AH challenge- make WWI in US as unpopular as Vietnam

Just got this idea from a HISTORY TODAY article I read yest (probably been addressed in some form before, but anyways)- what'd be the best way to facilitate such a sitn where the US involvement in WWI becomes as unpopular as Vietnam ?
 

MrP

Banned
Sounds pretty tricky. I guess have Teddy win the pre-war election and go in to support the Entente from the get-go. That way America also gets to suffer years of grinding siege warfare, so the common American view of the war matches that of the common British - pointless grind for years. How one'd get significant peace protests, I don't know. Maybe the simple act of going in earlier upsets some groups to the extent that they protest against it. Increased socialism combined with dissatisfaction by chaps who've very recently immigrated to America from Germany and A-H? It'd probably still be over by some time in '17 with American resources directed to it, though, with the lower casualties that suggests.
 
Well, an interest in Ireland would help, since Ireland is held under the thumb of the British. (Go read the link in the books and media section to "The Fable of John Bull and Uncle Sam" for the funny, twisted view of one Irishman.)
Further, if Socialism had spread more, we could see more protests against the war.
 
Just got this idea from a HISTORY TODAY article I read yest (probably been addressed in some form before, but anyways)- what'd be the best way to facilitate such a sitn where the US involvement in WWI becomes as unpopular as Vietnam ?


That is tough. I think any chance of that has to rest on the United States getting into the war much earlier and thus seeing casualties counts ala Verdun and Pasc. numbers. Perhaps if the US troops managed to be placed under the thumb of European commanders and the image becomes American machine gun fodder for the Frogs and Limeys ...
 

Germaniac

Donor
If the United States is in it once the Easter Rebellion strikes watch out, Boston, Chicago, and New York will be in flames!
 
I'd say it was already at least as unpopular as the Vietnam War. The US was only involved in the war for a year, and there was far more protest and resistance to the war in that one year than the whole of the Vietnam war.

They spent millions of dollars in a propaganda campaign trying to drum up volunteers for the army. They needed a million men. They got 70,000.

The Red Scare and the Espionage Act show just how fragile the government's position was. Maintaining the war effort required making any statement against the war entirely criminal.
 
If the real stories of warfare could have been told to the American public with the visual aspects of the horrors, ala the nightly news during the Vietnam war, then WW1 could have become even more unpopular than Vietnam. The American casualty rates were much higher, I think, than all other American wars, when you take into account how long the Americans participated in the War. Lots of senseless casualties as well. For instance, even after senior officers knew of the emminent cease fire and Armistace, many still threw their young soldiers into battle in order to achieve some meaningless piece of real estate for their own glory but at the expense of their soldiers' lives. If the media had been able to report such things in relative real time with photos or movies, the American public would have gone apeshit.
 
If I recall correctly, there was also mob (not mafia) violence against German-American citizens during 'The Great War' by tar and feathering or just good ol' fashioned lynchings.

Let's say that some of the Irish in America also get involved in the anti-war effort because of resentment towards the UK. This leads to major anti war rallies from them and the Germans as these two happen to be the most significant European ethnic groups in America outside of English/Scottish. The anti-war rallies lead to retaliation by cops and pro-Entente citizens thus leading to hostile ethnic riots, forcing government officials to address the situation at home and maybe overseas. Just a thought just in case this wasn't already happening.
 

MrP

Banned
If the real stories of warfare could have been told to the American public with the visual aspects of the horrors, ala the nightly news during the Vietnam war, then WW1 could have become even more unpopular than Vietnam. The American casualty rates were much higher, I think, than all other American wars, when you take into account how long the Americans participated in the War. Lots of senseless casualties as well. For instance, even after senior officers knew of the emminent cease fire and Armistace, many still threw their young soldiers into battle in order to achieve some meaningless piece of real estate for their own glory but at the expense of their soldiers' lives. If the media had been able to report such things in relative real time with photos or movies, the American public would have gone apeshit.

I recall one striking instance of an American general ( I cannot recall whether a brigade or divisional commander) ordering an offensive on the day of the Armistice so that his troops would be in control of the baths in a particular town then held by the Germans. Bizarre is not the word!
 
I agree with the idea that early American entry un TR is the best bet. It would see much of the Democratic Party along with the LaFollette Republcans forming a relentless opposition block. As for the Easter Rising that gets tricky as Devoy had an important role in coordinating that event and TR would clamp down on him the Clan na Gael and the Fenian Brotherhood which in itself would generate protests. Hearst, McCormack and Mencken would be releantless foes of the war and unlike OTL would not be marginalized so easily.
 

Japhy

Banned
Say there are more Americans on the Lusitania, and an overall higher American death rate at sea at the start of the war. In responce Wilson blows alot of political capital in instituting a Peacetime Draft in 1915. With the crisis mounting, the United States declares war on the Central Powers in 1916, a short time before the Easter Uprisisng.
Once the Battle of Dublin is over Irish, will firmly join the German, and anti-Czarist American groups in mass opposition to the war. Because of the Peacetime Draft the year before the Socialists and the IWW have higher membership, and unlike their European counterparts stay opposed to the war. "Black Cat" sabotoge on the part of the IWW increases, into a sustainable campaign.
In regards to the military campaign, without the Punitive Raid against Villa in Mexico, the US Army is even more unprepaired for the fight in Europe, Divisions are still rough outlines of collective regiments as they were in the Civil War. Because of this, the Regiments are broken from united American leadership to be placed under British, French, Belgian, and Dominion control as reenforcements.
Meanwhile in the South-west US, because the army is off in Europe Villa can launch continual raids against the US, and the goverments inability to stop him fuels anger at home.
Congress, refuses to insitute Wilson's vast restrictions on Free Speach, and Republicans, Socialists, Anarchists, and the various opposed immigrant groups continually blast the war, with its high casualties and as a cause of chaos at home.
Wilson is in a dangerous situation at home, as the death toll rises in Europe, and rebellion is simmering at home. In the 1916 Elections Wilson may very well lose to a "Peace Republican", or face Impeachment by a Congress and nation that cannot stand for "Mr. Wilson's War"
Once the US is out of the war, the popular tend in American History is to view the conflict as a useless waste, which caused a dangerous weakening of America.
 
Just got this idea from a HISTORY TODAY article I read yest (probably been addressed in some form before, but anyways)- what'd be the best way to facilitate such a sitn where the US involvement in WWI becomes as unpopular as Vietnam ?
Impossible.
Different culture and sensibility.
 
'Nam was strictly small fry compared to WWI

Jello's right (I keep agreeing with you today; have you commented elsewhere today that I should agree with you on?;-)).

'Nam was strictly small fry compared to WWI, because the latter killed so many, many more Allied soldiers, mostly stupidly.

Russia was so bad at getting relevant ammo to its troops it was hopeless after a few months, and of course, its gummint failed to survive the war. The Western Front saw millions of troops be ordered into machine gun fire to no noticeable purpose.

Much more details and political fallout here .
 
Top