But NOT in 1941. They are a separate country.Canada wasn’t truly independent until the Statute of Westminster in 1931. So given the OP, there is a window where the Canadians are subjects of a Dominion and technically under Britain’s rule.
But NOT in 1941. They are a separate country.Canada wasn’t truly independent until the Statute of Westminster in 1931. So given the OP, there is a window where the Canadians are subjects of a Dominion and technically under Britain’s rule.
But NOT in 1941. They are a separate country.
Thanks. It could use some more work; I'll hopefully post a potential revision soon.
At which point, WW2 itself is almost entirely butterflied away. Germany's Anchluss of Austria was only possible because the Italians were content to do nothing. Prior to that, Mussolini and Hitler were at the loggerheads over who controls Austria, something they nearly had a fight over had the two not joined forces in the Berlin-Rome Axis. With Germany forced to stand down, its standing would be harmed and it would need a more careful approach to expansion. It would be unlikely Hitler would have gotten as far as he did without Italian support, not unless Italy pulled a massive "head in the sand" political stance.
Actually, that's not going to be at all easy. While the Italian Army was the laughingstock of WW2, that was mostly due to lack of sufficient training and competent officers due to the massive bloating Mussolini had subjected it to in the interwar period, Italian terrain is going to be a nightmare for armor. Germany must cross the Alps, defended by some of the most surprisingly competent mountain troops in the world, the Italian Alpini. While the rich Po river valley isn't too far off from Austria, you have to cross some truly brutal rough terrain to get there, and unlike Northern France, a blitzkrieg would be counterproductive, if not a complete failure.
Admittedly, there are other ways; Germany managed to wrest control of Albania and Greece from Greek forces rather swiftly and brutally, despite them being some pretty rough mountain terrain that would favor defenders. Once they manage to get through, they can take the Po river valley, then work their way down the Appenine mountains - but it would not be easy, not by a long shot, unless Italy surrenders once they get through the northern mountains.
Even during the Civil War, USN and RN relations were very cordial in the Pacific.?
Britain and the US have had good relations through most of their shared history, certain unpleasantries early not withstanding.
WWII began for the US in 1941. WWII arguably began in the early 1930s with Japan's invasion of Manchuria.No need for the capitalisation fella, I wrote 1931 so I can see 1941 comes after that. I assume the OP’s reference to Pearl means you take the PoD to be in ‘41?
But the OP wrote “just before WWII begins” that gives us a PoD of 1937-38 or so. He also mentions “Britain and Japan kept their alliance from WWI” so one would assume this affects the British Empire during the whole of the pre-WWII period. This in turn will surely affect Anglo-Canadian relations.
British carrier aircraft where are inferior to those the Americans flew especially early in the war.
Although it might be humorous to see a spitfire or a hurricane try to shoot down a B-17 using only eight 30 caliber machine guns.
The USA out built the entire tonnage totals of the RN and IJN almost twice over.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.
If the shipyards on the East Coast are being hit they aren't going to have OTL production. The four major yards, ie Quincy, Brookyln, Philadephia and Newport News are all within 500 miles of Canadian airspace and on the coast.
Where are the forces in Canada , Bermuda and the Bahamas (I assume that is where the RAF is going to be based for this bombing campaign) going to get petrol? It won't be coming by tanker from Texas (the primary source in WWII) and I doubt it will come from Curacao (The secondary source in WWII) The U.S. had plenty of R & S class submarines in reserve to use against GB. They didn't have the range for a transpacific campaign (We will leave that to fleet boats to the traditional campaign against Japan) but have plenty of range for use in the Atlantic. And the older design torpedos used by the S class did not have anywhere near the problems of the newer torpedos used by the fleet boats.If the shipyards on the East Coast are being hit they aren't going to have OTL production. The four major yards, ie Quincy, Brookyln, Philadephia and Newport News are all within 500 miles of Canadian airspace and on the coast.
That first would be in the 1950s, with a Neutral USA.If the imperials get nukes first will the USA surrender?
If the shipyards on the East Coast are being hit they aren't going to have OTL production. The four major yards, ie Quincy, Brookyln, Philadephia and Newport News are all within 500 miles of Canadian airspace and on the coast.
Thats not going to work. If the US sees the British building up forces in Canada they will respond appropriately.
While pre WWI US has no substantial army, neither does Canada, and it can arm up its guard formations more quickly to occupy Eastern Canada.
Lets also remember, in this scenario, the US is not fighting Germany, correct? That means all that production is going to be hammering Britain. An occupied Canada means Britain is playing the U Boat campaign all alone, against someone who can make 20x as many submarines.
In worse case scenario London is radioactive in 1945.
Interesting, but I keep wondering a few items.
1) Why would Japan attack US in this scenario? IOTL it attacked US because it was being cut off from resources. In the scenario the occupation of Netherlands would of led to a British and Australia occupying Dutch East Indies. It then can sell oil to the Japanese.
2) Please Note that in 1932 the Dominion Act provided Canada, Australia, South Africa and New Zealand with greater independence, In WW1 the entry of Britain in war meant that Canada and other Dominions also joined the war. IN WW2 they each had to declare war on Germany and Subsequently on Japan. So we would need 4 Dominions to be on board and have "fascist" governments seems to difficult.
3) For your scenario to have any chance of working you need few things to go your way.
a) Part of Dutch East Indies would be demanded by Australians along with French Pacific Colonies.
b) The British would want all of Borneo not give it to the Japanese and that was where the oil was.
c) Best the Japanese could hope for is Philippines and French Indochina the rest the British and commonwealth would want to keep for security and just plain greed.
d) Australia and British along with Japanese navy would want to both destroy American bases in Hawaii and capture it so they have a clear path between Canada and Australia. New Zealand and British invade Panama Canal from Pacific while Forces in the Carribean would of attacked both Puerto Rico, Cuba and Panama Canal from Caribbean Sea.
e) Get Mexico onside from 1940-1941 promising to give it back part of land it lost in Mexico-USA war.
f) Follow-up the capture of Hawaii with actual invasion of California with assistance of Mexico.
g) The Japanese should concentrate on China, which it would have a free hand and since no Burma road no assistance.
h) Japan signs non-aggression treaty with Soviet Union following invasion by Germany allowing the Soviets to send majority if not all troops west. Then in 1942 when Soviet Union on verge of collapsing invade and capture most of Siberia.
Note: Portuguese Timor would not be attacked since it was not part of Dutch East Indies and Portugal was aligned with Britain, Which bring us to the fact that the British could of used Azores, Bermuda and Bahamas to launch their own blitz against American forces and industry in south.
What I not understand is what is FDR and American government doing through all this? No the only logical explanation is that he never comes to power and that a more isolationist and advocating greater state freedom President reduces Federal powers and US military go more to the state militia after WWI. You need to limit US ability to have any chance of the scenario to work.
Rather than trying to force britain to commit suicide perhaps flip it around and have the US go communist or fascist?
With a hostile US possibly allied to the Soviets Britain tolerates Japanese shenanigans out of raw terror. The US being the aggressor alters the calculus somewhat and IMHO is far more likely.
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.
For this TL, that means importing from Greater Germany.Erm....you know in this scenario Britain can import from Europe? Europe can import from the world.
Not in 1940 they didn’t. Oh it’ll sting sure, but not as much as it would in peacetime, and it’ll hurt others a lot more. And even if Europe is cut off South America is not, and can’t be.The US needs world trade to function as a society so really cannot do the kind of USW they did against Japan without the very real risk of hitting their own ships and neutrals carrying US cargoes?