Polish obstinacy and fear of Soviet infiltration ruins the chance. With the Polish secretly working with the Germans to take claimed territory from the Czechs, the Polish want to stay neutral. This ruins the French opportunity, forcing Paris to accept the concession, thinking it can't fight a new war against Germany without suffering losses similar to WW1. The French, as such, start rearming and building fortifications, with Paris calling for 'Peace in Our Time'. Britain applauds the event, but acts as if nothing happened when the Germans annex the rest of Czechia and turn Slovakia into a puppet state, with Poland taking Galicia. The countdown begins.

Japan has already invaded China in defiance of the League of Nations, with Germany, USA, and France condemning the move, but Britain defending Japan as 'defending its interests against vandals'. With the Anglo-Japanese alliance still strong, Japan continues its invasion of the divided and weak Nationalist China, much to America's anger, and the rhetoric increases. In response to deteriorating Anglo-American relations, the US-Canadian border becomes increasingly fortified and militarized, with talk increasing in the US about restarting the draft to counter any possible threat from the north. It is defeated in the Senate, but the US Army slowly begins its preparations. The USN also starts improving within its budget. Britain, meanwhile, starts increasing its military presence in Canada, ostensibly in response to 'American adventurism and aggression', and sets up Defense Scheme No. 1 in preparation, while the Americans secretly set up War Plan Red.

1939:
Germany, having built up some of its forces in preparation for the invasion of Poland, invents a casus belli against the Poles, demanding Danzing and the Polish corridor. Already having guaranteed the USSR's neutrality with the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, it threatens Warsaw with war. Paris demands Berlin stand down and cease its aggression, calling for an intervention, but London disregards it all. Again. Poland is invaded, France declares war, and things go from bad to worse as Poland is invaded from two sides and then partitioned by Germany and the USSR. France mobilizes and prepares for an all-out war. Belgium, believing itself safe with French and British guarantees of its independence, nonetheless starts building up its defenses. The "Phony War" starts in December, where the French and Germans stand behind fortified borders and wait for the other to make the next move, while the USSR bungles into the Winter War, exposing the weaknesses of the Red Army.

1940:
After a Phony War where Germany builds up its forces, its steel imports from Sweden guaranteed by British neutrality, it then turns its eyes on France and the Low Counties. Denmark is taken over with minimal resistance, the Low Countries fall despite their preparations, and I will assume the Invasion of France goes as it does OTL, only without the BEF's help. Paris falls, Europe is now effectively in Nazi hands. The USSR begins arming up immediately, as they don't have the luxury of waiting for Germany to deal with Britain and know they're next. Many in the CPSU still hope Germany and Britain will turn on each other.

Here, it depends on Italian actions. Without British interference, they still get humiliated in Greece, but it really all depends on whether Italy's invasion of Greece will trigger British intervention, or if they'll just stay neutral in Europe and focus elsewhere. Instead of taking Egypt, Hitler tries to talk Mussolini into taking Algeria and Morocco instead, as he doesn't want to anger Britain just yet. Not until he's dealt with the bear. The Balkans fall to Axis control, but Italy's bumbling ensures Barbarossa is delayed by several weeks, moving it to late summer, 1941. The USSR, meanwhile, is still trying to convert its lumbering mass army into a mobile striking force, but officer purges and the sheer mass of the Soviet Army makes things difficult. Germany makes overtures to Finland to get its revenge.

Britain continues preparations for war, and Japan, meanwhile, takes advantage of the French collapse to take over Indochina and a few possessions in the West. Britain and Japan split Siam between them, effectively cutting all roads of supply to China. China is going to have a much, much worse time in the coming years.

The US high command debates launching War Plan Red, but eventually decide against it despite some warning voices, opting to work on their defenses more and on the USN. That, as they will discover, was a big mistake.

1941:
With all its ducks in a row, the Axis forces storm the USSR in the biggest land invasion since the Mongol expansion, overtaking the still-underprepared Soviets across all fronts, though the Southern front has a harder time than the North or Central fronts due to having weaker Axis forces, like the Romanians, Hungarians, and so on, facing the better Soviet units defending resource-rich Ukraine. Later in the year, the USA is overwhelmed by massive numbers of British, Canadian, and ANZAC forces pouring across the borders, supplemented with Indian troops for numbers. Initial defenses hold out in some place, but are outflanked and soon overwhelmed, while the British charge into New York, New Jersey, and the Great Lakes, while the RN and RCN fight the USN in the Atlantic, and the IJN and ANZAC ships engage them in the Pacific. IJA troops overrun the Dutch West Indies, secure from the British in Singapore and India.

From here on out, it depends on several factors. If Italy doesn't foolishly charge into Egypt and incur Britain's wrath, the Imperials and the Axis can safely ignore each other, though Musso will definitely whine about wanting the wealth of Egypt and the Middle East into his new Roman Empire. If he does, though, the Axis and Imperials come to blows, forcing both Germany and Britain to delay their plans and give the US and USSR more time to prepare. It would be ironic if DS1 and Barbarossa both get delayed because the two nations had to fight each other first.

If London, Berlin, and Rome remain on good terms, however, the invasions proceed as planned. The USSR starts massive conscription, and the USA tosses caution to the wind and starts a frenzy of conscripting and drafting troops just to protect what was left. FDR and his cabinet move to safer areas down south, California, the MidWest, and the South start fortifying, and the US tries to move its industries down south and into California to keep them away from the bulk of the British invasion, much like the USSR is doing moving its industries past the Urals and fortifying Leningrad and Moscow. Though without a friendly Iran and with the RN blocking the seas, the US won't be able to send anything to the USSR - not that it would, anyways, given that they're also under attack and trying to fend for themselves.

Eventually, the US and Soviet governments sign a pact with Free France to form an alliance, and vow to fight back against the Axis and Imperial aggressors.
 
Eh? How do we get to the point where there are a bajillion Canadian, British, Australian(!!) New Zealand(!!!) and Indian troops massed on the US border without anyone in the US smelling a rat? How come the UK government suddenly go Full Palpatine without triggering a draft and a Two Ocean Navy, despite a dramatically more threatening international environment than OTL?
Where do the UK (famously Barely Better than Benito when it came to mobile warfare) suddenly come up with the resources and skills for a Barbarossa-like blitz down the eastern seaboard?

To me the whole thing sounds ASB - even if the UK loses their collective minds, I can’t see the Canadian government responding to the war plan any way other than lots of polite nods and then an immediate call to the White House to discuss setting up a defensive Alliance Of North American Republics.
 
1280px-Distribution_of_Population%2C_1851_to_1941.jpg

Those are the important parts of Canada. Thats also where most of the transportation infrastructure is at. There's enough border traffic that it's impossible to get a BEF into Canada without the US noticing,since they have to come over on liners and disembark in a few well known ports.
Or the Canadians agreeing to host that, or the rest of the Dominions and Commonwealth say, 'Yeah, lets send troops to help invade the USA'

Don't see Oz, NZ and SA being on board for this. Oz and NZ would not be happy about the Japanese Alliance, in any case
 
The big issue with this whole scenario is this; "what does Japan offer Britain that the US doesn't, and the US offers everything better". The biggest issue between Tokyo and London was the Far East possessions, which Britain felt unable to protect adequately after WW1 effectively wrecked its economy and military. Britain considered a deal with Japan, but Australia and New Zealand felt threatened by Japan's increasingly aggressive, expansionist attitude and preferred the white-Anglo America as a trade/alliance partner, so Britain let its alliance with Japan lapse and signed up with the Americans. Also, for Britain to ignore Europe being overrun by the Nazis runs counter to centuries of Imperial politics, where no single power was to dominate Western Europe, barely a stone's throw away from Britain itself. Plus, one of Japan's expansion targets was India, under the British Raj (though that may have come after they got closer to the Nazis).

Actually in the 1922 imperial conference every dominion voted to ally with Japan and give up the USA except for Canada. Canada didn't want to pick sides reasonably because they'd die first if America came to war while the Pacific dominions thought the USA too isolationist and far away to be useful

Of course its not very realistic but the new fascist British empire doesn't care about balance of power but historically the most support for Japanese alliance was in Australia and New Zealand
 
Great timeline there @Saint_007

Reasonable to point out that Italy might bring the Nazis to war with the imperials.

So instead Italy stays allied with France in the entente after ww1

Italy, France and Poland are the entente. I presume that Nazi Germany can sweep through Italy as they did France. It'll help keep things on schedule regarding Barbarossa.. Perhaps Spain joins the axis after to try to take Italian and French colonies.

Britain's arms industry swells from selling weapons to France and Germany and Italy.

Free France, Italy and the Netherlands become prey for Japan and Britain with them doing the same thing Japan did regarding administration and protection.

I don't know how much of the French colonies would fall in Africa. Certainly the horn of Africa and the Indian ocean might be taken. New Zealand gains new Caledonia etc. Australia gains timor and all of papau. Can Britain buy East timor?

When Siam begins its otl war with French Indochina they both denounce it and partition the nation as suggested. Now that the cats out of the bag with their alliance Britain helps Japan with China including a small force marching into Tibet and up the Burma road. They agree preferential trade with each other so Britain will always have access to the Chinese Market.

The USA is also very angry as otl. If they don't turn isolationist and give up both Britain and Japan recognise war is inevitable.

The otl hull note showed the USA wasn't interested in compromise even if the Japanese were.

So they end up agreeing they have to quickly strike and hope that they can convince USA to surrender.

I didn't think about nukes but with UK and Japanese collaboration is it possible that they'll get them? With the European war mainly on land the ocean traffic isn't harmed until the war with USA starts

Edit : the question I suppose is would the USA actually go to war if they weren't attacked first? Or Monroe doctrine if nowhere in the americas was attacked
 
Last edited:
To me the whole thing sounds ASB - even if the UK loses their collective minds, I can’t see the Canadian government responding to the war plan any way other than lots of polite nods and then an immediate call to the White House to discuss setting up a defensive Alliance Of North American Republics.

There is a reason that these usually have the US lose its collective mind instead.
 
The UK owed the US a huge war debt in dollar loans from WW I. The US allowed the UK to defer payment on many of these loans. All the U.S. has to do to win is demand the UK pay of these loans at original schedule in dollars. The U.K. then is forced to buy the dollars to pay these loans or face a total run on the Pound. If the UK buys dollars, interest rates in the UK skyrocket to pay for the dollars strangling the economy. If the UK defaults, it becomes a financial pariah for not honoring its obligations. The market reflects this. People dump their Pound denominated bonds (stocks, etc.), and the Pound collapses and hyper-inflation sets. Either the way, the UK economy crashes.

The US wins without firing a shot.
 
I’d say two-three years. The UK’s best option frankly is to ditch Japan and make a status quo ante with the US ASAP. Destroying the Empire to forever infuriate the juggernaut that was North American industry is a fool’s errand. If they don’t do that then Canada’s lost at minimum. The RN will break itself if it tries to control American waters, so hunkering down and waiting it out is the best option there. Attempting to shell or bomb US cities is the straight up worst possible option.
 
Eh? How do we get to the point where there are a bajillion Canadian, British, Australian(!!) New Zealand(!!!) and Indian troops massed on the US border without anyone in the US smelling a rat? How come the UK government suddenly go Full Palpatine without triggering a draft and a Two Ocean Navy, despite a dramatically more threatening international environment than OTL?
Where do the UK (famously Barely Better than Benito when it came to mobile warfare) suddenly come up with the resources and skills for a Barbarossa-like blitz down the eastern seaboard?

To me the whole thing sounds ASB - even if the UK loses their collective minds, I can’t see the Canadian government responding to the war plan any way other than lots of polite nods and then an immediate call to the White House to discuss setting up a defensive Alliance Of North American Republics.
Admittedly, there are quite a few weak points, which you addressed. I was just putting the general outline here. Admittedly, FDR isn't a chump like Stalin and will smell a rat should the British start invasion preparations, including the Two Ocean Navy. No amount of trickery will pull the wool over his eyes, as opposed to OTL Stalin who believed Hitler's BS about not wanting to invade the USSR.

As for Canada, which has increasing trade and ties to the USA, I admittedly glossed over that because the scenario requested an invasion from Canada, so I assumed an allied Canada. If Canada declares neutrality, the whole scheme is boned from the start, but bear in mind War Plan Red was set up in response to King George V being close to the Nazis, something Canada had no control over. The USA might not differentiate a neutral Canada to one that is willing to help an enemy invade them.

If someone wants to make a better planned out scenario than the one I wrote, they're free. I was just suggesting a general outline, and knew it wasn't 100% accurate.

EDIT: My bad, it's Edward VIII, not George V. Got the names confused.
 
Last edited:
Top